Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi)

🔒
❌ À propos de FreshRSS
Il y a de nouveaux articles disponibles, cliquez pour rafraîchir la page.
☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Poutine : “La Russie ne va pas se battre avec l’OTAN”

Par : ActuStratpol — 28 mars 2024 à 08:22

poutine otan

poutine otanLa Russie ne va pas se battre avec l’OTAN, c’est tout simplement absurde, la différence dans les dépenses militaires est

L’article Poutine : “La Russie ne va pas se battre avec l’OTAN” est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

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

Par : AHH — 28 mars 2024 à 02:24

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Dette souveraine de la France : appelons un chat, un chat !

Par : STRATPOL — 27 mars 2024 à 15:06

La dette chronique L’objectif de la loi de finances pour 2024 était de ramener le déficit à 4,4% du PIB

L’article Dette souveraine de la France : appelons un chat, un chat ! est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Julian Assange pourra faire appel de son extradition vers les États-Unis

Par : ActuStratpol — 27 mars 2024 à 08:37

assange appel

assange appelLa Haute Cour de Londres a autorisé le fondateur de WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, à faire appel de son extradition vers

L’article Julian Assange pourra faire appel de son extradition vers les États-Unis est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Euroclear autorisée à conserver une partie des revenus des avoirs russes gelés

Par : ActuStratpol — 27 mars 2024 à 08:35

avoirs russes

avoirs russesL’UE a décidé de retenir cinq milliards d’euros de revenus provenant des avoirs russes gelés pour financer les batailles juridiques

L’article Euroclear autorisée à conserver une partie des revenus des avoirs russes gelés est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Geoengineering – Weapon of Mass Destruction

Par : AHH — 26 mars 2024 à 22:50

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Poutine voit une piste ukrainienne dans l’attentat du Crocus City Hall

Par : ActuStratpol — 26 mars 2024 à 08:51

poutine crocus

poutine crocusLes traces des commanditaires de l’attaque terroriste contre le Crocus City Hall à Moscou mènent à l’Ukraine. Le régime de

L’article Poutine voit une piste ukrainienne dans l’attentat du Crocus City Hall est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Le Conseil de sécurité adopte une résolution pour un cessez-le-feu à Gaza pour la première fois depuis octobre

Par : ActuStratpol — 26 mars 2024 à 08:48

israel onu

israel onuLe Conseil de sécurité de l’ONU a adopté lundi une résolution appelant à un cessez-le-feu dans la bande de Gaza

L’article Le Conseil de sécurité adopte une résolution pour un cessez-le-feu à Gaza pour la première fois depuis octobre est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Moscou accuse les États-Unis de mépriser le droit international en élargissant sans consultation les limites de leur plateau continental

Par : ActuStratpol — 26 mars 2024 à 08:45

washington plateau

washington plateauMoscou ne reconnaît pas l’expansion par Washington des limites extérieures de son plateau continental, a déclaré le ministère russe des

L’article Moscou accuse les États-Unis de mépriser le droit international en élargissant sans consultation les limites de leur plateau continental est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

The Nuland – Budanov – Tajik – Crocus connection

Par : AHH — 26 mars 2024 à 00:13

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.

Oleh Tyahnybok, with McCain and Nuland

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Fallout from Moscow’s Crocus City Hall

Par : AHH — 25 mars 2024 à 08:10

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

VVP’s Announced Telephone Conversations in Last Two Days

Par : AHH — 24 mars 2024 à 17:08

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

The Day the combined West committed Suicide

Par : AHH — 24 mars 2024 à 15:43

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Turkey takes its Seat in Rules-based Terrorism Inc.

Par : AHH — 23 mars 2024 à 19:08

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.

Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan

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.

“Naval Battle of Çesme at Night,” July 1770, Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774), by Ivan Constantinovich Aivazovsky (1848)

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.

“Destruction of the Turkish Fleet in the Bay of Chesme,” July 1770, Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774), by Jacob Philipp Hackert, commissioned by Catherine II in 1772

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.

≈≈≈

“Chesma battle of 1770,” Russo-Turkish War (1768–1774), by Vladimir Kosov (2021)

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.

Izmir, Turkey: permanent headquarters of NATO Land Forces, known as Allied Land Command (LANDCOM).

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.

İzmir: rebranded ancient Smyrna from pre-historic through the Hellenistic, Roman, Byzantine, Crusader, Ottoman, and Turk Periods.

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?

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Gaza Update: Anglo-Zionist Pier & Bifurcation Road

Par : AHH — 23 mars 2024 à 18:36

Along with the latest news from the resistance in Gaza and the West Bank, Jon Elmer takes a look at the US military operation to build a pier in Gaza City and how that plan lines up with Israel’s ongoing construction of a highway south of Gaza City that will divide the Strip between north and south.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

It’s War: The Real Meat Grinder Starts Now

Par : AHH — 23 mars 2024 à 14:40

“Rules-based Terrorism” Returns to Moskau. No more shadow play. It’s now in the open. No holds barred.

By Pepe Escobar at Strategic Culture Foundation.


Exhibit 1:
 Friday, March 22, 2024. It’s War. The Kremlin, via Peskov, finally admits it, on the record.

The money quote:

“Russia cannot allow the existence on its borders of a state that has a documented intention to use any methods to take Crimea away from it, not to mention the territory of new regions.”

Translation: the Hegemon-constructed Kiev mongrel is doomed, one way or another. The Kremlin signal: “We haven’t even started” starts now.

Exhibit 2: Friday afternoon, a few hours after Peskov. Confirmed by a serious European – not Russian – source. The first counter-signal.

Regular troops from France, Germany and Poland have arrived, by rail and air, to Cherkassy, south of Kiev. A substantial force. No numbers leaked. They are being housed in schools. For all practical purposes, this is a NATO force.

That signals, “Let the games begin”. From a Russian point of view, Mr. Khinzal’s business cards are set to be in great demand.

Exhibit 3: Friday evening. Terror attack on Crocus City, a music venue northwest of Moscow. A heavily trained commando shoots people on sight, point blank, in cold blood, then sets a concert hall on fire. The definitive counter-signal: with the battlefield collapsing, all that’s left is terrorism in Moscow.

And just as terror was striking Moscow, the US and the UK, in southwest Asia, was bombing Sana’a, the Yemeni capital, with at least five strikes.

Some nifty coordination. Yemen has just clinched a strategic deal in Oman with Russia-China for no-hassle navigation in the Red Sea, and is among the top candidates for BRICS+ expansion at the summit in Kazan next October.

Not only the Houthis are spectacularly defeating thalassocracy, they have the Russia-China strategic partnership on their side. Assuring China and Russia that their ships can sail through the Bab-al-Mandeb, Red Sea and Gulf of Aden with no problems is exchanged with total political support from Beijing and Moscow.


The sponsors remain the same

Deep in the night in Moscow, before dawn on Saturday 23. Virtually no one is sleeping. Rumors dance like dervishes on countless screens. Of course nothing has been confirmed – yet. Only the FSB will have answers. A massive investigation is in progress.

The timing of the Crocus massacre is quite intriguing. On a Friday during Ramadan. Real Muslims would not even think about perpetrating a mass murder of unarmed civilians under such a holy occasion. Compare it with the ISIS card being frantically branded by the usual suspects.

Let’s go pop. To quote Talking Heads: “This ain’t no party/ this ain’t no disco/ this ain’t no fooling around”. Oh no; it’s more like an all-American psy op. ISIS are cartoonish mercenaries/goons. Not real Muslims. And everyone knows who finances and weaponizes them.

That leads to the most possible scenario, before the FSB weighs in: ISIS goons imported from the Syria battleground – as it stands, probably Tajiks – trained by CIA and MI6, working on behalf of the Ukrainian SBU. Several witnesses at Crocus referred to “Wahhabis” – as in the commando killers did not look like Slavs.

It was up to Serbia’s Aleksandar Vucic to cut to the chase. He directly connected the “warnings” in early March from American and British embassies directed at their citizens not to visit public places in Moscow with CIA/MI6 intel having inside info about possible terrorism, and not disclosing it to Moscow.

The plot thickens when it is established that Crocus is owned by the Agalarovs: an Azeri-Russian billionaire family, very close friends of…

… Donald Trump.

Talk about a Deep State-pinpointed target.

ISIS spin-off or banderistas – the sponsors remain the same. The clownish secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Oleksiy Danilov, was dumb enough to virtually, indirectly confirm they did it, saying on Ukrainian TV, “we will give them [Russians] this kind of fun more often.”

But it was up to Sergei Goncharov, a veteran of the elite Russia Alpha anti-terrorism unit, to get closer to unwrapping the enigma: he told Sputnik the most feasible mastermind is Kyrylo Budanov – the chief of the Main Directorate of Intelligence at the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense.

The “spy chief” who happens to be the top CIA asset in Kiev.

Stoking the unholy USUK meatgrinder

It’s got to go till the last Ukrainian

The three exhibits above complement what the head of NATO’s military committee, Rob Bauer, previously told a security forum in Kiev: “You need more than just grenades – you need people to replace the dead and wounded. And this means mobilization.”

Translation: NATO spelling out this is a war until the last Ukrainian.

And the “leadership” in Kiev still does not get it. Former Minister of Infrastructure Omelyan: “If we win, we will pay back with Russian oil, gas, diamonds and fur. If we lose, there will be no talk of money – the West will think about how to survive.”

In parallel, puny “garden-and jungle” Borrell admitted that it would be “difficult” for the EU to find an extra 50 billion euros for Kiev if Washington pulls the plug. The cocaine-fueled sweaty sweatshirt leadership actually believes that Washington is not “helping” in the form of loans, but in the form of free gifts. And the same applies for the EU.

The Theater of the Absurd is unmatchable. The German Liver Sausage Chancellor actually believes that proceeds from stolen Russian assets “do not belong to anyone”, so they can be used to finance extra Kiev weaponizing.

Everyone with a brain knows that using interest from “frozen”, actually stolen Russian assets to weaponize Ukraine is a dead end – unless they steal all of Russia’s assets, roughly $200 billion, mostly parked in Belgium and Switzerland: that would tank the Euro for good, and the whole EU economy for that matter.

Eurocrats better listen to Russian Central Bank major “disrupter” (American terminology) Elvira Nabiullina: The Bank of Russia will take “appropriate measures” if the EU does anything on the “frozen”/stolen Russian assets.

It goes without saying that the three exhibits above completely nullify the “La Cage aux Folles” circus promoted by the puny Petit Roi, now known across his French domains as Macronapoleon.

Virtually the whole planet, including the English-speaking Global North, had already been mocking the “exploits” of his Can Can Moulin Rouge Army.

So French, German and Polish soldiers, as part of NATO, are already in the south of Kiev. The most possible scenario is that they will stay far, far away from the frontlines – although traceable by Mr. Khinzal’s business activities.

Even before this new NATO batch arriving in the south of Kiev, Poland – which happens to serve as prime transit corridor for Kiev’s troops – had confirmed that Western troops are already on the ground.

So this is not about mercenaries anymore. France, by the way, is only 7th in terms of mercenaries on the ground, largely trailing Poland, the US and Georgia, for instance. The Russian Ministry of Defense has all the precise records.

In a nutshell: now war has morphed from Donetsk, Avdeyevka and Belgorod to Moscow. Further on down the road, it may not just stop in Kiev. It may only stop in Lviv. Mr. 87%, enjoying massive national near-unanimity,  now has the mandate to go all the way. Especially after Crocus.

There’s every possibility the terror tactics by Kiev goons will finally drive Russia to return Ukraine to its original 17th century landlocked borders: Black Sea-deprived, and with Poland, Romania, and Hungary reclaiming their former territories.

Remaining Ukrainians will start to ask serious questions about what led them to fight – literally to their death – on behalf of the US Deep State, the military complex and BlackRock.

As it stands, the Highway to Hell meat grinder is bound to reach maximum velocity.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Yemen’s Indian Ocean Checkmate

Par : AHH — 22 mars 2024 à 20:23

Ansarallah has single-handedly disrupted global shipping power dynamics. Yemen is launching attacks against Israeli-linked vessels deep into the Indian Ocean to cut off the last waterway route to the occupation state.

By Khalil Harb at The Cradle.

Our people are ready to send hundreds of thousands of mujahideen to Palestine. Okay, geography might pose a problem. It could be a problem for our people to go there in large numbers. Nevertheless, and despite all the obstacles, we will not hesitate to do whatever we can. We are completely coordinated with our brothers in the Jihad and resistance front to do anything and everything that we can do.  — Abdul-Malik al-Houthi, 10 October 2023

Since Abdul-Malik al-Houthi’s proclamation three days after the launch of the Palestinian resistance’s 7 October Al-Aqsa Flood Operation, Yemen’s Ansarallah movement, under his leadership, has undergone a remarkable transformation.

Ansarallah’s maritime reach has surpassed all initial expectations, now extending to the distant shores of the Indian Ocean in its ambitious plan to besiege Israel by targeting the occupation state’s shipping interests.

Yemen’s strategic position not only serves as a beacon of hope for Palestinians enduring Israel’s brutal military assault on their lives, homes, and livelihoods but has also become a crucial pillar in the Axis of Resistance’s fight against US hegemonic machinations in West Asia.

In late February, al-Houthi vowed to expand the scope of attacks against Israel-linked vessels, stating, “We have surprises that the enemies do not expect at all,” before announcing the successful testing of a new hypersonic missile.

This stands in stark contradiction to western narratives trumpeting their own containment efforts to encircle Yemen and thwart its ability to intercept Israel-bound vessels. If anything, the naval operations undertaken by the Ansarallah-aligned armed forces are instead rippling outward, spanning a remarkable distance of over 6,000 kilometers from the Yemeni coast to the Indian Ocean.

Failure of ‘Prosperity Guardian’

Crucially, Yemen’s defiance has drawn widespread, popular support from its once-warring nationals, not just in support of Gaza and the Israeli blockade but also against the relentless US and British airstrikes launched under the fig leaf of Operation ‘Prosperity Guardian‘ – an extrajudicial imperial project which aims to cripple Ansarallah’s military capabilities under the guise of securing international shipping and trade routes.

Yet al-Houthi’s unequivocal declaration on barring the passage of ships associated with Israel, or those engaged in commercial ties with it, from traversing the Indian Ocean and the Cape of Good Hope shows that Washington and London have been dealt a resounding strategic defeat.

By targeting these two new critical waterway passages, Yemen imposes a new reality on global shipping routes. This phase of the naval battle presents a significant threat to the world’s established maritime corridors, compelling commercial vessels traveling to and from Southeast Asia to navigate lengthier and more costly routes around the southern tip of Africa to reach the Mediterranean Sea.

Iran’s partner, not a proxy

Al-Houthi’s message is clear: “Do the Americans, British, and the Zionists expect that any aggressive act against Yemen will distract us from defending Gaza?” Ansarallah recently announced the targeting of over 70 commercial ships with ties to Israel, alongside military battleships across the Red Sea, Arabian Sea, Gulf of Aden, and the Indian Ocean.

Moreover, Yemen’s stance challenges western reports of secret talks brokered by Oman between the US and Iran, purportedly aimed at containing the conflict, preventing it from spreading further from the ‘Yemeni front.’

Despite Washington’s announcement that it has released $10 billion in frozen Iranian funds and its ferocious intimidation and enticement maneuvers behind the scenes, Sanaa’s strategic move towards the Indian Ocean should dismiss any rumors about an impending ‘US–Iran deal.’

Instead of acquiescing to US pressure, Tehran is working to maintain stability and avert all-out war through its ‘support fronts’ in Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Yemen. The escalation in Yemen poses a greater regional challenge, overshadowing any temporary truces in Iraq by some factions.

While the Biden administration attempts to portray its diplomatic efforts as successes, particularly through indirect negotiations with Tehran and plans to build a temporary pier off the coast of Gaza, the situation in Yemen remains a humiliating inconvenience for a White House heading into an election cycle. This comes against the backdrop of a White House also frantically trying to manage the Iraqi and Lebanese arenas, which are equally pushing back against US hegemonic interests.

As the spokesman for the Iraqi resistance Al-Nujaba movement, Dr Hussein al-Musawi, tells The Cradle:

Our principles are clear and firm regarding the American presence on Iraqi soil, which is a complete exit without any interference in our political, economic, and other affairs; ending its control over the aspects of Iraq’s politics; and liberating its land and wealth; and political and economic independence.

Economic ramifications for Israel 

Sanaa’s strategic maneuvering in the Red Sea–Gulf of Aden–Indian Ocean corridor not only poses a distraction for US and British naval forces but also presents unforeseen challenges. While US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin was in Israel after announcing his ‘Guardian of Prosperity’ operation, the Yemeni resistance was busy adding millions of square kilometers to their area of missile confrontation.

The 12 percent of global trade passing through the Bab al-Mandeb Strait has already suffered a blow to the core. The resulting disruptions, including increased shipping costs and insurance premiums, are anticipated to fuel inflation and potentially paralyze Israeli ports such as Eilat and decrease traffic in Haifa.

While the full extent of damage to Israel’s foreign trade remains unclear, initial estimates suggested losses exceeding $180 billion, considering pre-existing trade figures from 2022.

Yemen’s growing naval capabilities

Simultaneously, the question arises: how will the ‘Guardian of Prosperity’ forces, previously tasked with monitoring just the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden to counter Yemeni missile threats, manage the vast expansion required to monitor the thousands of ships traversing to and from the Cape of Good Hope across the Indian Ocean?

While the US and UK do not reveal the number of naval vessels assigned to their almost impossible mission, numbers circulating claim the participation of several US battleships, including the USS Laboon, USS Carney, and USS Mason – and from the British, the destroyer HM Diamond. Greece is estimated to have one frigate involved, France contributes naval vessels under US command, and Italy claims to have a frigate that operates outside the operation’s banner. Although the coalition publicly announced the inclusion of more than twenty countries in its mission, the actual naval commitment from its members appears negligible.

Furthermore, it’s hard not to notice the fundamental inefficiencies inherent to the western naval operation: the US “is launching $2 million defense missiles to stop $2,000 Houthi drones.” It was no surprise then when a Pentagon spokesman acknowledged a few days ago that despite ongoing western strikes on Yemen, Ansarallah’s capabilities have not been undermined.

And then Abdul-Malik al-Houthi comes along and adds the Indian Ocean to the US’ horror scenario with an area exceeding 70 million square kilometers.

Ali al-Qahum of Ansarallah’s Political Bureau characterizes this expansion as a “shocking and unexpected surprise” for the resistance’s adversaries. At the same time, it amplifies Yemen’s globally strategic significance as a military force – one that can successfully execute a comprehensive siege on Israel.

It is not clear whether the announcement of including the Indian Ocean in the Yemeni naval operations is related to the tests of the hypersonic missile. It would make Yemen one of only a small handful of nations to possess this unique military capability – Russia, China, Iran, and North Korea.

Regardless, Abdul-Malik al-Houthi’s ability to take the enemy by surprise showcases Yemen’s capacity to disrupt established power dynamics, particularly in the West Asian region. By supporting Gaza unequivocally, the Yemeni front within the Resistance Axis is further diminishing US influence amid the waves of the Indian Ocean, unless a lasting ceasefire is imposed in Gaza.

☐ ☆ ✇ Vu du Droit

Emmanuel Macron apprend à jouer du clairon

Par : Régis de Castelnau — 22 mars 2024 à 10:11
Après les rodomontades, nous sommes passés à la pantalonnade. Notre kéké national a donc déclaré tout seul la guerre à la Russie. La diversion de politique intérieure était évidente au départ, mais il s’est pris au jeu, et toujours abîmé… Lire la suite
☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

L’UE ne parvient pas à s’entendre sur le sort des avoirs russes

Par : ActuStratpol — 22 mars 2024 à 08:43

ue avoirs

ue avoirsLes discussions du premier jour du sommet de l’UE, malgré l’ordre du jour chargé, ont été principalement consacrées à l’Ukraine.

L’article L’UE ne parvient pas à s’entendre sur le sort des avoirs russes est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Washington appelle Kiev à cesser les attaques sur les installations pétrolières russes pour éviter un renchérissement des prix, selon le FT

Par : ActuStratpol — 22 mars 2024 à 08:41

ukraine petrole

ukraine petroleLes États-Unis ont appelé l’Ukraine à cesser ses attaques contre les installations énergétiques russes. Washington a averti Kiev que de

L’article Washington appelle Kiev à cesser les attaques sur les installations pétrolières russes pour éviter un renchérissement des prix, selon le FT est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Dien Bien Phools

Par : AHH — 21 mars 2024 à 14:09

We Won’t Get Dien Bien Phooled Again! Once the French have defeated Russia, they will attack all of Europe. France cannot be allowed to win!

with gratitude to FiveGunsWest and penned by Bones!

Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys

I must have every book about Dien Bien Phu there is. I also have the French Communist Party books on this topic and various and sundry others of the time, and Bernard Fall’s books as well.

‘A Street Without Joy’ is the benchmark of French military decline and the onset of loss of empire for the country that has gone from a lion, De Gaulle, to a mouse, Micron. And now the mouse that roars.

Street Without Joy (1961) by French-American professor and journalist Bernard B. Fall, who was on-site as a French soldier, and then as an American war correspondent. The book gives a first-hand look at the French engagement, with an insider understanding of Vietnamese events, and provided insights into guerrilla warfare. It drew wide interest among Americans in the mid-1960s, when their own country markedly increased its activity in the Vietnam War. (wiki)

The history of Dien Bien Phu is a study in miscalculation multiplied Force Ten. Fuck up after fuck up. Cascading idiocy. They so underestimated their enemy that they didn’t even dig in their gun emplacements. The man in charge of the artillery discovered his mistake as 100s of projectiles per minute rained down on the camps and took out the artillery. Despondently, he went down into his bunker sleeping quarters, pulled the pin on a grenade and placed it over his heart. He was such a larger than life individual and an inspiration to the men that the ‘overseer’s of the men’, the officers, lied to them and told them that he’d fallen on the field of honor. There is no honor in a colonial war for the occupier.

The artillery stood exposed. No sandbags. They disdained the abilities of the eventual victors so much that they stupidly held their last stand in a valley surrounded by mountains riddled with caves. They thought the Vietminh couldn’t shoot straight. Turns out they were crack shots, sighting through the barrels of their guns in the high caves surrounding Frenchy and Heinz.

Most of the “French” troops at Dien Bien Phu were former SS Nazi storm troopers. I guess the US took the cream of the NAZI crop. General Gehlen who set up our Gestapo Security State. Mr. Werner “I just make the mizziles, vhere they come down izz not my koncern” Von Braun. Eva wasn’t available.

The rank and file SS troops wound up in Vietnam, getting their asses shot off by the Vietminh and their ashes hauled in the official French brothels that always traveled with the troops. This practice is still current. They come to San Francisco once a year for fleet week. You can see the prostitutes. Some whores got the Croix de Guerre for ‘services above and beyond the call of booty’.

@robertjames6640 1 year ago:

“An amazing movie. I served with men who fought at Dien Bien Phu and they held the greatest of respect for the Vietnamese people who defeated them. Vietnam and its people are resilient, hard working and truly delightful.”


The Frogs Made It Personal For Giap

In the late 1930s, Giap married a fellow member of the party, whom he had met in prison years earlier. She gave birth to a daughter, Hong Anh, in 1940. Four months later, the party’s central committee decided to send him to join Ho, who was living in exile in China, where he was preparing plans for the revolution he intended to launch.

Soon after Gen. Giap left for China, his wife was taken into custody by French authorities. She died in prison, either by suicide or while being tortured. Because of the intervening world war, it was years before Gen. Giap learned of his wife’s death. In 1947, his father also died while in French custody, refusing to publicly denounce his son, although he never agreed with his communist ideology.

“He carries in his soul wounds that even time cannot heal,” Hong Anh told biographer Currey of her father.

It’s not my intention to recap history on this fascinating and well deserved defeat of the French who were ferreted out of their holes and FROG MARCHED off to a POW camp as they should have been, but to rub this humiliating defeat in their faces as they consider war with Russia. I consider them stupid like the rest of the crime syndicate of the Western satellite colonies of the former US empire.

The Frogs Can’t Get Enough

The Dien Bien Phools can’t get enough humiliation, death and defeat. Now they want to send their children to Ukraine to kill Russians for Joe Biden’s corrupt regime, all the while blathering on about freedom and democracy, meaningless crap that Ukraine doesn’t have or represent. They are fighting for western leaders endless supply of Merck cocaine and children to rape and abuse. They may not know it, but that is the reality.

The rank and file French soldier has no idea what they’re fighting for and for the most part, they never have. Remember, once invaded by the Nazis in WW2 they sided with the NAZIs and became Vichy France. The French Foreign legion … the former SS Nazis … didn’t care what they fought besides the kicks they got out of usual frolics colonial powers derive from killing the natives who have no standing army, navy or airforce. A turkey shoot as it’s called. Once again they’ve sided with the Nazis to boot.

That said, US troops have no idea what the fuck they’re doing from moment to moment. They’re a largely uneducated rabble and the non-coms are just as bad. An immoral uneducated rabble using the military as a jobs program in much the same way as a corrupt Congress critter uses the arms manufacturing as a jobs program bringing money into their coffers and sharing a little with the community. The last thing the US military wants to do? Their jobs.

Most of the world is watching Russia systematically destroy what was by far the largest most capable and equipped NATO-commanded army in the world (the Ukrainian army), understanding that what is unfolding is Washington’s Waterloo.

The US general stuff are all rear echelon muthafuckas

So drive on, it don’t mean nuthin’

Larch445:

“When or where have the French been correct in their strategic judgment?
SE Asia? Algeria? Sahel? West Africa? Central Africa? NATO? WWII?
Where or when?
They always get it wrong.”

smoothieX12:

“Yes, some imbeciles in Paris think so, but considering the level of French Armed Forces–they will be hunted down and killed.

What Paris is going to do about it? Right–nothing. France’s nuclear deterrent is dwarfed by Russia’s conventional, let alone nuclear capability–so, does Macron and his buddies want to die?

They will. So will France as a whole. Hey, French voted for this. Time to face consequences. And here is the funny thing–France is alone in all that.”

Bones:

“I predict popcorn shortages. Be sure to lay in a big supply. Enough to binge eat for a couple of days. ‘French cooking’ will not take that long. If US enters the fray, it may take a week to fry and die. They haven’t met Mr. Thermobaric. Have fun guys. Ta Ta.”

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Kiev abandonne sa liste des “sponsors internationaux de la guerre”

Par : ActuStratpol — 21 mars 2024 à 08:34

kiev sponsors

kiev sponsorsLe gouvernement ukrainien cessera de tenir une liste des entreprises “sponsors internationaux de la guerre”, a rapporté le service de

L’article Kiev abandonne sa liste des “sponsors internationaux de la guerre” est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

A Travelogue of Electoral Donbass

Par : AHH — 20 mars 2024 à 19:03

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%.

Avdeevka. Ukrainian Nazi vehicle – literally.

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.

Side by side with Pushkin: The extraordinary Ludmilla Leonova in Yasinovata, the main polling station in town.

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.

Avdeevka.

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.

Avdeevka. The icon by the window that survived everything.

AVDEEVKA. A local resident who refuses to leave.

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.

Avdeevka. He will NOT leave.

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.

Avdeevka. The miraculously preserved church of Mary Magdalen.

The miraculously preserved church of Mary Magdalen.

The miraculously preserved church of Mary Magdalen.

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.

View of Mariupol from within the Pakrovska Church — with Azovstal and the Russian Sea of Azov in the background

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.

Mariupol. School 53. Complete with gentleman on the voting booth, ballot box and a lovely painting featuring a ship with red sails…

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.

Mariupol. Azovstal with the restored monument to the Great Patriotic War – restored by Wagner – in the foreground.

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.

Avdeevka. Nella zona pericolosa. Gli FPV indugiano nel cielo. Foto del giovane fotoreporter Denis Grigory.

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Stoltenberg en tournée dans le Caucase pour la première fois depuis 2020

Par : ActuStratpol — 20 mars 2024 à 08:19

stoltenberg caucase

stoltenberg caucaseLe secrétaire général de l’OTAN, Jens Stoltenberg, termine sa tournée dans le Caucase du Sud. Depuis le 17 mars, il

L’article Stoltenberg en tournée dans le Caucase pour la première fois depuis 2020 est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Renseignement russe : la France prépare un contingent de 2 000 hommes pour l’Ukraine

Par : ActuStratpol — 20 mars 2024 à 08:15

france ukraine

france ukraineSelon le directeur du Service de renseignement extérieur, l’armée française craint qu’une unité aussi importante ne puisse être transférée et

L’article Renseignement russe : la France prépare un contingent de 2 000 hommes pour l’Ukraine est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Yemen Ends Thalassocratic Rule

Par : AHH — 19 mars 2024 à 19:03

Garland Nixon interviews Laith Marouf — West Asia update: Yemen and the beginning of the end of imperial naval force projection;

wide ranging talk includes:
🔸Zionist attempt to break the Syrian landbridge to Hezbollah again (after ISIS a decade ago);
🔸the Vichy regime of the Palestinian Authority;
🔸Prof Ali Kadri: the role of directed Genocide in western Capitalism; for more see:
https://guerrillahistory.libsyn.com/palestine-war-occupation-and-proletarianization-w-ali-kadri
http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue91/Kadri91.pdf
🔸the European lunch of the Empire
🔸COVID and Deagleian depopulation of the Golden Billion…

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Back in the EU, site of the 21st century’s biggest political disaster

Par : AHH — 19 mars 2024 à 14:39

Why is the biggest political story of our era so underreported?

with thanks to Ramin Mazaheri via Ramin’s Substack.

I have returned to Paris and can report that things are as politically bleak as ever, continuing a trend which began with the rubber bullet-smashing of the Yellow Vest movement in 2019. The European Union has become truly American (which was often alleged to be the ultimate goal): it’s politically apathetic.

There are no domestic political movements to report on – the French MSM just reports on Ukraine, Israel and (as usual) ecology.

This is not as it used to be.

Prior to the six months of bloody Saturdays over 2018-19 France had seen a full decade of incredible political activism. Leftist planning agendas were full of protests, gatherings and strikes concerning: Sarkozy’s bailouts in late 2008, Hollande’s hopeful Socialist Party election, his subsequent U-turn on austerity, the forceful imposition of austerity by Brussels, the fabrication of Macron, his immediate detestation, the spectacularly unprecedented support for – and then the spectacularly unprecedented repression of – les gilets jaunes – this was a 10-year period of intense, intense activism.

Were it not for Israel’s latest and most brutal invasion of Gaza, and combined with Macron’s incredible 7-years-running refusal to interact with the press (the exact opposite of Sarkozy), I’m not sure I’d have much work to do here?

There is a story to cover, and it’s the most important one, but it’s almost impossible to cover via PressTV news reports: the obvious failure of the pan-European project.

This is the biggest political story of the 21st century, and yet it’s going undiscussed year after year. Brexit put it on the front pages, and then so did the Yellow Vests, but Euroscepticism has been suppressed for four years now.

But what’s a bigger story in the 21st century than the economic, political and confidence collapse of the biggest economic bloc in the world?

The war on the Muslim world since 9/11? That’s something, indeed, but this is the re-sundering of a region which was already suppressed by two centuries of colonialism and then neo-colonialism.

The rise of China? That was something inevitable and unstoppable, due to the superior planning and cohesion of socialist-inspired governments. Of course, China’s sudden rise was aided by the Great Financial Crisis which devastated the West, who then exacerbated it with their predictably awful, inequality-generating policies of bailouts, austerity, QE and ZIRP.

Fifteen years ago who did not expect that a united Europe, and one working in what is now clearly lockstep with the United States, would become an unstoppable project?

That’s the big story: that Europe has not just stopped in its tracks but stagnated, regressed, devolved, disappointed, etc. and etc.

It’s truly historical. What the demise of the pan-European project means is the end of the “social democratic” model: if any region had implemented a “third way” between liberalism and socialism it was Europe. The alleged solution of “social democracy” goes way back to the 1890s – what we have witnessed hasn’t been the “death of communism” but the “death of social democracy” instead.

What a story, no? It was as the proponents of socialist democracy always predicted: social democracy inevitably reverts back to mere liberal democracy. It’s truly historical.

Back in the US someone recently asked me why I kept referring to the Great Financial Crisis of 2008, saying it was old history, and it made me pause. They never talk about it in the US anymore, that’s true. However, as soon as I returned to France I was confronted with multiple references to it in journalism and art. But they only get the dates right – roughly.

Yes, Europe took a more far-right economic approach (austerity) than the US (Europe had more social democracy to roll back, of course), but the problem is not the 2007-8 Great Financial Crisis nor austerity – the problem is the pan-European project itself, and this is precisely what is suppressed.

It is easy to suppress, or just be confused, because the timelines are so similar: the pan-European project didn’t truly begin until the undemocratic passage of the Lisbon Treaty of 2009, which was forced through thanks to the chaos surrounding the Great Financial Crisis and subsequent European Debt Crisis (starting 2009).

Why has nobody kept referring to the Lisbon Treaty of 2009? I am definitely one of the very few journalists who do. Now that the UK is out the Anglophone world doesn’t care, I suppose.

The 15-year summation of the pan-European can only be judged to be atrocious, but who is talking about these things: the decrease in economic power; the sustained collapse in the euro’s value; the constant, continent-wide protests against the decisions of Brussels; the decrease in democratic credibility; the increase in militaristic domestic repression; the decrease in social economic protections for the average person; the rise of neo-fascist parties – what on earth does this reporter who has covered the EU since birth have to do get some real talk about United Europe anymore?

The Fall of Phaeton, 1605, Peter Paul Rubens

Ukraine will make or break the pan-European project

The European Union succeeds at nothing and nor do they stand for anything, so they’re desperate for any rallying cry for “Europe!”, and they’ve found one in Ukraine.

Of course, Europe has already failed Ukraine: their weaponry is being defeated, their production capabilities aren’t up to the job, everybody knows they’re just setting Ukraine up for the same debt traps they laid for country like Greece, and they have failed (purposely) to find a diplomatic solution. Their only success is in their spectacularly prejudiced prioritising of Ukrainian refugees: this was, of course, to keep flooding the labor market with desperate, low-wage accepting workers amid record-high inflation – anything to keep wage demands down.

The reality is that Ukraine is going to either be the EU’s final undoing, or it will somehow lead to the “more Europe” that is the only way this misguided economic-but-not-political federalist project could ever possibly succeed.

Europe’s leaders know Ukraine is their best – given the far-right victories looming in European Parliament elections this spring – chances, which are diminishing, to rally Europe behind the pan-European project and away from Euroscepticism.

Remember that in two years Macron has gone from “we must not embarrass Russia” to calling other European countries “cowardly” for not buying Ukraine even more weapons, and even threatening to land NATO troops. Why the huge shift?

Of course war is good for business – France has soared to become the #2 arms merchant in the world. But in a bloc which has a pre-Covid history which no one in the 1% wants anyone to remember, it’s only via war with Russia that European public opinion could possibly be united in favor of “Europe!”.

European imperialists have run out of racism and now can only rely on nationalist prejudice – this is what the EU has revealed itself to be. Furthermore, during the 2010s we were constantly told in France that the pan-European project was the only reason war didn’t break out in Europe – recall how the EU won the Nobel Peace Prize in 2012, amid mass anti-austerity repression? This is justification is now out the window.

No peace, no public opinion in public policy, no prosperity – no success for the EU, and when will success ever arrive?

Now isn’t the time, Europeans are being told, to argue about the lack of results in the pan-European project – Putin is at the doorstep. Marine Le Pen fairly accused Macron of creating a situation – surrounding this week’s French Parliamentary approval of a 10-year military pact with Ukraine – where, “You’re either with Macron or you’re with Putin”. That’s not just Russophobia or scapegoating – that is the summation of Macron’s whole political policy now.

Nobody – no popular democratic majority – has ever been or will ever be with Macron, but the fabrication of false unity is what Ukraine is being manipulated for here in Europe.

But it’s going to be even bigger than that in the coming months and maybe even years, namely: “Either you’re with the pan-European project or you’re with Putin”.

After all, how else can support for the pan-European project possibly be created in 2024? They cannot stand on their results, and they cannot stand on hopes that the project will suddenly become workable, profitable, democratic, morally responsible, inspire confidence, etc.

The failure of Europe – that’s the biggest story of the 21st century.

<—>

Ramin Mazaheri is the chief correspondent in Paris for PressTV and has lived in France since 2009. He has been a daily newspaper reporter in the US, and has reported from Iran, Cuba, Egypt, Tunisia, South Korea and elsewhere. His latest book is France’s Yellow Vests: Western Repression of the West’s Best Values. He is also the author of ‘Socialism’s Ignored Success: Iranian Islamic Socialism’ as well as ‘I’ll Ruin Everything You Are: Ending Western Propaganda on Red China’, which is also available in simplified and traditional Chinese. Any reposting or republication of any of these articles is approved and appreciated. He tweets at @RaminMazaheri2 and writes at substack.com/@raminmazaheri

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Les sanctions contre les diamants russes feront perdre 20 milliards de dollars aux Occidentaux

Par : ActuStratpol — 19 mars 2024 à 09:01

diamants russes

diamants russesLes sanctions contre les diamants russes ne feront que nuire aux entreprises occidentales. Le directeur général par intérim de l’Association

L’article Les sanctions contre les diamants russes feront perdre 20 milliards de dollars aux Occidentaux est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Le CERN cessera de coopérer avec environ 500 spécialistes liés à la Russie d’ici la fin de l’année

Par : ActuStratpol — 19 mars 2024 à 08:56

cern russie

cern russieL’Organisation européenne pour la recherche nucléaire (CERN, Conseil européen pour la recherche nucléaire) cessera fin novembre sa coopération avec des

L’article Le CERN cessera de coopérer avec environ 500 spécialistes liés à la Russie d’ici la fin de l’année est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

The UN System in the Dock

Par : AHH — 18 mars 2024 à 14:04

How much longer will the world’s people allow the zionists and their imperialist backers to carry out their horrific crimes with impunity?

Lalkar writers at The Communists.

UN system in the dock: international law or rules-based order?

Two days after the International Court of Justice (ICJ) ruled in favour of South Africa’s prima facia case of genocide against it, Israel, and its primary sponsor the United States, along with the usual cohort of vassal states including Britain, all withdrew funding to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (Unrwa), which provides food and aid to Gaza.

The very same people being deprived of food, water, medical supplies and all other life-supporting mechanisms whilst being bombed into oblivion by Israel using US and British weapons, have had what meagre support they had withdrawn.

Whilst the withdrawal of Unrwa funding could be considered a war crime in itself, the action is in flagrant defiance of the ICJ’s ruling, which found the charges of genocide brought by South Africa to be plausible.

The ICJ ordered Israel to abide by six provisional measures to prevent genocide and alleviate the humanitarian catastrophe, one of which was for Israel to secure immediate and effective steps to provide humanitarian assistance and essential services in Gaza. The defunding of Unrwa by the imperialists was a retaliatory message to the ICJ that, by deciding that Israel was non-compliant with the present orders thus warranting further orders, Israel will not recognise the ICJ’s authority.

Israel feels free to ignore ICJ ruling

What does this say about the authority and influence of the highest international court in our world? What does it say about Israel’s acknowledgement of the court’s legitimacy when, following its ruling, the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu responds by declaring: “Israel’s commitment to international law is unwavering. Equally unwavering is our sacred commitment to defend our country.”

Mr Netanyahu went on to assert that South Africa’s allegation that Israel was committing genocide was “not only false, it’s outrageous, and decent people everywhere should reject it”.

Well, decent people the world over have made it clear what they think, and they reject Israel and the reject the western support of the zionists’ ongoing genocidal campaign. Whilst many may have no historical knowledge of the region and no understanding of the geopolitical implications or of US imperialist ambitions, they do know the difference between right and wrong.

They know genocide when they see it on their social media feeds, despite western media’s intense campaign of lying propaganda and protestations to the contrary.

Narratives unravelling fast

What we are witnessing is the rapid unravelling of two carefully constructed narratives that have run in parallel since 1945. One is the right of Israel to exist on any basis, and the other is the pretence that we are all governed according to some democratic principles enshrined in international law.

Since 1945, international law has been centred on the United Nations and its charter. One hundred and ninety-three countries have acceded to the UN charter as member states, declaring their wish to be part of the community of nations.

As part of the deal, they are obliged to follow the fundamental principles and provisions that extend from that charter, including its highest court, the ICJ.

Swedish diplomat Dag Hammarskjöld once stated that the goal of the UN was not to “take mankind to heaven, but to save humanity from hell”. But neither the UN’s courts nor its plethora of resolutions have done much for humanity in Palestine!

Israel and its sponsors, the USA and Britain, flagrantly disregard international law and the demands of millions of pro-Palestinian demonstrators worldwide, and they must be brought to account. It is time to delineate the words and actions of our leaders and to make them accountable for what they do.

Words matter. Words are how we communicate, interpret and understand one another and our world. They are also how we are manipulated into accepting wars and injustices that, if clearly articulated, we would fervently fight.Remember ‘weapons of mass destruction’? Our leaders and mass media constantly play with words to mould our thinking. Have you noticed how Israelis are ‘killed’ but Palestinians ‘die’?

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian refugees (Unrwa) was established in 1949. Since 1950 it has been providing nutritional, health and educational services to the 750,000 Palestinians displaced as a result of ethnic cleansing by the zionist colonisers, those displaced in later waves of war and occupation, and their descendants. Today, owing to a lack of international support, the agency struggles to provide services to over five million Palestinian refugees. Since the Palestinian refugees’ plight is officially recognised as ’temporary’, Unrwa is also supposed to be a temporary organisation, with its mandate reviewed and renewed every three years by the general assembly.

No limits to US-granted immunity for Israel

A change in phraseology coming out of the USA in recent years quietly replaced ‘international law’ with ‘the rules-based order’. Over time, the ‘rules-based order’ became the dominant phraseology in western media and political discourse, despite not having anything like the same meaning.

The ‘rules-based order’ flaunted by American and British politicians is less about international law and more about international law as interpreted by the United States. It allows the USA to flout the rules that govern other nations, and in particular to justify its exceptionalist approach toward Israel. This was clearly articulated in the joint declaration made during President Joe Biden’s visit to Israel in July 2022.

The statement reaffirmed “the unbreakable bonds between our two countries and the enduring commitment of the United States to Israel’s security”, along with the determination of the two states “to combat all efforts to boycott or delegitimise Israel, to deny its right to self-defence, or to single it out in any forum, including at the United Nations or the International Criminal Court”.

This commitment underpins the consistent refusal of the United States to hold Israel to account for its repeated violations of humanitarian law or to condemn its policy of apartheid in the occupied Palestinian territories.

The USA and its allies have always been partial in their application of the moral imperative, particularly when applied to international law. Israel remains the most immune and, regardless of sin, its brutal ethnic cleansing continues to have the full financial and military support of the USA and Britain.

Israel is America’s military base in the middle east. It has ensured US domination of the region and its oil since WW2, and that is why Israel is supported by the USA regardless of its actions or world opinion.

Imperialism v humanity: the struggle of our times

Whilst from the perspective of the western imperialists, such actions are presented as being consistent with their ‘rules-based order’, for the rest of the world they clearly violate the most basic rules of international law – and of humanity itself.

The ICJ ruling in support of South Africa’s submission that Israel is committing a genocide against the Palestinian people is a positive step, but if the court has no teeth, and if the genocide continues, what is the point of the court? What, in fact, is the point of the United Nations itself?

And if there is no legal mechanism for stopping what we all see and know is a genocide, and our own governments are complicit, who is going to see that justice is done?

Israel and the UN system are both in the dock. If nothing is done to hold Israel accountable, it will be because the USA has a veto over the only body with any executive power – the UN security council.

The USA has used that position to protect Israel and green light its genocidal and apartheid activities with impunity for 75 years, despite international outrage.

The question is: how much longer will the world’s people allow that situation to continue?

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Kiev ne veut pas prolonger l’accord de transit du gaz russe pour 2025

Par : ActuStratpol — 18 mars 2024 à 08:56

ukraine gazprom

ukraine gazpromLe ministre ukrainien de l’Énergie, German Galouchtchenko, a déclaré que Kiev n’envisageait pas de prolonger l’accord de transit de gaz

L’article Kiev ne veut pas prolonger l’accord de transit du gaz russe pour 2025 est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

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

Par : AHH — 18 mars 2024 à 00:09

“… 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

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Karl’s Twist of the Fabric

Par : AHH — 17 mars 2024 à 19:00

Dr. Karl extends the thoughts of Crooke and Todd using American history. Well done. The rejection of the Global Majority of the West’s post-Christian ideas is manifest. There will be a change of elites.

with thanks to Karl at karlof1’s Geopolitical Gymnasium.

Growing out of Alastair Crooke’s talk at the Night Falls Conference: Night Falls in the Evening Lands: The Assange Epic on 9 March, is this essay posted to Al-Mayadeen on the 12th. Currently, there’s no video available of Crooke’s talk given via video at the conference, although one hopes it will be produced soon so we can learn more about Alastair’s thoughts on the matter than what’s revealed in his essay. For those who have yet to read the Emmanual Todd interview with Le Figaro on 12 January 2024, it’s a key component to Crooke’s essay and is linked from there and here too to its translation. Other blogs have run articles based on the interview and Todd’s controversial book and perhaps that should be done here. For me, the interview and translated excerpts I’ve read have me hooked on buying it once it gets translated as there’s not enough context in the excerpts to properly assess its merit, which IMO for this work is very important. It will also help if the reader’s familiar with Jungian philosophy and his thesis of the collective unconscious. Readers will note that Todd relies on the evolution of political-economy for his work as does Crooke, and those familiar with Hudson’s work will have a better understanding of both. This is more than enough of a preamble for this important essay:

The celebrated French philosopher, Henri Corbin, who taught at Tehran University, once drew the attention of a Western friend to an ancient cupboard in a Tehran café, in which they were sitting. The old piece had several shelves — each enclosed by thin panelling — cut around the outline of different vases and urns, into which they would be slotted on the shelves.

Only, as Corbin noted, the vases and urns were absent: they had long since vanished; broken or lost.

The point Corbin was making was that nonetheless the space which once they physically occupied still persisted in clear outline. And so it is with ideas, with things said or written. They are not entirely gone. The space persists and somehow relentlessly reminds us of them.

Corbin here was pointing at something important about Shi’a understanding of time and memory. He was hinting that memory resides not just in ourselves, but beyond the confine of individual brains; and that memories can and do surge up into consciousness, triggering a recall of something past.

Corbin was a close friend of Carl Jung (they together attended the annual Eranos conferences), and Corbin’s insights drawn from long study of Shi’a philosophy were, as Jung acknowledged, to influence his own work on the collective (transpersonal) unconsciousness.

It is a significant point: Ideas, conceptualisations and history may be shut down and cancelled by the command of the ‘masters of dogma’, but the space these intellectual vessels once occupied is still ethereally there — to rise again in challenge to dogma.

The massive polarization occurring today in the world is not simply geopolitical. It is not simply a competition over resources, or even simply a rivalry based on trade relationships. The conflict between Western élites and the rest of humanity, as Emmanuel Todd has suggested in La Défaite, is the result of the West “falling into nihilism and the deification of nothing”. Todd defined this nihilism as “the desire for destruction, but also of the negation of reality. There are no longer any traces of religion, but the human being is still there.”

We are in for an extended period of revolution and of civil war. Ukraine and Gaza already have brought about the West’s ideological self-isolation in the world. The world is not in the least invested in the notion that Ukraine and Washington somehow represent ‘freedom and progress’, and Moscow ‘stands for tyranny’.

The Washington-led West simply has no clue as to how much of the world rejects the value system of contemporary globalist neo-liberalism.

The Ruling Strata, however, views giving up power as the height of irresponsibility. As betrayal, even! A mindset reflecting a breath-taking dogmatism; a kind of ideological solipsism, preventing these technocratic élites from seeing the world as it actually is.

Holding onto power trumps upholding the old Order that brought them to power (or maintaining a Constitution, or respecting the Law).

The masses — absent essential élite guidance — our rulers believe, risk being captured by the dark forces of ‘Populism’ and authoritarianism.

The disorder of their [the masses] slide towards ‘otherness’ threatens to disorder the new world of values – and makes them enemy to the new diversity of identity, now sacralised to the point of being non-negotiable.

Diversity paradoxically inverts not at all to legitimize wider horizons, but rather, towards a new dogmatism: Rival minorities are ‘gated’ behind an array of dogma and impervious to rational discussion. 

The physical segregation of the population to self-enclosed, heterogenous identity enclaves has its counterpart in the balkanization of opinion. Each compartment is barricaded behind its own dogmas, emoting and shouting at each other; yet unable to settle any dispute.

Therefore, all tools — Money, Institutions and Media — must be put to the enforcement of the New Order.

The Ancient understanding of society and history — of the world — was that of an integrated totality. It offered a more holistic perspective — one which can account for, rather than annul or strike out, the contradictions within the fabric of reality.

Contradictions and oppositions within history and understanding today are regarded as dangerous and signs of a threat to democratic order. [The order of course being fascist, not democratic.]

The underlying reality, however, is that individual life stories of members of a community become enmeshed and intertwined. And the entanglement of our stories surges out to form the everyday weft and weave of communal life.

The latter can and should never become funneled into a single ‘way of thinking’ — generated abstractly and imposed by Central Command.

Defending historical holism, however, implies ultimately, the defence of unique existence, in spite of any superficial contradictions within.

To defend the existence of your people, their unique culture and way of life as an organic, integral, and holistic culmination of the people’s historical existence, in itself is History viewed as a living organic thing.

The tool of ‘free money’ facilitated enforcement of many things, but particularly has achieved a hold over the media.

The rush ‘free money’ at zero interest, called Quantitative Monetary Easing or QE  – was launched in Japan in 2001. The total credit created by central banks through quantitative easing, or QE, is now more than $30 trillion.

QE quietly became the defining idea of our time. And as QE drove inequality, it polarised politics.

For the past 15 years, every major development in the Western economy and the cultural superstructure has rested upon it: the explosive growth of social media and Big Tech, the property boom, the gig economy, Elon Musk, cryptocurrencies, fake news and woke capitalism.

Trillions flooded into the financial system.  It was magic to the financialised world, but it had another effect too —

The rush of ‘free money’ gave Big Tech the power to buy up platforms that previously had relied on selling the news. They were replaced by entities beholden to advertisers that only cared about grabbing people’s attention and selling it to the highest bidder.

A new economy of attention arose — a machine for turning distraction and polarisation into investor returns.

The Power Structures ‘got it’: Words no longer need to have objective meanings in this market. Everything is about ‘attention’, however achieved. True or false. That’s what the advertisers wanted. Words could mean what those in power say they mean. The ‘truth’ behind the narrative became irrelevant. 

What mattered was the force of a narrative, now divorced from meaning, to compel a singularity of messaging, and to demand that belief in the new order be reflected, not just in compliance, but in assimilation of the messaging into personal conduct in life. Critical thinking was disallowed as denoting an enemy; a threat to be crushed.

This revolution and civil war are likely to be extended over time. Enforcement will predominate initially, but ultimately the Ruling Strata will overreach itself. Emmanuel Todd has defined the West as a “post-imperial” entity; just a shell of military machinery deprived of an intelligence-driven culture, leading to “accentuated military expansion in a phase of massive contraction of its industrial base”.  As Todd stresses, “modern war without industry is an oxymoron”.

Each time that society just says ‘No’, enforcement by the Ruling Strata will become more problematic, more stupidly heavy-handed. And the Élites will duly undercut themselves.

Julian Assange is a soldier seized by enemy forces — an undeserving victim in this ‘war’. I mourn also Daryia Dugina who was burnt to death in a fireball, as her father watched on, helplessly — another battlefront to this war. I salute them both. Let us continue saying, ‘No’; ‘Just go’.

This article is based on a talk given by Alastair Crooke on 9 March 2024 as part of the conference Night Falls in the Evening Lands: The Assange Epic, organised by the Julian Assange Campaign. [My Emphasis is bolded italics. All other emphasis is original.]

Crooke tells us which side of our Civilization War he’s on for those who didn’t know by now. That Assange is a casualty is clear as he tried to—and did—inject reality into the discourse. And perhaps that’s how the new political divisions ought to be determined: Pro-Reality and Pro-Human versus Pro-False Narrative and Anti-Human—essentially free-thinkers versus dogmatists and those the latter’s captured. This short sentence speaks volumes:

Holding onto power trumps upholding the old Order that brought them to power.

It indicates that elites can no longer be considered conservatives of any sort, neo or otherwise and as George HW Bush declared the job was now to destroy the past and create a New World Order, an Authoritarian Order he clearly omitted since the US Constitution and the UN Charter had suffered continual subversion since the latter’s inception in 1945. The New Unipolar World Order would build on its Fascist roots that were planted in the 1880s in the Elites’s counter-revolution against Progressive-Classical Political-Economy that had come very close to eradicating the vestiges of Feudalism and its Authoritarianism. In the USA, there was a similar movement against what was deemed the Money Power by the self-described Populist Party that also came very close to gaining control but was co-opted by the Protestant Racism Todd describes—and that Racism provided the basis for American style Fascism.

So, when we use the powers of Holistic History, we can see the past trail that’s led us to this point provided we have the courage and strength to look. Such context is critical to the generation of the types of thinking that can overturn the Elite Narrative and replace it with reality and the fact that we can refuse to comply. Russia and China lead a Global Majority that are refusing to comply. There’s a mistake Todd makes that’s unveiled in the interview that many of the Majority now see and that’s the falsity of what Obama’s selection was touted as, which Todd attributes to the disappearance of Protestant Racism—Obama was and remains a creation of the Elite and a Class Tool to continue their rule—essentially GHW Bush with black skin.

IMO, the Global Elites know their hold on power is tenuous and weakening, meaning their penchant to do something radical to reinstall their power is growing. But here reality suddenly stares them in the face and they realize they have few tools to work with, and their ability to command is at an ebb. Everyday, more people for a spat of reasons within the Outlaw US Empire’s Neoliberal Colonies join the Resistance of the Global Majority, although initially they may think themselves to be alone—they have their Winston Smith moment and wonder why their friends and family can’t see what they can—they remain transfixed by the fabric weavers whose mask blinds them. Plato’s Cave indeed, which tells us this really isn’t new, and that fact can become an excellent ally.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

What is China’s Economic Future?

Par : AHH — 16 mars 2024 à 19:48

Political economists Radhika Desai and Michael Hudson are joined by Beijing-based scholar Mick Dunford to discuss what is actually happening in China’s economy, explaining its technological development and transition toward a new industrial revolution.

Radhika Desai and Michael Hudson at The Geopolitical Economy Hour.

Video:

Podcast:

Transcript:

RADHIKA DESAI: Hello and welcome to the 24th Geopolitical Economy Hour, the show that examines the fast-changing political and geopolitical economy of our time. I’m Radhika Desai.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I’m Michael Hudson.

RADHIKA DESAI: And working behind the scenes to bring you our show every fortnight are our host, Ben Norton; our videographer, Paul Graham; and our transcriber, Zach Weiser.

And with us today we have, once again, Professor Mick Dunford, professor emeritus of geography at Sussex University and now working at the Chinese Academy of Sciences, keeping a close watch, among other things, on China’s economy. So welcome, Mick.

MICK DUNFORD:  Thank you very much.

RADHIKA DESAI: So, China’s economy is what we’re going to talk about today. Where is it at after decades of breakneck growth, after executing the greatest industrial revolution ever? Where is it headed?

Trying to understand this is not easy. The disinformation that is fake news and even what I often call fake scholarship that distorts the view that any honest person may be trying to take on China’s economy is simply overwhelming. It’s absolutely wall-to-wall propaganda, no matter which Western publication or website you open.

If we are to believe the Western press and the leading scholarly lights of the West, who are the major generators of the Western discourse on China, we are at peak China. That is to say, they claim that China has reached a point, reached the highest point, that is, that it ever can. And from here on, it’s only going to be downhill, more or less rapidly.

They say that China has, in recent years, inflated a huge property bubble to compensate for the West’s inability to keep up imports. And this bubble is about to burst. And when it does, it will subject China to a 1980s and 1990s Japan-style long-term deflation or secular stagnation. They have even invented a word to talk about this: “Japanification”. We are told that the Japanification of China’s economy is impending.

They say that the U.S.’s trade and technology wars are hitting China where it hurts the most, at its export and its reliance on inward foreign investment. They are saying that China has grown only by stealing technology. And now that the U.S. is making it harder for it to do so, its technological development can only stall. They are saying that China followed disastrous COVID-19 policies, leading to mass death, draconian lockdowns, and economic disaster.

They are saying that China over-invests, and its growth will not pick up unless China now permits higher consumption levels. They are saying that China has a serious unemployment crisis, that the CPC, the Communist Party of China, is losing legitimacy, because it is failing to deliver ever-higher living standards. And they are saying that Xi Jinping’s authoritarian leadership is ensuring that the private sector will stall, and with it, so will China’s growth.

All this, they say, before even beginning to talk about China’s foreign policy. And there, of course, lie another long litany of alleged disasters and misdemeanors that China is responsible for, beginning with debt-trap diplomacy and China’s allegedly voracious appetite for the world’s resources.

The only reason why Western experts ever stress the strength of China’s economy is when they want to argue that the West must redouble its efforts to contain China and to stall its rise.

So today, we’re going to take a closer look at China’s economy, and in doing so, we’re going to bust a lot of these myths. We’re going to show you that, sadly, for the purveyors of the fake news and fake scholarship about China, no amount of their huffing and puffing has been able to blow down China’s house, because, like the good, the smart little pig, China is actually building its house with bricks.

So, we have a number of topics to discuss in this show. Here they are:

1.    Characterising China’s Economy: Capitalist? Socialist?

2.    Growth Story

3.    Covid Response

4.    The Alleged Debt and Property Bubble? And Japanification?

5.    Restricted Consumption? Stagnant living standards?

6.    Exports in the China Story

7.    China’s new growth strategy

8.    China’s foreign policy

So, these are the topics that we hope to discuss. We want to begin by talking about how to characterize China’s economy. Is it capitalist? Is it socialist? Then we will do the most important and primary basic thing, we will look at the growth story with some statistics. We will then look at China’s Covid response. We will look at the alleged debt and property bubble and whether China is being Japanified.

Then we will look at the issue of whether China is overinvesting and neglecting consumption and living standards, etc. How reliant is China on exports? What is China’s growth strategy? And what is China’s foreign policy? And are those myths about it true? So, this is what we hope to discuss.

So, Mick, why don’t you start us off with your thoughts on exactly how to characterize China’s economy?

MICK DUNFORD: Ok, the way I would characterize China is as a planned rational state. I mean, right the way through, it has maintained a system of national five-year planning, and it also produces longer-term plans. But it’s a planned rational state that uses market instruments.

China has a very large state sector. And of course, some people have claimed that this state sector is, in a sense, an impediment to growth. And we’ve seen a resurrection of this idea, guo jin min tui (国进民退), which is used to refer to the idea that the state sector is advancing and the private sector is retreating.

It’s a very, very strange concept, in fact, because the third word is min (民), and min refers to people. So, what they are actually, in a sense, saying – these ideas were invented by neoliberal economists in 2002 – the private sector is equated with the people, which I find absolutely astonishing. But, I mean, the country does have a very significant public sector.

What I find striking is that one can actually turn it around and say, what is it that these Western economists seem to think China should do? And they seem to think that China should privatize all assets into the hands of domestic and foreign capitalists. It should remove capital controls. It should open the door to foreign finance capital. It should transfer governance to liberal capitalist political parties that are actually controlled by capital.

I think one of the most fundamental features of the China system is actually that it’s the state that controls capital, rather than capital that controls the state. And it’s, in fact, this aspect of the Chinese model, and in particular, the rule of the Communist Party of China that has basically transformed China from what was, effectively one of the poorest countries in the world into one of its largest industrial powers.

So, in a way, it’s a planned rational state in which the CPC has played an absolutely fundamental role. And without it, I mean, China would never have established the national sovereignty that permitted it to choose a path that suited its conditions and to radically transform the lives and livelihoods of its people.

RADHIKA DESAI: Michael, do you want to [speak]?

MICHAEL HUDSON: The question is, what is the state? There are two aspects of the state with China. One is public infrastructure. And the purpose of China’s public infrastructure is to lower the cost of doing business because infrastructure is a monopoly.

That’s what really upsets the American investors. They wanted to buy the phone system, the transportation system, so that they could benefit from charging monopoly rents, just like under Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher.

The most important sector that China’s treated in the public is money creation and banks. Americans hope that American banks would come over and they would be making all the loans in China and benefiting from China’s growth and turning it into interest. And instead, the government’s doing that. And the government is deciding what to lend to.

And there’s a third aspect of what people think of when they say state. That’s a centralized economy, centralized planning, Soviet style.

China is one of the least centralized economies in the world because the central government has left the localities to go their own way. That’s part of the Hundred Flowers Bloom. Let’s see how each locality is going to maneuver on a pragmatic, ad hoc basis.

Well, the pragmatic ad hoc basis meant how are localities, villages, and small towns going to finance their budgets? Well, they financed it by real estate sales, and that’s going to be what we’re discussing later.

But once you realize that the state sector is so different from what a state sector is in America, centralized planning and the control of Wall Street for financial purposes, finance capitalism, hyper-centralized planning, you realize that China is the antithesis of what the usual view is.

RADHIKA DESAI: Absolutely. And I’d just like to add a few points, which dovetail very nicely with what both of you have said.

The fact of the matter is that this was also true of the Soviet Union and the Eastern European countries when they were still ruled by communist parties. We generally refer to them as socialist or communist, but in reality, they themselves never claimed to be socialist or communist. They only said they were building socialism, especially in a country that was as poor as China was in 1949.

The leadership of the Communist Party of China has always understood that there has to be a long period of transition in which there will be a complex set of compromises that will have to be made in order to steer the economy in the direction of socialism, in order to build socialism.

So, from its beginnings, the revolutionary state in China was a multi-class state and a multi-party state. People don’t realize very often that while the Communist Party of China is the overwhelmingly most powerful party in China, there are other parties that exist as well, which reflect the originally multi-class character of China.

Now, it’s true that since 1978, the government has loosened much of its control over the economy. But the important thing here is that the Communist Party retains control of the Chinese state.

The way I like to put it is, yes, there are lots of capitalists in China. Yes, those capitalists are very powerful. They are at the head of some of the biggest corporations in the world, and they are quite influential within the Communist Party. But what makes China meaningfully socialist or meaningfully treading the path to socialism, let’s put it that way, is the fact that ultimately the reins of power are held in the hands of the Communist Party of China leadership, which owes its legitimacy to the people of China.

So, the reigns of power, the reigns of state power are not held by the capitalists; they are held by the Communist Party leadership.

So, in that sense, I would say that China is meaningfully socialist. Although, as Mick pointed out, there is a fairly large private sector in China, but so too is the state sector very large. And the extent of state ownership means that even though the private sector is very large, the state retains control over the overall pace and pattern of growth and development in the country.

And I just add one final thing here, which is going to become quite important as we discuss the various other points, and that is that the financial sector in China remains very heavily controlled by the state.

China has capital controls, China practices a fair degree of financial repression, and China’s financial system is geared to providing money for long-term investments that improve the productive capacities of the economy and the material welfare of the people. And this is completely different from the kind of financial sector we have today.

So, Mick or Michael, did you want to add anything?

MICK DUNFORD: Just to reiterate, I mean, the point is, the government sets strategic targets that relate to raising the quality of the life of all the Chinese people. And it has strategic autonomy, which gives China the opportunity or the possibility of actually choosing its own development path.

And I think that’s something that very strikingly marks China out from other parts of the Global South that have had much greater difficulty, in a sense, in accelerating their growth, partly because of debt and their subordination to the Washington financial institutions.

So I think that is critically important, the role of sovereignty and autonomy in enabling China to make choices that suited its conditions, and at the same time making choices that are driven by a long-term strategic goal to transform the quality of the lives of all Chinese people.

MICHAEL HUDSON: I want to put in one word about sovereignty. You put your finger on it. That’s really what makes it different.

What makes other countries lose their sovereignty is when they let go, how are they going to finance their investment? If they let foreign banks come in to finance their investment, if they let American and European banks come in, what do they do? They fund a real estate bubble, a different kind of a real estate bubble. They fund takeover loans. They fund privatization.

Banks don’t make loans for new investment. China makes great money to finance new tangible investment. Banks make money so you can buy a public utility or a railroad and then just load it down with debt, and you can borrow and borrow and use the money that you borrow to pay a special dividend if you’re a private capital company. Pretty soon, the country that follows this dependency on foreign credit ends up losing its sovereignty.

The way in which China has protected its sovereignty is to keep money in the public domain and to create money for actual tangible capital investment, not to take your property into a property-owning rentier class, largely foreign-owned.

RADHIKA DESAI: Thank you. Those are very important points. Thank you.

I’d just like to add one final point on the matter of how to characterize the Chinese economy and the Chinese state. At the end of the day, it’s not just important to say that the state controls the economy, but whose state is it?

The way to look at it as well is that in the United States, essentially we have a state that is controlled by the big corporations, which in our time have become exceedingly financialized corporations, so that they are directing the United States economy essentially towards ever more debt and ever less production, whereas that is not the case in China.

And the question of whose state it is makes use of the word autonomy. The autonomy refers to the fact that it is not subservient to any one section of society, but seeks to achieve the welfare of society as a whole and increase its productive capacity.

MICK DUNFORD: If I may just add, I think also it’s important that you pay attention to the policy-making process in China. It’s an example of what one might call substantive democracy. It delivers substantive results for the whole of the Chinese population.

In that sense, it delivers improvements in the quality of the lives of all the people, and therefore, in a sense, it’s a democratic system. But it’s also a country that actually has procedures of policy-making, experimentation, design, and choice and so on that are extremely important and that have fundamental aspects of democracy about them.

When Western countries characterize China as authoritarian, they’re actually fundamentally misrepresenting the character of the Chinese system and the way in which it works, because they, in a sense, merely equate democracy with a system, whereas China, of course, does have multiple political parties, but a system with competitive elections between different political parties. There are other models of democracy, and China is another model of democracy.

RADHIKA DESAI: Mick, you’re absolutely right to talk about the substantive democracy. Indeed, in China, they have recently developed a new term for it. They call it a “whole process democracy”, and it really involves multiple levels of consultation with the people, going down to the most basic village and township levels, and then all the way up the chain.

And I think this process does work, because the other remarkable thing about the CPC leadership is its ability to change direction pragmatically. If something does not work, then it assesses what it has attempted, why it has failed, and then it revises course. So, I think we will see several instances of this as we talk as well.

Michael, you want to add something?

MICHAEL HUDSON: One thing about democracy. The definition of a democracy traditionally is to prevent an oligarchy from developing. There’s only one way to prevent an oligarchy from developing as people get richer and richer, and that’s to have a strong state.

The role of a strong state is to prevent an oligarchy from developing. That’s why the oligarchy in America and Europe are libertarian, meaning get rid of government, because a government is strong enough to prevent us from gouging the economy, to prevent us from taking it over.

So, you need a strong central state in order to have a democracy. Americans call that socialism, and they say that’s the antithesis of democracy, which means a state that is loyal to the United States and follows U.S. policy and lets the U.S. banks financialize the economy. So, just to clarify the definitions here.

RADHIKA DESAI: Very, very true, Michael. But let’s not go, I mean, maybe we should do a separate show on political theory of the state, because that’s equally important.

But for now, let’s look at our next topic. We hope, of course, that everybody understands how we characterize China’s state. But now, let’s look at China’s GDP growth.

So, here you have a chart, and we have several charts on this matter, but we’ll take them one by one and comment on them:

gdp growth china west 1980 2028

So, here we have a chart showing the annual rate of GDP growth from 1980 to 2028. Of course, post-2023 are their projections, which are shown by the dotted lines. And I’ve only taken a few selected countries from the Our World in Data website, and anybody can go there and look at this data, by the way.

So, you can see China and then a handful of the most important Western countries. And you can see that going back to 1980, essentially China’s growth rate, which is here, the top red line here, has absolutely been massively higher on practically any year than the other countries.

In fact, you see I left Russia in here. I should probably have taken it out. It’s a bit of a distraction, because here you see Russia’s growth rate massively bouncing up from the late 90s financial crisis. But let’s leave that aside.

All the other major countries, which you see here, they are all showing considerably lower growth. So, the United States here is this orangish line. And essentially, they’re all showing much lower growth.

And more recently as well, this is the Covid-19 pandemic. And you can see that China, again, like all the other countries, it experienced a fairly sharp decline in the growth rate, but it still remained positive, unlike all the other countries.

And it remains substantially above that of the rest of the economies that constantly are telling China how to improve its economic policy. So, that’s what I want to say about this chart.

But Mick, go ahead.

MICK DUNFORD: Can you show that table that I sent?

RADHIKA DESAI: Yeah, sure. Yes, here we go:

gdp growth china west table

MICK DUNFORD: These are more recent growth rates for China, for the world, and for the G7. And I mean, first of all, they show absolutely clearly that China’s growth rate is still a long way in excess of the average growth rates of all G7 countries, many of which have actually performed abysmally. I mean, Germany is now in recession, it declined 0.3% per year this year. I mean, Italy has had extremely low rates of growth, France, Germany, the United Kingdom, Japan, all had extremely low rates of growth.

China last year achieved a growth rate of 5.2%. It itself expects to grow at 5% next year. The IMF forecast 4.6%. Even that 4.6% target is quite close to the average growth rate that China needs to achieve to meet its 2035 target. It has a 2035 target of doubling its GDP, its 2020 GDP by 2035. I think that that goal is perfectly realizable. And in that sense, I strongly disagree with people who argue that China has in a sense peaked.

But I do find it, really quite astonishing, that Western countries, whose economies have performed extremely poorly, feel in a position to lecture China about how it should address what is said to be an unsatisfactory rate of growth. That’s the first point I want to make.

I just want to say something else, if I may. When we talk about, I mean, China’s growth has slowed. And, there’s no doubt that in terms of people’s everyday lives, there are many difficulties. And I just want to quote something.

At New Year, Xi Jinping gave a speech. I wanted to cite his actual words. He recognised that in these years, China faces what he called the tests of the winds and rains. And then he said, when I see people rising to the occasion, reaching out to each other in adversity, meeting challenges head on and overcoming difficulties, I am deeply moved.

So, the leadership and all Chinese people are well aware that there are many, many difficulties and challenges confronted, because China is actually undergoing a major structural transformation about which we shall speak later. But China is also in the short term undertaking a lot of important actions that are actually designed to cope with some of the real difficulties that people confront.

So, if you listen to Li Qiang’s government work report, he addressed the problem of short-term employment generation. And there are proposals for 12 million new urban jobs to increase employment, especially for college graduates and other young people, because for young people, the unemployment rate, including college students, is in the region of 21 percent. Urban unemployment is 5 percent. So, there are issues to do with the generation of employment.

Government expenditure this year will target a whole series of strategic issues, but also livelihoods. So, affordable housing, youth unemployment, job security, insurance, pensions, preschool education, the living conditions in older communities. So, I’m just saying that, in the current context, difficult economic situation and a particularly turbulent global situation. I mean, China, as every other country in the world, faces challenges, and it is in many ways directly addressing them in very important ways.

RADHIKA DESAI: Great. Thanks, Mick. Michael, do you want to add anything?

MICHAEL HUDSON: No, I think that’s it. The question is, what is the GDP that is growing? There are a number of ways of looking at GDP. And when I went to school 60 years ago, economists usually thought of GDP as something industrial. They’d look at energy production. They’d look at railway cargo transportation.

If you look at the industrial component of what most economists used to look at, electricity is the power for industry, electricity is productivity growth for labor. If you look at these, what is the component of GDP, you realize that these differences in Mick’s charts are even wider than what he showed, because the American GDP, very largely interest, overdraft fees of credit card companies, as we’ve said, is providing a financial service. 7% of American GDP is the increase in homeowners’ view of what their rental value of their property is. That’s 7%.

Now, I doubt that China includes a measure like this in its GDP. But if it did, with all of its rise in real estate prices, its GDP would be even higher in a reality-based basis.

So real GDP, as we think of it, and the public thinks of it, is something useful and productive. Actually, China’s doing a much more efficient job in minimizing the kind of financial and rentier overhead that you have in the United States.

RADHIKA DESAI: Exactly, Michael. What I was going to point out as well is that these figures of U.S. GDP growth and the absolute level of U.S. GDP are heavily financialized.

The financial sector, which actually is not a force for good in general in the U.S. economy, it is out of which the indebtedness comes, out of which the productive weakening comes. The growth of the financial sector is counted as GDP in the United States and massively inflates U.S. GDP, which would not be as high as this.

And this is particularly important given that President Biden, for example, is congratulating himself now for having the strongest economy in the world or the Western world or whatever it is. Well, that’s what the U.S.’s boast is based on.

And China does not do that, nor does it have the kind of financial sector which creates, which destroys the productive economy. Rather, as we were saying, it has the kind of financial sector that supports it.

So, just another general point I want to make. We were talking about this chart:

gdp growth china west table

This shows from 1980 to 2028, and the projections remain, by the way, even from conservative sources, that China’s growth is going to remain higher than the rest of the world, particularly the Western countries, for a long time to come.

And I also decided to show you this chart:

gdp growth china west 2008 2028

This is the chart of growth, which is just a more focused version of the previous one, which shows growth rates from 2008 to 2028.

So 2008 is when we had what Michael and I call the North Atlantic Financial Crisis. And since then, what we’ve seen is, yes, of course, all countries have seen a sort of a reduction in their growth rate, and certainly China has. But even since then, you can see that China’s growth remains high and stable. So, that’s another thing that we wanted to show.

And this is a chart showing the rise of per capita GDP:

gdp per capita growth china west 1970 2021

That is to say, you can have a higher GDP, but if your population is expanding, then to what extent is per capita GDP rising? So, you can see here that, again, even in terms of per capita GDP, and this only again goes to 2021, but in terms of per capita GDP, China has remained head and shoulders above all the major Western countries.

And this bounce here that you see in the case of the US and the UK here, it is only a dead cat bounce from the absolute depths to which their economies had sunk during Covid, and so they came to some sort of normalcy.

Mick, you may want to say something about this chart, because you sent it to me. So, please go ahead:

gdp per capita ppp 2021 china west

MICK DUNFORD: It’s correct, of course, that China’s growth slowed. Now, in 2013, China entered what is called the New Era. At that time, China decided that its growth rate should slow. It chose slower growth. It spoke of 6 or 7 percent per year, and it more or less achieved that, until the Covid pandemic. So, China chose slower growth for very particular reasons, and I think in this discussion, we shall come to some of these reasons later on.

But in a sense, what they want is what they call high-quality growth. And what China is seeking to do is undertake a profound structural transformation of its economy, establishing new growth drivers by directing finance towards high-productivity sectors and directing finance towards the use of digital and green technologies in order to transform its traditional industries. So, in a sense, it’s undergoing a profound process of structural transformation.

And I mean, if you, for example, look at Li Qiang’s speech, the major tasks include invigorating China through science and education, so to strengthen the education, science and technology system, to improve the capabilities of the workforce, or promote innovation, industrial investment and skills, and another, striving to modernize the industrial system and accelerate the development of new productive forces, bearing in mind that we’re on the verge of a new industrial revolution. But these are very important issues, fundamentally important issues.

RADHIKA DESAI: And I would say just, and I know we’ll talk about it at greater length later on, but it is really important to bear in mind that really, when the world stands at the cusp of being able to exploit new technologies like quantum computing or nanotechnology or artificial intelligence or what have you, a relatively centralized decision-making process about how to allocate resources, for what purposes, for what social benefits, etc., is likely to prove far superior, that is to say, China’s method is likely to prove far superior than the Western tactic of leaving private corporate capital in charge of the process.

And just to give you a couple of instances of this, the fact that private corporate capital is in charge of the development of digital technologies is already creating all sorts of social harms in our Western societies, whether it is harms to children’s mental health or even adults’ mental health, to political division that the algorithms sow and so on.

And also, it is leading to a situation where even these mega-corporations, these giant corporations, actually do not have the resources to invest, the scale of resources that will be needed to invest. So, for example, you hear in the Financial Times that Sam Altman is looking for people to invest in his artificial intelligence ventures, which will require trillions of dollars, and he cannot find private investors for it. So, this is really quite interesting.

Okay, so if we’re done with the growth rate story, oh, and I just want to say one other thing about this, which is, this is a GDP per capita in purchasing power parity, and China, in the space of a few decades, essentially, has experienced the biggest spurt in per capita well-being, etc., which includes important achievements like eliminating extreme poverty.

The Communist Party has brought China to essentially per capita GDP in purchasing power terms of next to nothing in 1980 to about $20,000 per annum in 2020. This is really quite an important achievement. And to do this for a country of 5 to 10 million people would be laudable, but to do this for a country of 1.3 billion people is a massive, historic achievement, and I think that’s something to remember.

MICK DUNFORD: I just, if you just go back for one minute, I mean, I absolutely agree with what you’ve just said, Radhika.

I’ll just make a comment about this chart. It’s because we were probably going to speak about Japanification:

gdp per capita ppp 2021 china west

It basically shows that the GDP per capita of Japan, and indeed of Germany, closed in on the United States, and actually Germany overtook it in the 1980s. But after that point in time, I mean, after the revaluation of their two respective currencies, and after the, the bubble, the stock market and property market bubble in Japan, you saw stagnation set in. And there’s a question as to whether that will happen with China.

But I mean, I think that one thing that’s striking in this diagram is that China is still at a much lower level of GDP per capita than Japan, or indeed Germany was at that time. And those economies, because, they were at the technological frontier to some extent, had to innovate, move into new technologies.

China, because there is still a technological gap, has enormous opportunities to accelerate its growth in a way in which, well, Japan failed because it chose not to take up opportunities, and it gave up semiconductors manufacture. But China has enormous opportunities, and that’s one reason why we must anticipate China’s growth as continuing.

RADHIKA DESAI: Absolutely. Thank you, Mick. Okay, so if we’re done with the growth story, let’s go to our next topic, which is what happened in China under Covid-19. Now, of course, there is just so much dispute about and controversy around Covid and Covid strategies, etc. So we don’t want to get into all of them, but I just want to emphasize two things.

We’ve already looked at the growth figures, we looked at the growth figures around Covid:

gdp growth china west 2008 2028

So you can see here that in 2020, all economies had a big dip thanks to Covid in their economies, but China is alone among the major economies to have remained in positive growth territory, and to have, of course, remained much higher than the rest of the other major world economies. So essentially, China, whatever China did, it did not sacrifice growth.

Now, this is very ironical, because in the Western countries, we were told that we need to, in order to continue growing, we need to, so in order to preserve livelihoods, which was the euphemism for preserving the profits of big corporations, in order to preserve livelihoods, we may have to sacrifice some lives. And the Western economies went through an absolutely excruciating process of lockdown here, and opening there, and lockdown again, and opening again, and so on.

But all of this had devastating impacts on Western economies, whereas China prioritized the preservation of life above all. And it imposed a lockdown knowing that, okay, even if we are going to develop vaccines, and remember, China developed its own vaccines, and effectively inoculated over 70 percent of the population by the time they began reopening.

China prioritized the saving of lives, and it was accused of essentially creating world shortages by shutting down its economy, etc. But in reality, China’s strategy, which focused before the availability of vaccines, on essentially physical distancing, isolation, etc., as was necessary, but China managed to do it in a way as to keep up a relatively robust growth rate, and very importantly, lose very few lives.

This is a chart, again from Our World In Data, of cumulative Covid-19 deaths per million of population:

covid 19 deaths per million china us

So here we have all these countries, the United States and United Kingdom are these top two lines, Germany, Canada, Japan, even though we are told that East Asian economies did well because they had experience with SARS, etc., even then, compared to China, which is down here with a cumulative Covid death rate per million of about 149 or something people dying per million, and these numbers are over 3,000, almost 4,000 per million at this point in the United States and the UK, and then you have these other economies.

So China actually managed to avoid the worst of Covid, both in terms of lives and in terms of livelihood, and it did so because it did not compromise the saving of lives.

Does anyone else want to add anything? Mick? You were there.

MICK DUNFORD: Well, I mean, obviously, there were difficulties for some people in some places at some times. I was here right through it. All I can say is the impact personally on me was extremely limited.

It was a very effective system for protecting life. And if you lived in some places, then in fact the impact on your life, apart from having frequent nucleic acid tests and so on and ensuring that your health code was up to date, the impact on one’s life was relatively limited.

But in some places, obviously, in Wuhan at the outset, in Shanghai later on, the impact was very considerable.

But I think it’s an indication of the importance of a kind of collectivism, and the priority given to the protection of human life. And as you said, it is quite striking that actually through it, China’s economy actually kept ticking over.

And of course, China produces so many important intermediate goods that obviously it was also very important in providing things that were needed in many, many other parts of the world.

It also shared its drugs, its vaccines, which is really quite different, in a sense, from the conduct of the United States. And to some extent, the Western pharmaceutical companies.

RADHIKA DESAI: Absolutely. Michael, go ahead.

MICHAEL HUDSON: In the United States, that would be considered a failure of policy. The United States used Covid as an opportunity to kill.

For instance, the governor of New York, Cuomo, took the Covid patients and he moved them into all of the assisted living and old people’s homes. And that had a great increase in productivity. It resulted in enormous death rates for the elderly.

That helped save New York’s pension plan system. It helped save other pension plans. It helped save Social Security because the dead people were no longer what America called “the dead weight”.

The American policy was to indeed infect as many people over the age of 65 as you could. And that helped balance state, local budgets, pension plan budgets.

The increase in the death rate is now the official policy of the Center for Disease Control in the United States. They say do not wear masks. They’ve blocked any kind of mask wearing. They’ve done everything they could to prevent the use of HIPAA filters or airborne disease. The Disease Control Center says that Covid is not an airborne disease. Therefore, do not protect yourself.

Well, the result is many children have been getting Covid and that weakens their resistance system. And they’re getting measles and all sorts of other things. And all of that is greatly increasing GDP in America. The health care costs of America’s destructive policy.

I think Marx made a joke about this in Capital. He said when more people get sick, the doctors and the economic output goes up. Are you really going to consider sickness and destruction and fires rebuilding and cleanup costs? Are you going to count all of this there?

RADHIKA DESAI: But the irony is Michael, even with all of that, America’s GDP plunged so deeply down.

Well, I think we should move on to the next topic, but I will just say one thing. It is generally said that China is in a panic, the Chinese government reversed its draconian Covid policies because there were popular protests, and blah blah and so on. I would not agree with that.

Certainly, there were some popular protests. It also seems as though at least some of them were being pushed by the National Endowment for Democracy with the typical color revolution style. They have one symbol that symbolizes it. So, they decided to put up blank pieces of paper, etc. So, there’s no doubt that there was some of this going on. And as Mick said, undoubtedly, there were local difficulties in many places.

But what becomes very clear is that China decided to lift Covid restrictions towards the end of 2022 only after it has satisfied itself that the risk. And I should also add one thing. It was under pressure to lift these restrictions a great deal because the fact was that the rest of the world was not following China’s footsteps apart from a handful of other countries. And they were socialist countries. They were not following China’s footsteps.

So, it’s very hard to be the only country that’s doing it. But nevertheless, despite all those pressures, China had a very deliberate policy. It lifted Covid restrictions after assuring itself that enough of the population had been vaccinated, as to achieve something close to herd immunity.

And these figures of deaths per million demonstrate that China’s bet proved right, and China continues to monitor the situation. Covid hasn’t gone away.

And so, in all of these ways, I think that it’s important for us to understand that China’s policy has actually been above all about protecting people’s lives.

MICK DUNFORD: Just from my recollection, the demonstrations of which you spoke, where the slogans were written in English, I wonder who they were talking to, were on the 1st of December. China had, on the 11th of November, already announced the steps of, in a sense, removing restrictions. And then they were finalized in early December. So, the change was already underway.

RADHIKA DESAI: Exactly. Great. So, I think we are at almost, I think, 50 minutes or so. So, let’s do the next topic, which is the property bubble. And then we will stop this episode and we will do a part two of this episode, and do the other four topics that remain in part two.

So, Mick, do you want to start us off about the property bubble and the alleged Japanification, impending Japanification of China’s economy?

MICK DUNFORD: Okay. Well, if you want, you can just show the chart:

house property prices china us

Basically, you can see that throughout this period, Chinese house prices have risen quite substantially. You know, in a sense, the story started, with housing reform, after 1988, when China moved from a welfare to a commodity system. And then, in 1998, it actually privatized Danwei housing, and it adopted the view that housing should be provided, as a commodity by developers.

And in 2003, that course of action was confirmed. And from that point in time, one saw very, very substantial growth in the number of developers, many of which, the overwhelming majority of which were private developers. So, in a sense, they moved towards a fundamentally market system.

And they very quickly had to make certain adjustments because they found that while the quality of housing and the amount of housing space per person was going up, these developers were orienting their houses towards more affluent groups. So, there was an under-provision of housing for middle-income groups and for low-income groups.

And so, there were progressively, you saw over the years, increasing attention paid to the provision of low-cost housing and of low-cost rented housing. And in fact, in the current five-year plan, 25% of all housing is meant to be basically low-cost housing.

So, the important point is that this problem emerged in a system that was liberalized, actually, I mean, in line with recommendations that were made in 1993 by the World Bank.

So, in other words, it’s an example of a liberalized, predominantly market-led, private-led system, in which these difficulties and these problems have emerged.

So, that’s the first thing I want to say. And I mean, obviously, to address housing needs, China has had, over the course of time, to considerably move back in the direction of providing low-cost housing in order to meet the housing needs of the Chinese people.

But basically, in August 2020, the government got very, very deeply concerned about, on the one hand, increasing house prices and, on the other hand, the explosion of borrowing and the fact that the liabilities of many of these developers substantially exceeded their assets.

And of course, the other line on that chart is a line indicating house prices in the United States. And of course, it was the crash of prices in the subprime market that, in a sense, precipitated the financial crisis. So, China, in the first place, is absolutely determined that it should not confront that kind of problem that was generated by the liberalized housing system in the United States.

So, I mean, that’s the first thing I basically want to say.

If you want, I can say something about the case of Evergrande. But basically, what China did in 2020 was it introduced what it called Three Red Lines, which were basically designed to reduce financial risks.

But it had a number of consequences because it, to some extent, deflated the housing market. Housing prices started to fall. Some of these developers found themselves in a situation where their liabilities substantially exceeded their assets. There was a decline in housing investment.

But to some extent, I think this is a part of a deliberate goal of basically diverting capital towards, as I said earlier, high productivity activities and away from activities, especially the speculative side of the housing market. So, I’ll just say that for the moment, but I can come back and say something about Evergrande, if you wish, in a few minutes.

RADHIKA DESAI: Okay, great. Michael, do you want to add anything?

MICHAEL HUDSON: Well, what I’d like to know as the background for this is what is the, how much of this housing is owner-occupied and how much is rental housing? That’s one question. The other question is how much is the ratio of housing costs to personal income? In America, it’s over 40% of personal income for housing. What’s the ratio in China?

I’d want to know the debt-equity ratio. How much debt, on the average, for different income groups? Debt relative to the value of housing. In America, for the real estate sector as a whole, debt is, the banker owns more of the house than the nominal house owner, whose equity ratio for the whole economy is under 50%.

These are the depth dimensions that I’d want to ask for these charts, if you know anything about them.

RADHIKA DESAI: Okay, thanks for that. And so, I just want to add one thing, which is that, this graph actually really says it all, and in some ways implicitly answers Michael’s questions:

house property prices china us

Because the blue line, which shows the United States property prices, you can see that they reached a certain peak at 150% of the value of its 2010 values in 2008. Then it went down to below the level of 2010.

But U.S. monetary policy, Federal Reserve policy, its continuing deregulated financial sector, the easy money policy that was applied in a big way with zero interest rate policies, with quantitative easing, etc., etc., has simply led to a new property boom, where the prices of property prices have reached a peak, which is even higher than that of 2007-8, which was such a disaster. And this was all made possible precisely by the, by increasing housing debt, etc.

Whereas in China, a big driver of the housing boom has actually been that people are investing their savings in it. So, by logically, it means that the extent of a debt in the housing market will be comparatively lower. The entities that are indebted are actually the developers.

And that’s a very different kind of problem than, than the, than the owners being indebted. So that’s the main thing I want to say.

And Mick, you wanted to come back about, about Evergrande, so please do. And then remember also that we want to talk about this chart in particular, and deal with the question of Japanification:

china loans real estate industry

So, please go ahead, Mick. Let’s talk about that.

MICK DUNFORD: Okay, well, I mean, as Radhika just said, the problem is, the indebtedness of developers, and the existence of debts that considerably exceed the value of their assets.

And the way in which this situation has come about, and I mean, as I said, the Chinese government, in a sense, wants to address the financial risks associated with that situation, and did so by introducing these so-called Three Red Lines.

It also is interested in reducing house prices, and it’s also interested in redirecting finance towards productivity-increasing activities.

So, Evergrande is an enormous real estate giant. It has debt of 300 billion dollars. It has 20 billion of overseas debt, and its assets, according to its accounts at the end of the last quarter of last year, are 242 billion. And 90 percent of those assets are in mainland China. So, its liability asset ratio was 84.7 percent, and the Three Red Lines set a limit of 70, 70 percent. So, it’s substantially in excess of the red line.

In 2021, it defaulted. And then, in January this year, it was told to liquidate after international creditors and the company failed to agree on a restructuring plan. In September, by the way, last year, its chair, Su Jiayin, was placed under mandatory measures, on suspicion of unspecified crimes. Basically, it was a Hong Kong court that called in the liquidators.

And the reason was that, in a way, outside China, Evergrande looked as a massively profitable distressed debt trade opportunity. There were 19 billion in defaulted offshore bonds with very substantial assets and, initially, a view that the Chinese government might prop up the property market.

So, large numbers of U.S. and European hedge funds basically piled into the debt, and they expected quite large payouts. But it seems as if this negotiation was, to some extent, controlled by a Guangdong risk management committee. And the authorities, basically, were very, very reluctant to allow offshore claimants to secure onshore revenues and onshore assets.

And, in fact, to stop the misuse of funds, I think about 10 Chinese local provinces actually took control of pre-sales revenues. They put it into custodial accounts, and the idea was that this money should basically—the priority is to ensure that the houses of people who’ve paid deposits on houses are actually built, and people who’ve undertaken work in building houses, are basically paid. So, that, then saw the value of these offshore bonds collapse very rapidly, indeed.

And I think that, to some extent, explains the concerns of the international financial market about the difficulties of this particular case. But I think, it’s clear that China intends, basically, to deflate this sector and to put an end to this speculative housing market as much as it possibly can, and to direct capital, towards productivity increasing, essentially, the industrial sector. And we shall talk about this direction of finance later on.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Evergrande debt, and other real estate debt, is to domestic Chinese banks and lenders. Certainly, many Chinese home buyers did not borrow internationally.

So, I want to find out how much the domestic Chinese banking system, or near banking system — not the Bank of China itself, but the near banks intermediaries who lent — to what extent have the banks given guarantees for the loans for Evergrande and others?

I understand that there are some guarantees domestically, and if the banks have to pay them, the banks will go under, just as occurring here in New York City. Do you have any information on that?

MICK DUNFORD: No, I don’t really have any information, except, I mean, some of the literature that I’ve read suggests that these creditors, bondholders and also other creditors, basically shareholders, are going to take a very, very major haircut.

RADHIKA DESAI: Exactly. I think that this is the key, that there will be an imposition of haircuts on the rich and the powerful, not just subjecting ordinary people to repossession of their homes, which they should have access to.

So, as Mick has already said, the Chinese government is doing everything possible to make sure that the ordinary buyers who have bought these houses do not lose out, which is the opposite of what was done in trying to resolve the housing and credit bubble in the United States.

So, I just want to say a couple of things. I mean, the Chinese government is quite aware, as Mick pointed out, the whole thing has begun by, this whole property bubble is in good part a product of the fact that when relations between China and the West were much better, China accepted some World Bank advice, and this is partly a result of that and the kind of deregulation that the World Bank had suggested.

But very clearly, now relations between China and the West are not good. In fact, they’re anything but good. China is unlikely, once bitten, twice shy, to accept such bad advice again, even if they were good. And now that they’re not good, there will be, and China is clearly looking at distinctively pragmatic, socialistic ways out.

And you see in the new address to the NPC by the Premier [Li Qiang], that social housing has become a major priority, not building houses for private ownership, but rather building houses which will be kept in the public sector and rented out at affordable rates. And I think this is really an important thing, really the way to go.

And finally, I would say that, the property bubble in Japan and the property bubble in the United States were bound to have very different consequences, partly because, well, for two reasons, mainly. Number one, the nature of their financial systems were very different.

In the case of Japan, the financial system was being transformed from one that resembles China’s financial system to something that resembles much more the US financial system. And Japan has continued this transformation and has suffered as a result. I would say in short, really, Japan has paid the price of keeping its economy capitalist. So in many ways is the United States.

And the second reason, of course, is that, funnily enough, one of the effects of the Plaza Accord was that, by the time the Plaza Accord came around, Japan was no longer interested in buying US treasuries. And as a result, the United States essentially restricted its access to US markets in a much bigger way. And so, essentially, Japan lost those export markets.

And it did not do what China is able to do. It perhaps could not do what China is able to do, being a capitalist country, which is massively reorient the stimulus for production away from exports and towards the domestic market, including the market for investment.

So I think that we are, maybe this is the cue at which we can talk about Japanification. So maybe you can start us off by commenting on this chart, and then Michael and I can jump in as well:

china loans real estate industry

MICK DUNFORD: Ok, the blue line, of course, is the flow of loans to different sectors. So the blue line is the flow of loans to the real estate sector.

MICHAEL HUDSON: Only the Bank of China or by?

MICK DUNFORD:  All the banks. You can see from 2016, the share going to real estate has diminished very significantly, whereas, where it says industrial MLT, that’s medium and long term loans for industrial investment, you can see a very, very strong, steady increase in the share of loans going to industrial investment. In agriculture, it declines. And then also, that has actually increased since 2016. So this is a directing of investment towards manufacturing and towards the industrial sector of the economy.

So why is that? Well, I think the first thing one can say is that, in the past, basically, the growth drivers of the Chinese economy were, to some extent, export manufactures. But China was predominantly involved in processing activities, employing very unskilled labor and associated with very low levels of labor productivity.

So one of China’s goals is to significantly, basically, strengthen, upgrade the quality of these traditional industries, to make them digital, to make them green, and to radically increase productivity through a large-scale investment wave.

And then, secondly, we’re on the verge of a new industrial revolution, which Radhika has spoken about. So the aim in this case is, basically, to divert investment towards the industries that are associated with the next industrial revolution.

The other main growth drivers in the past, alongside this export sector, were obviously real estate, which, I mean, if you look at GDP by expenditure, was accounting probably with household appliances and furniture and household goods and so on, about 26, 27 percent of the economy.

But it’s a sector that’s associated with relatively low productivity, and of course, it was associated with very substantial speculation and generated very considerable financial instability.

So, as Radhika said, there will be, in dealing with this financial crisis, basically an underwriting of existing, of obligations to existing home buyers, and in the future, an attempt to establish a more sustainable housing market.

The other area of the economy was basically this sort of platform economy. But this platform economy was associated with very, very strong tendencies towards monopoly, and in the, about four or five years ago, a series of measures were adopted, basically, to restrict, some aspects of this platform economy, and other areas, like private tutoring, which was generating large disparities in the educational system, and is associated with the fact, that the cost of raising children in China is extremely high. I mean, it’s the second highest in the world after South Korea, actually.

So, these growth drivers, these old growth drivers, are basically seen as not offering potential to sustain the growth of the Chinese economy into the years ahead, and so there’s this attempt to look for new growth drivers. And basically, for that reason, you’ve seen this redirection of investment.

And I think one can distinguish that, from what happened to Japan, because basically, in Japan, industrial investment did not increase, largely, I think, because the profitability of investment was not sufficiently high. And also Japan, in a sense, adopted a neoliberal program. It didn’t implement industrial policies.

Whereas China is seeking to undertake this transformation, basically, through, it’s a kind of supply-side restructuring, driven by industrial policy, and driven by financial policies, providing strategic funding for industrial transformation.

Then linking that also to the transformation of education, to try to ensure that the output of the education system, in terms of skill profiles, and so on, corresponds much, much more closely with the profile of work and employment, with much more emphasis upon STEM, in the context of this new industrial revolution, radically raising productivity, and by radically raising productivity, you increase income, and ultimately, you’ll increase consumption, and so on.

So I think that the Japanification course is not one that China will follow, that China will actually address this need to innovate and transform its industrial system, in order to, in a sense, address the problems that are associated with the earlier drivers of Chinese development.

MICHAEL HUDSON: We probably need a whole other program to talk about the difference in structure. Real estate is the largest sector of every economy, and China is so different from Japan.

The Ginza district in Japan, right around the palace, that small district, was larger than all of the real estate value in California. So, we’re dealing with a huge debt finance explosion there, and then you have the largest collapse of property prices in Japan, everywhere, anywhere in the world.

In a way, what you’ve described brings us back to what we were talking about at the beginning of the show, about China’s structure. The effect of the real estate slowdown and falling in prices has a disastrous effect on localities, small villages and towns in China, who are dependent on real estate sales as funding their budget.

So, the real estate crash in China, if we’re talking about what policy is China going to take, how is it going to solve the problem of local budgets without solving it by creating a booming real estate market for towns to sell off their property to developers, and developers to make a profit selling off a property to private buyers, mainly.

I assume they’re not just selling it to the government to make a profit. I think there’s a lot of structure that I’d like to know. I don’t know what it is now, but it’s so different from what you have everywhere else.

I think that really is what I hope will be the focus of our show, the geopolitics of different real estate structures and the real estate tax that goes with it.

RADHIKA DESAI: That’s a really interesting question, and much of that we will be discussing in the second part of this show, which we’ll be recording in a week or so, I think.

But let me maybe then just bring this to a conclusion by simply agreeing with what both of you have said, which is that China has a very good chance, in fact, very likely, China is not going to follow the Japanification model because, as Michael is emphasizing, the structure of China’s economy and the imperatives generated by that structure are very different.

To name just one, if something is not profitable in a capitalist economy, it will not get done. Whereas in the case of the Chinese economy, the Chinese government can always say, well, if it’s necessary, we’ll do it even if it isn’t profitable, because it is necessary for the welfare of the people or the productive capacity of the economy, etc. So, profitability just does not play the role of a brake in the same way as it does in capitalist societies.

Secondly, the role of the state, both in terms of initiating new projects and taking responsibility for new projects, and we can already see in the current NPC and the discussions there that the role of the state is already once again expanding again in China, and it can continue to do so. And I think that’s a very good thing.

And remember also that, Mick, you emphasized in the case of when you were discussing one of the graphs, that the per capita GDP of China today is considerably lower than what it was in Japan, even in the late 80s and early 90s.

And that means that, number one, domestic consumption can be a big stimulus for further economic expansion. And secondly, of course, the industrial opportunities, the opportunities for a new industrial revolution are many, and China in particular, because of the important state role in the Chinese economy, the centrality of the state role in the Chinese economy, and the aim of the Chinese economy and the Chinese economy’s managers to develop China’s productive capacity in whatever way that works, not necessarily through private ownership.

These elements are actually going to ensure that China will exploit the opportunities of the new technologies much more effectively and execute a transition to the next industrial revolution much more successfully, and that will be an important road to avoiding what’s called Japanification.

MICK DUNFORD: You know, I think the difference is that Japan, I thought, in the 1980s was at the technological frontier, and China is not. But just, what Michael was referring to is the fact that in China, local government revenue came to depend to a very considerable extent on what is called land revenue.

You know, basically all land is state-owned, is either state-owned or owned by the rural collectives. But what happened was that if land was converted for use for urbanization, was converted for use for urbanization, for housing, then basically the local government could in effect sell leases, 90-year leases, or depending on the activity, different lengths of lease. They could sell these leases to developers. And then that revenue was used by local government to fund infrastructure.

To some extent that model has come up against limits. And I think, the issue Michael raised really concerns how in future will local government be funded, and will there be a reform in the system of taxation?

Will a property tax be introduced in order to generate government revenue rather than relying upon this land tax? Because of course that did encourage local government to allocate that land to people who are going to build housing for upper-income groups, because the implications for land value were under that situation, they would actually be higher rather than providing that land to construct housing for low income groups.

So, this issue of land revenue is one that has to be addressed basically by someone who’s an expert in public finance.

MICHAEL HUDSON: That should be what we talk about in the next show, I think.

RADHIKA DESAI: Great. So I think that we should bring this part of the show, the first part of this show to an end. And let me just do that by going back to our list of topics.

So just to conclude, we managed to cover the first four, although the question of Japanification and the alleged property bubble will resonate into all the rest of the topics, certainly the question of consumption, exports and China’s new growth strategy. So we will return to it.

But in the next [Geopolitical Economy] Hour, we will be talking about these topics, restricted consumption, exports, new growth strategy, and of course, China’s foreign economic policy.

So thanks very much both. Thanks to all the listeners. And we look forward to seeing you in another week or two. Thank you and goodbye.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

The Terms of Surrender

Par : AHH — 16 mars 2024 à 19:22

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

African Observers of Russian Presidential Elections

Par : AHH — 16 mars 2024 à 14:10

Those who travel to Russia and see the reality for themselves, from any part of the world, are consistently astounded and pleased with what they see. This consistent discrepancy between reality and media-driven myth underlines the potency of the mindwashing western Big Lie Media, which most of humanity continues to foolishly imbibe.




Visiting Russia is a key antidote, until the Global South / Global Majority drops safeguards against western media, referred to as “informational hygiene” by Russians. Otherwise Forever Wars are permanently baked in as this Big Lie Media forever sews discord, false impressions between natural allies, and works to divide humanity along false lines.

An interesting pattern developed during yesterday’s first of three main voting days. Let the following 11 African election observers from 10 different African countries tell you in their own words. The selections are from the Sputnik Africa Telegram channel.

International observers for the Russian presidential elections plan to visit at least 52-53 regions, they will be provided with all the necessary assistance, said the head of the Central Election Commission, Ella Pamfilova. Currently 333,600 people are monitoring the Russian presidential election, including over 700 from 106countries,” Pamfilova noted.
The process of voting is “proceeding normally,” she added.”

💠Everything you need to know about Russia’s 2024 presidential elections

Russian citizens will head to the polls on March 15-17 to vote in 2024 presidential election. There are 112.3 million eligible voters inside Russia, and around 1.9 million eligible voters reside abroad. Voter turnout is expected at 71%, as per the Russian Public Opinion Research Center (VCIOM).

What’s new about 2024 elections?
E-voting, a remote electronic voting system, is being used for the first time to elect a Russian president. Voters in 29 Russian regions will be able to cast their ballots remotely.
🔹Electronic ballot processing system uses a special scanner to read and process marked paper ballots and tally the results.
🔹Mobile Voter mechanism provides online voting.
🔹Elections state automated system is information software that ensures that ballots are counted in an accurate and rapid manner.

There are four candidates vying for the top office:
🔸Self-nominated candidate and incumbent President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin;
🔸Communist Party nominee Nikolay Kharitonov;
🔸Liberal Democratic Party nominee Leonid Slutsky;
🔸New People party nominee Vladislav Davankov.

Who will observe the voting process?
🔸Election observers are Russian citizens who monitor compliance of election procedure with the law, supervise the process and record possible violations.
🔸200 parliamentary international observers have been accredited to monitor the elections in Russia, delegations from 36 countries are already arriving.

👉 Follow this link to learn more

≈≈≈≈≈≈

💠A Kenyan observer for the Russian presidential elections, who’s watching the voting process in Russia’s city of Perm told Sputnik that “the election process has started well” and “the election officials are well set”

“It’s very cold, [but] I am very happy to be here,” he added.

💠Fast and secure procedure: a Burundian observer appreciates the advantages of voting electronically in the Russian presidential election

“When I was told what happens electronically, I congratulated you, I saw that you had succeeded,” President of the National Assembly of Burundi, Honorable Gelase Daniel Ndabirabe, told Sputnik Africa.

Ndabirabe noted that once a person is identified in the system, the voting process takes “very little time,” adding that such an option saves “a lot of time and energy” for people.

Lastly, the observer praised the excellent security of the electronic voting.

“I was told that to date there have been no complaints about the security of the electronic trial. Which is another great success, because that’s what’s so frightening. I say: “congratulations”. Because there can’t be any hacking. That’s a very good thing,” Ndabirabe concluded.


💠Cameroonian observer speaks about Russian presidential election. African observers who are inspecting polling stations across Russia will return home genuinely satisfied with what they have seen, Serge Espoir Matomba, the first secretary of the Cameroonian United People for Social Renovation, told Sputnik Africa.

According to him, at a time when “the world wants to be multipolar, we have an obligation to know what’s going on without waiting to be told what’s going on. There is this growing misinformation that is being used today as a lever for manipulation.”

“That is why I am in Moscow today, to see with my own eyes how the elections are going, how the buzz around the elections is going, how the process itself is being set in motion,” Matomba said.

“The image that Africa has often had of Russia in the past is changing exponentially,” the politician concluded. “Africans are now realizing that Russia is not the country they were presented with. And that’s a good thing.”

💠 An observer from Kenya in the Kherson region praised the Russian electronic voting system

“In Russia you can vote from home. In other countries, especially in African countries, with electronic voting you have to go to the polling station to register,” said Ezekiel Kanagi Mutes.


💠 “Absolutely fair”: Ethiopian observer impressed by Russian presidential elections

“Really, it is well planned, well organized. I have seen the voters, how they are electing. As to my observation up to now, it is absolutely fair. I appreciate it,” Dr. Petros Woldegiorgis, an observer from Ethiopia and President of Bonga University, told Sputnik Africa.

He particularly noted the accessibility measures in place, including the option for citizens in distant locations to vote via telephone—a novel experience for him.

“The general feeling I have is wonderful,” the observer remarked. “From Alpha to Omega, what I have seen now, honestly speaking, I’m very much excited.”

💠 🇷🇺🗳🇹🇿 “Very open and freely”: Tanzanian observer from the ruling party on the Russian presidential election

“The voting process here is very interesting. […] It takes very small time, just 3 to 5 minutes you are done, is very open and freely,” Joseph Mgaya told Sputnik Africa.

Furthermore, the observer pointed out that Russian citizens are voting “freely” and they can do it in every corner of the country – you just need to have an ID with you.

Mgaya also praised the “high-end” online voting technology that simplifies the whole election process.

“I’m very interested in it because it’s high-end [and] […] it’s very open,” he added.


💠 “The process is more than transparent”: Comorian observer on presidential elections in Russia

The Russian presidential election has a number of advantages, including security cameras to ensure transparency, candidate representatives at each polling station, “a more efficient electronic system combined with a reliable manual system,” Ahmed Said Mdahoma, head of the Independent National Electoral Commission of the Comoros, told Sputnik Africa.

He also noted “maximum” security to ensure the calm of the electoral process and “constant communication at the level of the Central Electoral Commission to inform citizens, observers and actors about the electoral process.”

In addition, Mdahoma emphasized a 3-day voting period that would allow “everyone who wants to exercise their right to vote to find the right time” to do so.


💠 Chairman of CAR National Electoral Commission praises organization of Russian presidential elections

Mathias Moruba visited three polling stations in Russia and noted their compliance with international electoral standards, the Russian Embassy in the Central African Republic (CAR) said.

According to the embassy, the delegation from the Central African Republic arrived in Russia to observe the presidential election at the invitation of the Russian Central Election Commission.


💠 “Russia is already ahead,” says Madagascan observer on electronic voting in Russia

Russia’s presidential election is taking place “calmly and also within the norm,” which has highlighted some advances, such as automated voting, which saves voters’ time, Ralaisoavamanjaka Andriamarotafikatohanambahoaka, the first general rapporteur of Madagascar’s Independent National Electoral Commission, told Sputnik Africa.

“The computerized system is a novelty. The whole world will choose this system. The choice of the virtual system, which the majority of people will make, is mainly to save time for them,” the observer explained.

He added that “it’s obvious that we’ve respected the principle of electoral sovereignty and the electoral norm in Moscow and Russia in general.”
[His name is not a typo!! Another example here.]


💠🇷🇺🗳🇦🇴 “No violations”: an observer from Angola about the Russian presidential elections

“We didn’t find any problems, no violations. [Everything went] very well, without problems. And everything was peaceful,” said Manuel Camati, member of the National Electoral Commission of Angola.

He also noted that elections are part of the sovereignty of each state, and therefore it was important for him to be personally present in this process.

Speaking about the technological innovations of the Russian elections, Camati said that they help to quickly resolve any issues, and the electronic voting option allows “to minimize the number of errors and speed up electoral processes.”


💠🇷🇺🇲🇱 Voting in Russia “proceeding normally, as in other countries,” says Malian observer

The ability to vote electronically is important for people who cannot travel, such as the disabled and the elderly, Nana Aïcha Cissé, the first vice-president of Mali’s Network of Women Parliamentarians, told Sputnik Africa.

She came to observe the elections in Russia for the first time and said she was impressed by the organization.

The observer also called Mali “a friend of Russia,” noting that “people know Russia, they know the ties that exist between Mali and Russia, and that’s very important.”

☐ ☆ ✇ Vu du Droit

Libération en mode « Je suis partout ».

Par : Régis de Castelnau — 16 mars 2024 à 11:56
On pensait que la liberté d’expression procédait de l’application de l’article 11 de la Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme. Qui prévoit que l’on peut dire ce que l’on veut, sauf si pour des raisons d’intérêt général la Loi a prévu… Lire la suite
☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Will BRICS launch a new world in 2024?

Par : AHH — 15 mars 2024 à 20:18

Ryabkov, Ushakov and Glazyev foresee a quickening of the Russian river after Putin’s spring reelection: the BRICS will create payment and settlement systems that do not depend upon the shifty “rules-based international order.”

By Pepe Escobar at The Cradle.

“BRICS doubled its membership at the start of 2024, and faces huge tasks ahead: integrating its newest members, developing future admission criteria, deepening the institution’s groundings, and most importantly, launching the mechanisms for bypassing the US dollar in international finance.”

BRICS Ambassadors attend “Maslenitsa: Dialogue of Civilizations,” Moscow, 12 March 2024.

MOSCOW – Across the Global South, countries are lining up to join the multipolar BRICS and the Hegemon-free future it promises. The onslaught of interest has become an unavoidable theme of discussion during this crucial year of the Russian presidency of what, for the moment, is BRICS-10.

Indonesia and Nigeria are among the top tiers of candidates likely to join. The same applies to Pakistan and Vietnam. Mexico is in a very complex bind: how to join without summoning the ire of the Hegemon.

And then there’s the new candidacy on a roll: Yemen, which enjoys plenty of support from Russia, China, and Iran.

It’s been up to Russia’s top BRICS sherpa, the immensely capable Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov, to clarify what’s ahead. He tells TASS:

We must provide a platform for the countries interested in rapprochement with the BRICS, where they will be able to work practically without feeling left behind and joining this cooperation rhythm. And as to how the further expansion will be decided upon – this should be postponed at least until the leaders convene in Kazan to decide.

The key decision on BRICS+ expansion will only come out of the Kazan summit next October. Ryabkov stresses that the order of the day is first “to integrate those who have just joined.” This means that “as a ‘ten,’ we work at least as efficiently, or, rather, more efficiently than we did within the initial ‘five.'”

Only then will the BRICS-10 “develop the category of partner states,” which, in fact, means creating a consensus-based list out of the dozens of nations that are literally itching to join the club.

Ryabkov always makes a point to note, in public and in private, that the twofold increase of BRICS members starting on 1 January 2024 is “an unprecedented event for any international structure.”

It isn’t an easy task, Ryabkov says:

Last year, it took an entire year to develop the admission, expansion criteria at the level of top officials. Many reasonable things were developed. And many of the things that were formulated back then got reflected in the list of countries that joined. But it would probably be improper to formalize the requirements. At the end of the day, an admission to the association is a subject of political decision.


What happens after Russia’s presidential elections

In a private meeting with a few select individuals on the sidelines of the recent multipolar conference in Moscow, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov spoke effusively of BRICS, with particular emphasis on his counterparts Wang Yi of China and S. Jaishankar of India.

Lavrov holds great expectations for BRICS-10 this year – at the same time, reminding everyone that this is still a club; it must eventually go deeper in institutional terms, for instance, by appointing a secretariat-general, just like its cousin-style organization, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO).

The Russian presidency will have its hands full for the next few months, not only navigating the geopolitical spectrum of current crises but, most of all, geoeconomics. A crucial ministerial meeting in June – only three months away – will have to define a detailed road map all the way to the Kazan summit four months later.

What happens after this week’s Russian presidential elections will also condition BRICS policy. A new Russian government will be sworn in only by early May. It is widely expected that there will be no substantial changes within the Russian Finance Ministry, Central Bank, Foreign Ministry, and among top Kremlin advisers.

Continuity will be the norm.

And that brings us to the key geoeconomics dossier: the BRICS at the forefront of bypassing the US dollar in international finance.

Last week, top Kremlin adviser Yury Ushakov announced that BRICS will work towards setting up an independent payment system based on digital currencies and blockchain.

Ushakov specifically emphasized “state-of-the-art tools such as digital technologies and blockchain. The main thing is to make sure it is convenient for governments, common people, and businesses, as well as cost-effective and free of politics.”

Ushakov did not mention it explicitly, but a new alternative system already exists. For the moment, it is a closely, carefully guarded project in the form of a detailed white paper that has already been validated academically and also incorporates answers to possible frequently asked questions.

The Cradle was briefed on the system via several meetings since last year with a small group of world-class fintech experts. The system has already been presented to Ushakov himself. As it stands, it is on the verge of receiving a final green light from the Russian government. After clearing a series of tests, the system in thesis would be ready to be presented to all BRICS-10 members before the Kazan summit.

This all ties in with Ushakov publicly declaring that a specific task for 2024 is to increase the role of BRICS in the international monetary/ financial system.

Ushakov recalls how, in the 2023 Johannesburg Declaration, the BRICS heads of state focused on increasing settlements in national currencies and strengthening correspondent banking networks. The target was to “continue to develop the Contingent Reserve Arrangement, primarily regarding the use of currencies different from the US dollar.”


No single currency for the foreseeable future

All of the above frames the absolute key issue being currently discussed in Moscow, within the Russia–China partnership, and soon, deeper among the BRICS-10: alternative settlement payments to the US dollar, increased trade among “friendly nations,” and controls on capital flight.

Ryabkov added more crucial elements to the debate, saying this week that the BRICS are not debating the implementation of a single currency:

As for a single currency, similar to what was created by the European Union, this is hardly possible in the foreseeable future. If we are talking about clearing forms of mutual settlements such as the ECU [European Currency Unit] at an early stage of development of the European Union, in the absence of a real means of payment, but the opportunity to more effectively use the available resources of the countries in mutual settlements to avoid losses due to differences in exchange rates, and so on, then this is precisely the path along which, in my opinion, BRICS should move. This is under consideration.

The key takeaway, per Ryabkov, is that the BRICS should not create a financial and monetary alliance; they should create payment and settlement systems that do not depend upon the shifty “rules-based international order.”

That’s exactly the emphasis of the ideas and experiments already developed by Minister of Integration and Macroeconomy at the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) Sergei Glazyev, as he explained in an exclusive interview, as well as the new groundbreaking project on the verge of being greenlighted by the Russian government.

Ryabkov confirmed that “a group of experts, led by the Ministries of Finance and representatives of the Central Banks of the respective [BRICS] countries,” is working nonstop on the dossier. Moreover, there are “consultations in other formats, including with the participation of representatives of the ‘historical west.'”

Ryabkov’s own takeaway mirrors what the BRICS as a whole are aiming at:

Collectively, we must come up with a product that would be, on the one hand, quite ambitious (because it is impossible to continue to tolerate the dictates of the west in this area), but at the same time realistic, not out of touch with the ground. That is, a product that would be efficient. And all this should be presented in Kazan for consideration by the leaders.

In a nutshell: the big breakthrough may be literally knocking at the BRICS door. It just depends on a simple green light by the Russian government.

Now compare the BRICS devising the contours of a new geoeconomics paradigm with the collective west mulling the actual theft of Russia’s seized assets to the benefit of the black hole that is Ukraine.

Apart from being a de facto declaration by the US and EU against Russia, this is something that carries the potential, in itself, of totally smashing the current global financial system.

A theft of Russian assets, would it ever happen, will render livid, to put it mildly, at least two key BRICS members, China and Saudi Arabia, who bring to the table considerable economic heft. Such a move by the west would completely destroy the concept of the rule of law, which theoretically underpins the global financial system.

The Russian response will be fierce. The Russian Central Bank could, in a flash, sue and confiscate the assets of Belgian Euroclear, one of the world’s largest settlement and clearing systems, on whose accounts Russian reserves were frozen.

And that on top of seizing Euroclear’s assets in Russia – which amount to roughly 33 billion euros. With Euroclear running out of capital, the Belgian Central Bank will have to revoke its license, causing a massive financial crisis.

Talk about a clash of paradigms: western robbery versus a Global South-based equitable trade and finance settlement system.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

L’Arménie veut s’éloigner de la Russie pour se rapprocher de l’UE

Par : ActuStratpol — 15 mars 2024 à 08:57

armenie ue

armenie ueLe processus d’éloignement de l’Arménie de la Russie, et en même temps des alliances dont les deux pays sont encore

L’article L’Arménie veut s’éloigner de la Russie pour se rapprocher de l’UE est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Stoltenberg reconnaît que des munitions de l’OTAN ont servi à attaquer la flotte russe en mer Noire

Par : ActuStratpol — 15 mars 2024 à 08:55

stoltenberg flotte

stoltenberg flotteLes munitions avec lesquelles les forces armées ukrainiennes ont attaqué la flotte de la mer Noire ont été fournies par

L’article Stoltenberg reconnaît que des munitions de l’OTAN ont servi à attaquer la flotte russe en mer Noire est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Nuclear Forces

Par : AHH — 14 mars 2024 à 22:08

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

Macron s’en va en guerre…  (suite)

Par : Olivier CHAMBRIN — 14 mars 2024 à 17:56

Le président Macron harangue les troupes françaises déployées en Roumanie

Le président Macron harangue les troupes françaises déployées en RoumanieCertains éléments rendus publics permettent de préciser l’analyse des possibles conséquences de l’engagement de l’armée française directement contre les forces

L’article Macron s’en va en guerre…  (suite) est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Nuland’s Policy Has Collapsed

Par : AHH — 14 mars 2024 à 17:44

The Drang continues after Nuland. Biden fully implements ziocon projects. A mere change in tack: “This is not over yet. This debate is not finished…” (9:20)

Nuland’s Policy Has Collapsed as Ukraine Lost it – Netanyahu Will Lose | Chas Freeman

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Yemen consolidates around Ansar Allah (Houthis)

Par : AHH — 14 mars 2024 à 15:34

In Yemen, The Squabbling Tribes — ancient vehicle used by Empires to divide and rule  — have been harnessed by Ansar Allah into the unbreakable internal front; the rock upon which shatters the thalassocratic West.

By Saqr Abo Hasan at The Cradle.

In Yemen, tribes hold the keys to power

Yemen’s many tribes are key powerbrokers in the country’s wars and conflicts. Today, it is Ansarallah, and not foreign powers, that has emerged as the predominant force harnessing tribal influence and strategically managing these disparate groups.

Throughout the considerable history of internal conflicts in Yemen, the influential role of tribes has been critical in shaping the outcomes of external wars and internal power struggles.

These ancient tribal structures, deeply embedded in Yemen’s social fabric and military dynamics, have played kingmaker roles in times of conflict – even during periods when the state, with its superior military and security apparatuses, was involved, as seen in the Six Sadaa Wars.

Spanning from 2004 to 2010, those wars pitted government forces against Yemen’s Ansarallah resistance movement. But each side could only come to the fight with their own set of tribal allies.

Over the years, and especially today, Yemeni tribes in the northern regions – where the Houthi clan is based – have evolved into an “inexhaustible reservoir of fighters,” embodying a formidable force that can be mobilized under the right political and social conditions.

As Yemeni writer Ali Abdullah al-Dhayani points out, these particular Yemeni tribes are “natural warriors, as their men – and even women in some areas – carry weapons as part of daily life.”

The Hashid and Bakil tribes

Two prominent tribal confederations, Hashid (led by the Al-Ahmar family) and Bakil (led by the Abu Lahoum family), stand out as the most potent forces in Yemen’s military, civil, and executive spheres. The Hashid tribe’s clout has helped it secure four seats in the Yemeni House of Representatives for the sons of its late leader, Abdullah al-Ahmar.

Meanwhile, Saba Abu Lahoum, the scion of the Abu Lahoum family, now leads the Bakil tribe, inheriting the mantle from his father, Sinan Abu Lahoum, who passed away in 2021.

For decades, the Al-Ahmar and Abu Lahoum families have vied for the prestigious position of “Sheikh of the Sheikhs of Yemen,” a title that has oscillated between them depending on prevailing political winds.

The loose alliance forged between the Hashid and Bakil encompasses the majority of tribes across northern and eastern Yemen, wielding significant influence. It is worth noting that Ansarallah belongs to the Bakil confederation, while late former president Ali Abdullah Saleh’s Sanhan clan belongs to Hashid.

According to a study by Iraqi researcher Nizar al-Abadi, published on the Al-Mutamar.net website, which is affiliated with the Saleh-affiliated General People’s Congress Party (GPC) in Yemen, “The number of Yemeni tribes is estimated at 200–168 of them are in the north and the rest in the south, with the majority of them living in mountainous areas.”

Tribalism in politics

Successive governments in Yemen have historically sought to exert control over the tribes, employing various strategies to secure their allegiance. One notable example is Saleh’s establishment of the “Tribal Affairs Authority” in the early 1980s, through which monthly salaries and bonuses were distributed to numerous tribal leaders across the country to ensure the alignment of their interests with Saleh’s ruling GPC.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, a leader of one of the tribes informs The Cradle that this government approach encouraged materialism and corruption within tribal leadership, effectively buying their loyalty for the Saleh government:

Joining the Tribal Affairs Authority was based on loyalty to the regime. It included hundreds of sheikhs who had no influence, while opponents of the ruling party were punished by being deprived of salaries. Sometimes, marginal figures were pushed to assume the leadership of the tribe.

After Saleh stepped down in early 2012, there were calls to abolish the Tribal Affairs Authority and invest its annual budget of around 13 billion Yemeni riyals into national infrastructure. But the successor government to Mohammed Salem Basindwa decided against this. It resumed Saleh’s tried-and-tested financial approach “to win over the tribal leaders,” according to a tribal source.

During Yemen’s 2011 ‘Arab Spring,’ Saleh established a new entity – the “Yemen Tribal Council” – to contain the growing tribal preference for the opposition, especially after several of these leaders, including Hashid Chief Sadiq al-Ahmar, publicly supported the popular uprising against his government.

According to political activist Shaalan al-Abrat, the tribes’ involvement provided significant momentum to the so-called February 11 revolution in some Yemeni cities, such as Dhamar (100 km south of Sanaa).

In late 2012, the city of Saada in northern Yemen, an Ansarallah stronghold, witnessed the emergence of the “Tribal Popular Cohesion Council,” which included tribal leaders supportive of the resistance movement. The council quickly expanded to include all tribes in and outside areas controlled by the current Ansarallah-led government based in the capital, Sanaa.

As Dr Abdo al-Bahsh, head of the political department at the Yemeni Studies and Research Center, describes the development:

[This council] was imposed by the Yemeni political reality and attempts to subject Yemen to American control … [It] expresses the aspirations of the Yemeni people and their national will, far from sectarian, ethnic, regional, and narrow partisanship.

The council is headed by Dhaif Allah Rassam, a tribal leader from Saada Governorate. It has branches and representatives in all Yemeni governorates currently under Sanaa’s control. Importantly, its influence extends to tribes outside their area of control, such as in the Shabwa, Ma’rib, and Al-Dhalea areas of Yemen.

Bolstering the argument that the tribes play a key role in dispute resolution, the council’s Dhamar branch head, Abbas al-Amdi, says that throughout the years of aggression against Yemen, the council was instrumental in strengthening internal unity, ending tribal revenge wars, and supplying the fighting fronts with tribal fighters.

Ansarallah’s political ascendency

Yemen’s political factions have long leveraged tribal affiliations to enhance popular support. The Saudi-backed Islah Party, affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood, strategically aligned itself with tribal leaders upon its establishment in 1990, with Abdullah bin Hussein al-Ahmar, chief of the Hashid tribe, assuming its presidency.

The assertion of tribal authority over state influence was exemplified by Hamid al-Ahmar – brother of Hashid’s leader – when asked in an interview on Al-Jazeera whether he was afraid of returning to Sanaa after voicing support for Saleh’s opposition: “Whoever has Sadiq [al-Ahmar] as his chief, and Hashid as his tribe, would not be afraid.”

Tribal influence was strikingly evident during Saleh’s ousting through the 2012 Gulf Initiative, in which a coalition of Yemeni tribal and political factions orchestrated that delicate transition of power. Around this time, Ansarallah capitalized on its tribal networks to expand its movement’s influence, particularly in the country’s northern regions. It gradually extended its reach across Yemen in an alliance with Saleh’s GPC and the armed forces.

Ansarallah’s adept handling of tribal structures facilitated their rise, merging ideology with tribalism to galvanize support. This symbiotic relationship contributed to their military and popular ascendancy, as noted by Yemeni political analyst Abdul Salam al-Nahari:

[Before 2012], finding someone who believed in Ansarallah was difficult due to years of misinformation. However, after 2015, society began to become aware of Ansarallah, especially among tribes exhausted by wars and internal conflicts … After the war in Yemen, the tribe has now become more cohesive after playing a major role in community steadfastness and in supplying the fighting fronts with weapons, money, and men.

Tribe-centric strategies

Nahari points out that the Saudi-led aggression against Yemen put the country at a crossroads: either remaining under American guardianship or breaking away from it at any cost. “The people of Yemen chose independence,” he declares.

The foreign aggression united Yemenis during a time when Ansarallah was encouraging the advancement of many tribal leaders to the front ranks and giving them the opportunity to lead.

Examples abound. In the Al-Bayda region of central Yemen, tribal leader Saleh bin Saleh al-Wahbi founded the “Wahbi Brigades” in 2016. After his death in 2021, his son Bakil succeeded him.

In the Al-Razzamat region, north of Saada Governorate near the southern border of Saudi Arabia, tribal leader and member of the House of Representatives Abdullah Aydah al-Razami threw his weight behind Ansarallah Founder Hussein Badr al-Din al-Houthi, and his tribe fought a fierce war against government forces after the latter’s killing.

During the foreign aggression against Yemen, his son Yahya al-Razami was appointed commander of the Hamidan axis forces and assumed command of the “Death Brigades,” the elite forces affiliated with Ansarallah.

The son played a vital role in the Victory from God operation in 2019 when his forces captured thousands of soldiers loyal to the Yemeni government in Riyadh and seized a vast amount of weapons and military equipment.

Al-Nahari asserts that “fighting in any area where there is no popular incubator is like fighting on open ground.” Ansarallah has actively sought to create supportive environments in strategic areas. By neutralizing certain tribes through treaties and agreements, such as in Marib, Ansarallah has effectively extended its influence with minimal combat cost, illustrating its strategic understanding of Yemen’s tribal politics.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Vladimir Putin on Russia’s Path Ahead

Par : AHH — 14 mars 2024 à 14:53

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

La Première ministre lettone annonce un nouveau rideau de fer entre les Baltes et la Russie

Par : ActuStratpol — 14 mars 2024 à 08:53

rideau fer

rideau ferLes pays baltes et la Russie seront séparés par un rideau de fer, a déclaré la Première ministre lettone Evika

L’article La Première ministre lettone annonce un nouveau rideau de fer entre les Baltes et la Russie est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

L’Histoire du corsaire John Paul Jones et du premier salut au pavillon des États-Unis

Par : Jean de Joinville — 14 mars 2024 à 07:28

Première reconnaissance officielle du pavillon U.S. par un étranger (Edward Moran 1829-1901, Naval Academy Museum)

Première reconnaissance officielle du pavillon U.S. par un étranger (Edward Moran 1829-1901, Naval Academy Museum)A Port-Haliguen, sur la presqu’île de Quiberon en Bretagne, près de la plage où se dresse la stèle commémorant le

L’article L’Histoire du corsaire John Paul Jones et du premier salut au pavillon des États-Unis est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

☐ ☆ ✇ Global South

Engineered Destruction of America and Europe

Par : AHH — 13 mars 2024 à 18:34

“Predicted” in 1991 by the Club of Rome

Peter Koenig
10 March 2024

“A Nation of Sheep will be ruled by Wolves.”

The Club of Rome, created in 1968, issued in 1991 its second “world-reaching” report, “The First Global Revolution”.

Its preamble says,

“Ah Love! Could Thou and I with faith conspire,
To grasp this sorry scheme of things entire,
Would not we shatter it to bits and then,
Remould it nearer to our heart’s desire.”
Edward FitzGerald, the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayyam

(Rubáiyát of Omar Khayyám is the title that Edward FitzGerald gave to his 1859 translation from Persian to English of a selection of quatrains [4-line poem] attributed to Omar Khayyam, dubbed “the Astronomer-Poet of Persia”.)

At the end of the Forword, there is another remarkable quote:

“No generation has ever liked its prophets, least of all, those who point out the consequences of bad judgement and lack of foresight.
The Club of Rome can take pride of the fact that it has been unpopular for the last twenty years. I hope it will continue for many years to come spell out the unpalatable facts and to unsettle the conscience of the smug and the apathetic.”

(late) Prince Philippe, Duke of Edinburgh,
Message to the Delegates at the Twentieth Anniversary Conference of the Club of Rome
Paris, 1988.

And another one highlighted in the text:

“The Cult of Sovereignty has become mankind’s major religion. Its God demands Human Sacrifice.” – Arnold Toynbee, British Historian and Philosopher

This is the tenor of the book throughout its 160 pages. It is spiked with arrogance and superiority. Together with its precursor, “Limits to Growth”, it promotes eugenics – and is as of this day – and beyond – if we let it – the blueprint for the WEF’s Great Reset and the UN Agenda 2030.

Together, these two reports promote, or rather dictate Destruction for Building Back Better (bbb) (remember the never explained slogan of the neocons?), and eugenics. These are the top priorities under which humanity is living and suffering today.

That is why wars are supported over Peace, why people have to be tricked into believing in uncountable and unpredictable pandemics – all on the horizon, like “Disease “X “ – and – of course, do not worry, vaccines are on the drawing board, the mRNA kinds that modify your genes, so you become a better human being – code for “so you perish faster”.

Remember the slogan on top: “A Nation of Sheep will be ruled by Wolves.”
For God’s sake – Let us stop being sheep!

—–

What we are living these days. Weeks, months – and over at least the past 4 years, in ever-accelerating pace – is precisely the agenda, the dictate of the Club of Rome (CoR). Destruction is the name of the game.

Starting with the West, that includes, destruction of our economy, industry, infrastructure, agriculture – the very food we need to survive – services, health care, legal systems, ethics, faith, hope – and, finally humanity itself. We are now some 8 billion – they want us down to below 1 billion.

When we see doom – the cabal’s boots can complete its stampede.


Destruction – initiated by France’s Macron?

A few days ago, France’s President Macron said openly and without remorse, “There are no limits to support for Ukraine”. He added, “France should abide by no limits or Russian “Red Line”, when it comes to backing Kiev.”

This is strong stuff. A provocation for Russia without precedence. Macron already earlier said, that sending NATO troops (French) to Ukraine was indeed an option.

This is putting the finger on the trigger for a nuclear blast. If it is not clear yet to the arrogant Washington puppets, Russia’s Red Line does not disappear because Mr. Macron says so. Russia’s nuclear arsenal is way superior to that of the US, which is stationed as NATO throughout Europe and Asia, pointing its nuclear warhead missiles towards Moscow.

If destruction must be, Mr. Macron, it will indeed be Europe again, the third time in just over a hundred years. Europe, and probably way beyond. This time, nobody can even imagine the extent of destruction – and the cost in human lives. And it may be too late for the western “elites” – masterminds of disaster – to run to their bunkers.

Former Russian president and current deputy head of the National Security Council, Dmitry Medvedev, posted on “X” (former Twitter) that this means “Russia has no more red lines left for France.” He added “everything is allowed against enemies.” – Here, the enemy being France and all those dragged along by French arrogance.

French European Parliamentarian, Florian Philippot, leader of the French Patriots Party, urged the French to impeach Macron before they are sent to die in Ukraine. “It is up to every Frenchman to resist, for every mother to refuse to let her son die for Kiev, NATO and Blackrock,” Philippot ais on “X”. “It’s up to us to fight to leave the EU and NATO and throw Macron out!”
(See this)

Never before, has a European, so-called “leader”, made such stern and provocative pronouncements, not even Macron. Who gave him orders to do so NOW?WHO GAVE HIM ORDERS?

Will he send officially French (NATO) troops to Ukraine? – Thereby crossing Mr. Putin’s Red Line – and provoking whatever Russia finds is necessary to protect her integrity, her land, and her people? – It could be a nuclear – all destructive conflict.
That is what many analysts predict and fear.

Is that what the power behind France and behind the dark cabal wants – a total destruction – which would also serve the depopulation agenda?

Maybe. Perhaps 2024 is the time.

The leader of the French Republican Party (The Gaullists), Eric Ciotti, is more prudent, saying supporting Ukraine by sending troops would be “irresponsible and dangerous,”.

Let us TRUST that humanity will find sanity, and rather depose Macron than follow his unthinkably dangerous advice and words and – God knows – deeds.


Moscow is alert

On a lower key, Moscow warns – NATO is becoming increasingly aggressive.

The plan is an engineered destruction of Humanity?
Carrying out the Club of Rome’s mandate?

Mind you – the elite is not planning to self-destruct, of course not. Before total annihilation, they hope to seek rescue in their bunkers, wherever they are, maybe in a remote island of Hawaii, in New Zealand or simply in South Dakota – (see this).


President Joe Biden’s State of the Union Address of 9 March 2024

This is another disastrous message for total destruction, annihilation of civilization – if he has his way. But he will not.

A “normal” State of the Union Address, is about the United States, it is about the “State” of affairs of the nation, of the economy, of jobs, of growth and growth potential – about forecasts, development perspectives. It is a message of foresight, supposed to give people hope – to let them know their government plans to improve shortcomings. Nothing of that happened.

The first 20 minutes of the speech were dedicated to Ukraine alone – smashing President Putin and Russia, and “We shall never abandon you – Ukraine! – We will always stand behind you” – Promising sending another 90 billion dollars to the Ukrainian oligarchs. Tax-payers money, for zilch. Biden knows it. The US Congress knows it. Everybody knows it. This war is NEVER winnable against Russia. And why should it be?

Other than having prepared and started it – compliments of Madame Victoria Nuland [f*ck Europe], now gone, thanks God; a more than 10-billion-dollar preparation project – what remaining interest does the US have in fighting a proxy-war some 10,000 km away, across the Atlantic and Europe? Certainly not National Security.

Boosting the profit margins of the Military Industrial Complex for sure is a good reason, and – well – achieving “regime change” in Russia. Madame Nuland’s admitting words in an interview to CNN’s Christiane Amanpour, just days before her forced resignation.

Yes, it has always been about bringing Russia to the knees of the Washington wannabe Emperor, with a Russian puppet leader. They thought they had achieved their target in 1991, with then President Yeltsin, who was smarter than given credit for – when he introduced Mr. Vladimir Putin, appointing him in August 1999, as Prime Minister. It was clear that President Yeltsin was preparing Mr. Putin for the Kremlin. – So much for defeating the West’s sneaky ways to subdue Russia.

Mr. Biden’s speech was also a rant against Republicans. Right at the beginning he compared former President Trump, his only opponent in the (still) planned November 2024 elections – to Hitler. That is what he called Donald Trump. This man, Biden, has zero decency. His face expressed anger throughout – he yelled and ranted. And, guess what – he got standing ovations. That speaks volumes for the State of the Union of the United States.
See this for the full speech .

Tucker Carlson responding to Joe Biden’s State of the Union Address, said it was the United States’ worst ever State of the Union Address. In addition to describing the crime the US – the West – was financing in Ukraine, Tucker Carlson pointed to other destructive measures Biden promoted – like transhumanism, and free abortion, in other words the Soros-funded Woke agenda – which doesn’t even hide its population reduction objective.

Illegal immigrants. Tucker Carlson also talked about Biden’s insane open-borders policy, bringing illegals into the US, even by plane loads – giving them shelter, food, debit cards never to be paid back (see this) – mostly young men that could and are expected to serve in the US army.

Why would Biden do that?
These immigrants have zero allegiance to the US – and should serve in the US army?

Perhaps against the American people – during a provoked upraising?
See this for Tucker’s full analysis (9 March 2024).


“Illegal” immigrants are directly flown into the Unites States, the Biden Administration openly admits. So far, the official figure points to 320,000. The official reason is indeed, to make up for the military recruitment shortcomings.

The real reason is certainly somewhere else. Immigrants, especially when they come in masses, are always a disruption in the society they enter. It is the same in Europe, and Europe’s policy is not much different from that of the US. – It is very much coordinated.
See this  ; and this 14 min video “Redacted” of 7 March 2024.

In an interview with Tucker Carlson, Col. MacGregor warns about the plan to recruit illegals into the US military. Tucker said that Rome fell because foreigners who were not loyal to Rome populated its military and they turned on the people of Rome. For the same reason, retired Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor warned Americans against allowing illegal aliens to serve in the armed forces. See this video 7 min – 4 March 2024

——–

Indeed, disrupting society. But why? Creating internal conflict, internal strive – maybe civil war? – It is a means of destruction and the victims are the immigrants who are dreaming of a better world. Instead, they are being used for the Club of Rome’s precept of DESTRUCTION – to eventually rebuild according to the elite’s desire.

These are just a few examples of the planned and engineered destruction – exactly as foreseen under the Club of Rome’s edicts.

People wake up. What happens in the US is already happening in a different, perhaps less visible version in Europe.

Stop being Nations of Sheep being ruled by Wolves.

—-

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.

☐ ☆ ✇ STRATPOL

La Chine prend tout et l’océan pacifique l’est de moins en mois…

Par : STRATPOL — 13 mars 2024 à 17:08

Carte Indo-Pacifique

Carte Indo-PacifiqueLes Britanniques et les Américains sont de plus en plus faibles dans ce que leur hubris a appelé l’Indo-Pacifique. En

L’article La Chine prend tout et l’océan pacifique l’est de moins en mois… est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.

❌