Connexion
Régis Chamagne est un colonel de l’aviation française, il fut commandant de l’escadron Mirage F1C à Cambrai, puis commandant de
L’article L’Ukraine n’a aucune chance de gagner cette guerre, la politique de la France va à l’encontre de ses intérêts nationaux est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’armée russe a attaqué la zone de l’aérodrome des Forces armées ukrainiennes dans la banlieue de Starokonstantinov, dans la région
L’article La Russie frappe un aérodrome ukrainien qui doit recevoir des F-16 est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’Ukraine a tenté d’attaquer la Russie à l’aide d’un ballon qui a été détruit par la défense aérienne au-dessus du
L’article Kiev a attaqué le territoire russe avec… un ballon est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les forces armées russes ont frappé l’emplacement des mercenaires français à Slaviansk, contrôlé par les Forces armées ukrainiennes, a déclaré
L’article L’armée russe frappe des mercenaires français à Slaviansk est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Dans toutes les directions, dans la République populaire de Donetsk, il y a eu un tournant en faveur des forces
L’article L’armée russe avance sur tous les axes en RPD, selon un conseiller de Pouchiline est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Kiev a un plan pour une nouvelle contre-offensive, mais cela nécessite une aide militaire des États-Unis, a déclaré Zelensky. Il
L’article Zelensky évoque déjà une contre-offensive… à condition d’avoir une aide militaire américaine est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La centrale nucléaire de Zaporojié a été la cible d’attaques de drones plusieurs jours de suite. Après une série d’attaques
L’article La centrale de Zaporojié ciblée par des attaques sans précédent est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le président ukrainien Vladimir Zelensky a déclaré que Kiev était prêt à accepter un prêt des États-Unis si le Congrès
L’article Kiev se dit prêt à accepter l’aide américaine sous forme d’emprunts est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
‘Once more unto the breach, dear friends, once more;
Or close the wall up with our English dead.’
King Henry V, 1415, the Hundred Years War.
By Pepe Escobar at Strategic Culture Foundation.
The Mechanism: how the “order” based on made-up rules is descending into savagery
As the de facto North Atlantic Terror Organization celebrates its 75th birthday, taking Lord Ismay’s motto to ever soaring heights (“keep the Americans in, the Russians out, and the Germans down”), that thick slab of Norwegian wood posing as Secretary-General came up with a merry “initiative” to create a 100 billion euro fund to weaponize Ukraine for the next five years.
Translation, regarding the crucial money front in the NATO-Russia clash: partial exit of the Hegemon – already obsessing with The Next Forever War, against China; enter the motley crew of ragged, de-industrialized European chihuahuas, all in deep debt and most mired in recession.
A few IQs over average room temperature at NATO’s HQ in Haren, in Brussels, had the temerity to wonder how to come up with such a fortune, as NATO has zero leverage to raise money among member states.
After all, the Europeans will never be able to replicate the time-tested Hegemon money laundering machine. For instance, assuming the White House-proposed $60 billion package to Ukraine would be approved by the U.S. Congress – and it won’t – no less than 64% of the total will never reach Kiev: it will be laundered within the industrial-military complex.
Yet it gets even more dystopic: Norwegian Wood, robotic stare, arms flailing, actually believes his proposed move will not imply a direct NATO military presence in Ukraine – or country 404; something that is already a fact on the ground for quite a while, irrespective of the warmongering hissy fits by Le Petit Roi in Paris (Peskov: “Russia-NATO relations have descended into direct confrontation”).
Now couple the Lethal Looney Tunes spectacle along the NATOstan front with the Hegemon’s aircraft carrier performance in West Asia, consistently taking its industrial-scale slaughter/starvation Genocide Project in Gaza to indescribable heights – the meticulously documented holocaust watched in contorted silence by the “leaders” of the Global North.
UN Special Rapporteur Francesca Albanese correctly summed it all up: the biblical psychopathology entity “intentionally killed the WCK workers so that donors would pull out and civilians in Gaza could continue to be starved quietly. Israel knows Western countries and most Arab countries won’t move a finger for the Palestinians.”
The “logic” behind the deliberate three tap strike on the clearly signed humanitarian convoy of famine-alleviating workers in Gaza was to eviscerate from the news an even more horrendous episode: the genocide-within-a-genocide of al-Shifa hospital, responsible for at least 30% of all health services in Gaza. Al-Shifa was bombed, incinerated and had over 400 civilians killed in cold blood, in several cases literally smashed by bulldozers, including medical doctors, patients and dozens of children.
Nearly simultaneously, the biblical psychopathology gang completely eviscerated the Vienna convention – something that even the historical Nazis never did – striking Iran’s consular mission/ambassador’s residence in Damascus.
This was a missile attack on a diplomatic mission, enjoying immunity, on the territory of a third country, against which the gang is not at war. And on top of it, killing General Mohammad Reza Zahedi, commander of the IRGC’s Quds Force in Syria and Lebanon, his deputy Mohammad Hadi Hajizadeh, another five officers, and a total of 10 people.
Translation: an act of terror, against two sovereign states, Syria and Iran. Equivalent to the recent terror attack on Crocus City Hall in Moscow.
The inevitable question rings around all corners of the lands of the Global Majority: how can these de facto terrorists possibly get away with all this, over and over again?
The sinews of Liberal Totalitarianism
Four years ago, at the start of what I later qualified as the Raging Twenties, we were beginning to watch the consolidation of an intertwined series of concepts defining a new paradigm. We were becoming familiar with notions such as circuit breaker; negative feedback loop; state of exception; necropolitics; and hybrid neofascism.
As the decade marches on, our plight may at least have been alleviated by a twin glimmer of hope: the drive towards multipolarity, led by the Russia-China strategic partnership, with Iran playing a key part, and all that coupled with the total breakdown, live, of the “rules-based international order”.
Yet to affirm there will be a long and winding road ahead is the Mother of All Euphemisms.
So, to quote Bowie, the ultimate late, great aesthete: Where Are We Now? Let’s take this very sharp analysis by the always engaging Fabio Vighi at Cardiff University and tweak it a little further.
Anyone applying critical thinking to the world around us can feel the collapse of the system. It’s a closed system alright, easily definable as Liberal Totalitarianism. Cui bono? The 0.0001%.
Nothing ideological about that. Follow the money. The defining negative feedback loop is actually the debt loop. A criminally anti-social mechanism kept in place by – what else – a psychopathology, as acute as the one exhibited by the biblical genocidals in West Asia.
The Mechanism is enforced by a triad.
1. The transnational financial elite, the superstars of the 0.0001%.
2. Right beneath it, the politico-institutional layer, from the U.S. Congress to the European Commission (EC) in Brussels, as well as comprador elite “leaders” across the Global North and South.
3. The former “intelligentsia”, now essentially hacks for hire from media to academia.
This institutionalized hyper-mediatization of reality is (italics mine), in fact, The Mechanism.
It’s this mechanism that controlled the merging of the pre-fabricated “pandemic” – complete with hardcore social engineering sold as “humanitarian lockdowns” – into, once again, Forever Wars, from Project Genocide in Gaza to the Russophobia/cancel culture obsession inbuilt in Project Proxy War in Ukraine.
That’s the essence of Totalitarian Normality: the Project for Humanity by the appallingly mediocre, self-appointed Great Reset “elites” of the collective West.
Killing them softly with AI
A key vector of the whole mechanism is the direct, vicious interconnection between a tecno-military euphoria and the hyper-inflationary financial sector, now in thrall with AI.
Enter, for instance, AI models such as ‘Lavender’, tested on the ground in the Gaza killing field lab. Literally: artificial intelligence programming the extermination of humans. And it’s happening, in real time. Call it Project AI Genocide. — Sidebar: [01] [02] [03] [04] [background]
Another vector, already experimented, is inbuilt in the indirect assertion by toxic EC Medusa Ursula von der Lügen: essentially, the need to produce weapons as Covid vaccines.
That’s at the core of a plan to use funding of the EU by European taxpayers to “increase financing” of “joint contracts for weapons”. That’s an offspring of von der Lügen’s push to roll out Covid vaccines – a gigantic Pfizer-linked scam for which she is about to be investigated and arguably exposed by the EU’s Public Prosecutor Office. In her own words, addressing the proposed weapons scam: “We did this for vaccines and gas.”
Call it Weaponization of Social Engineering 2.0.
Amidst all the action in this vast corruption swamp, the Hegemon agenda remains quite blatant: to keep its – dwindling – predominantly thalassocratic, military hegemony, no matter what, as the basis for its financial hegemony; protect the U.S. dollar; and protect those unmeasurable, unpayable debts in U.S. dollars.
And that brings us to the tawdry economic model of turbo-capitalism, as sold by collective West media hacks: the debt loop, virtual money, borrowed non-stop to deal with “autocrat” Putin and “Russian aggression”. That’s a key by-product of Michael Hudson’s searing analysis of the FIRE (Finance-Insurance-Real Estate) syndrome.
Ouroboros intervenes: the serpent bites its own tail. Now the inherent folly of The Mechanism is inevitably leading casino capitalism to resort to barbarism. Undiluted savagery – of the Crocus City Hall kind and of the Project Gaza Genocide kind.
And that’s how The Mechanism engenders institutions – from Washington to Brussels to hubs across the Global North to genocidal Tel Aviv – stripped down to the status of psychotic killers, at the mercy of Big Finance/FIRE (oh, such fabulous seafront real estate opportunities available in “vacant” Gaza.)
How can we possibly escape such folly? Will we have the will and the discipline to follow Shelley’s vision and, in “this dim vast vale of tears”, summon the transcending Spirit of Beauty – and harmony, equanimity and justice?
O Mockers, ‘Ask not for whom the Bell tolls, it tolls for thee!’
Pepe begins ~38th min; Prof Marandi at ~1:19 min.
The entire is worthwhile, especially the introduction putting Gaza’s Al Shifa Hospital barbarity into perspective.
Rubicons were crossed on one-way paths…. The absolutely shocking events of last week harken and were last seen during the open Drang of the Third Reich against mankind; Pax Judaica presented its calling card back-to-back-to-back with the annihilation of historic Al Shifa Hospital, the missiling of the sacrosanct Iranian Embassy of Damascus, immediately followed by the measured triple-tap droning of the caravan of the western aid workers. Quod licet Iovi, non licet bovi? Urbi et Orbi on Pax Judaica? We are all guilty of lèse-majesté, or are we? We shall see. The Fat Lady hasn’t sung.
Regardless, it is the End of the Line for the Old Order — in every way on every theater of confrontation, internal and external. Note Pepe’s sense of indignities suffered by all BRICS and the SCO through the savage attack on the Iranian Embassy in Syria. Responses are now due from the Axes of Civilization of this joined Global-SMO.
Le ministère russe de la Défense a confirmé une conversation téléphonique entre le chef du département, Sergueï Choïgou, et son
L’article En conversation téléphonique, Lecornu a tenté de convaincre Choïgou de l’innocence de l’Ukraine dans l’attentat au Crocus est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le dirigeant ukrainien Vladimir Zelensky a marqué la fin de son premier mandat présidentiel par des changements de personnel à
L’article Après l’armée, Zelensky purge son administration présidentielle est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Des véhicules aériens sans pilote (UAV) ukrainiens ont attaqué le Tatarstan pour la première fois depuis le début de l’opération
L’article Des drones ukrainiens parviennent pour la première fois à frapper des sites au Tatarstan est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les icônes dans lesquelles des explosifs ont été trouvés lors d’une fouille de voiture à l’entrée de la Lettonie se
L’article Le FSB découvre des icônes bourrées d’explosifs à la frontière lettone est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Terror Attack on Moscow & Why the US Stands as the Prime Suspect
US use of terrorism to advance foreign policy objectives is based on decades of evidence and includes support for militants in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union, Chechen separatists inside Russia in the 1990s and 2000s, and Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria against Syrian, Iranian, and Russian forces;
More recently, US foreign policymakers have laid out plans to use listed terrorist organizations as proxies to carry out attacks in targeted nations like Iran and Pakistan;
Ukraine has already carried out an extensive terror campaign aimed at Russian civilians deep within Russian territory including in Belgorod, St. Petersburg, and Moscow;
US media admits collaboration between US intelligence and Ukrainian intelligence from 2014 onward while also admitting Ukraine has carried out a number of attacks on civilians inside Russia including Darya Dugina and Vladen Tatarsky;
US media also admits that despite the US claiming to have warned Russia of an impending terrorist attack, information was withheld due to the “adversarial relationship” between the US and Russia;
Leading up to the deadly Moscow attack, US foreign policymakers had repeatedly stated the need to make ordinary Russians “feel the pinch” of the conflict;
References:
NYT – Why Russia’s Vast Security Services Fell Short on Deadly Attack (March 28, 2024)
RAND Corporation – Extending Russia (2019)
The New Yorker – The Redirection, by Seymour Hersh (2007)
NYT – C.I.A. Said to Aid in Steering Arms to Syrian Opposition (2012)
NYT – Arms Airlift to Syria Rebels Expands, With Aid From C.I.A. (March 2013)
Washington Post – ‘Al-Qaeda is eating us’: Syrian rebels are losing out to extremists (2017)
BBC – Islamic State and the crisis in Iraq and Syria in maps (2018)
Brookings Institution – Which Path to Persia? (2009)
BBC – US removes Iran group MEK from terror list (2012)
Foreign Policy – Two Cheers for Syrian Islamists (2012)
Russia Matters – Claim (in 2004, 2015 and 2017): The U.S. government supported Chechen separatism
RFE/RL – Chechen Separatist Fighters Defend Ukraine Against ‘Common Enemy’ Russia (November 2022)
NY Times – Why Russia’s Vast Security Services Fell Short on Deadly Attack (March 28, 2024)
NYT – U.S. Believes Ukrainians Were Behind an Assassination in Russia (October 2022)
NYT – The Spy War: How the C.I.A. Secretly Helps Ukraine Fight Putin (February 2024)
Where to Find My Work:
Le ministère russe des Affaires étrangères exige du régime de Kiev l’arrestation du chef du SBU Vasily Malyuk, qui a
L’article Attentats : Moscou exige de Kiev l’arrestation du chef du SBU est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Des spécialistes du Centre russe pour les solutions intégrées sans pilote (CDBR) ont étudié un drone ukrainien Baba Yaga capturé,
L’article Des experts russes trouvent le site d’assemblage de drones ukrainiens Baba Yaga est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
The broken relationship between the United States and Niger reveals U.S. grand strategy as well as policy towards Russia. The policy failed to isolate Russia in the Global South. The denial of Niger’s right to choose its own partners uncovers the lie behind America’s stated objectives in Ukraine.
By Ted Snider at Antiwar.com
What Does the Coup in Niger Tell Us about the War in Ukraine?
On July 28, 2023, a coup led by General Abdourahamane Tchiani kicked out the democratically elected government of Niger. On March 16, 2024, the coup government kicked the United States out of Niger.
Niger, and a cooperative government in Niger, are important to the United States. “Niger is a strong ally of western nations, especially France, the U.S. and the European Union in fighting insurgency and curbing illegal migration to Europe,” according to Olayinka Ajala, senior lecturer in politics and international relations at Leeds Beckett University. The New York Times has called Niger “a centerpiece of American efforts to combat surging Islamist militancy in the Sahel region” and “the main U.S. counterterrorism ally in the region.” Niger’s vast uranium and oil reserves also give it an economic importance to the United States.
That partnership was threatened by the July 2023 coup. The United States was sluggish in calling the coup a coup because such a recognition would force the U.S. to suspend military aid and limit the ability of the U.S. military to operate in Niger. The State Department did eventually make that decision and suspended aid. The United States did not, however, withdraw their forces from Niger and soon resumed flights of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance drones.
The Defense Department says that the U.S. currently has “approximately 1,000” troops in Niger. They are “consolidating” to U.S. Air Base 201, “the linchpin of the U.S. military’s archipelago of bases in North and West Africa.” The $110 million base is key to U.S. intelligence in the region, including satellite communications and a fleet of drones that includes armed Reapers.
The March 16 statement by the coup government in Niger ended those drone flights and that military partnership and kicked those American forces out of Niger.
Niger’s military spokesman, Colonel Major Amadou Abdramane, announced on television that, “The government of Niger, taking into account the aspirations and interests of its people, decides with full responsibility to denounce with immediate effect the agreement relating to the status of military personnel of the United States and civilian employees of the American Department of Defense in the territory of the Republic of Niger.” The agreement for U.S. forces and civilian personnel to be hosted in Niger has been revoked.
The decision came just days after a U.S. delegation traveled to Niger to “continue ongoing discussions… with leaders of the National Council for Safeguarding the Homeland (CNSP) regarding Niger’s return to a democratic path and the future of our security and development partnership.”
Those discussions, for a number of reasons, reportedly went very badly. Those unsuccessful talks contain a number of lessons, not only on failed American foreign policy in Africa, but on the war in Ukraine.
Alex Thurston, assistant professor of political science at the University of Cincinnati and a specialist in the politics of northwest Africa, says there are reports that American officials were criticizing Niger’s turn towards Russia. The State Department says that, while exchanging “views on how to chart a new path of cooperation forward,” the “U.S. delegation met with Nigerien officials, expressing concerns over Niger’s potential relationships with Russia.”
In a March 18 briefing, Deputy Pentagon Press Secretary Sabrina Singh again referred to “direct conversations about some of our concerns, about some of their, you know, pursuing relationships with Russia.” She also raised concerns over the fact “that Russia has, certainly, a presence within the region from, you know, they continue to pursue ties to African nations to deepen their security cooperation.”
The American delegation’s warnings about Russia outraged Niger. Abdramane said, “Niger regrets the intention of the American delegation to deny the sovereign Nigerien people the right to choose their partners and types of partnerships. Also, the government of Niger forcefully denounces the condescending attitude accompanied by the threat of retaliation from the head of the American delegation towards the Nigerien government and people.”
The American effort in Niger is crucial for the hypocrisy it reveals in American foreign policy. On March 21, 2022, at the beginning of the war in Ukraine, State Department spokesperson Ned Price explained that one of the “core principles at the heart of the Kremlin’s war against Ukraine” is that
“each and every country has a sovereign right to determine its own foreign policy, has a sovereign right to determine for itself with whom it will choose to associate in terms of its alliances, its partnerships, and what orientation it wishes to direct its gaze.”
The United States was prepared to risk a war with Russia, a third world war, a potential nuclear war, and the injury and death of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian soldiers for a “core principle” that it does not subscribe to: at least not when it comes to Africa or when it does not convenience the United States. The U.S. “den[ies] the sovereign Nigerien people the right to choose their partners and types of partnerships.”
The pressure brought to Niger reveals that Washington is supporting the war against Russia for reasons other than the right of Ukraine to choose its partners and join NATO, or that that right only applies when the partner being chosen is the United States and NATO but not Russia. The core principle, then, is not the right of a sovereign nation to choose its partner, but the right of a sovereign nation to partner with the United States.
The American attitude toward Niger and Russia reveals a second lesson. A key response to the Russian invasion of Ukraine was to isolate Russia and reinforce the U.S.-led unipolar world. It has not worked.
The United States has expressed concern that the “Russian Federation is really trying to take over central Africa as well as the Sahel.” Thurston told me that the U.S. is “very worried about Russian influence throughout the Sahel, and it has a particular sting in Niger given the previous closeness of the relationship.”
He added that the United States “seems to regard competition with Russia in Africa as zero-sum; whereas, most African governments don’t see things that way.” And that is the hallmark of the emerging multipolar world that the U.S. is trying to hold back. Saudi Arabia has said “we do not believe in polarization or in choosing between sides.” India’s Minister of External Affairs, S. Jaishankar, in his book, The Indian Way, describes the new multipolar world as one in which countries deal “with contesting parties at the same time with optimal results” for their “own self-interest.”
Africa has rejected America’s “zero-sum” framing of partnerships. Not one country in Africa has joined the U.S.-led sanctions on Russia. Instead, Africa has asserted its sovereign right not to be forced to choose sides in a world where you can partner with many factions in pursuit of your own national interest. So, Niger stands up to American pressure and asserts its “right to choose their partners and types of partnerships.”
The broken relationship between the United States and Niger is important for what it reveals about America’s foreign policy in Africa and the future of its footprint on the continent. But it is also important for what it reveals about U.S. grand strategy and its policy towards Russia. American fears and concerns about Russia’s strengthening relationships in Africa reveal its fears about the failure of its policy of isolating Russia. And, most importantly, the denial of Niger’s right to choose its own partners uncovers the lie behind America’s stated objectives in Ukraine.
Ted Snider is a regular columnist on U.S. foreign policy and history at Antiwar.com and The Libertarian Institute. He is also a frequent contributor to Responsible Statecraft and The American Conservative as well as other outlets. To support his work or for media or virtual presentation requests, contact him at tedsnider@bell.net.
Le commandant en chef des forces armées ukrainiennes, Syrsky, a annoncé l’abandon du projet de mobilisation de 500 000 personnes.
L’article Le commandant en chef des forces armées ukrainiennes Syrsky abandonne la mobilisation de 500 000 personnes est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le chef du Comité d’enquête, Alexandr Bastrykine, a tenu une réunion régulière avec l’équipe de l’enquête. “Les enquêteurs ont fait
L’article Le Comité d’enquête de Russie a découvert un lien financier entre Kiev et les terroristes du Crocus est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Ukraine, ISIS, and the Moscow Concert Attack: What really happened? Pepe Escobar joins us to examine the complicated spider web of connections between Ukrainian intelligence, jihadist groups, and Western governments.
hosted by Dimitri Simes Jr. at the New Rules.
Ukraine, ISIS, and the Moscow Concert Attack: What really happened?
Pepe Escobar joins us to examine the complicated spider web of connections between Ukrainian intelligence, jihadist groups, and Western governments.
#NewRulesPodcast @RealPepeEscobar pic.twitter.com/oiNQgd7eLP— NewRulesGeopolitics (@NewRulesGeo) March 28, 2024
L’armée ukrainienne est confrontée à une stagnation au front. Le conseiller du chef de cabinet du président ukrainien, Mikhaïl Podolyak,
L’article Le conseiller de Zelensky, Podolyak, regrette la stagnation du front est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Le Bureau du Commissaire des Nations Unies aux droits de l’homme a publié un rapport dans lequel il parle de
L’article L’ONU publie un rapport sur la torture de prisonniers de guerre russes en Ukraine est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
En écoutant les déclarations de Macron et d’autres sur l’envoi de troupes françaises au sol en Ukraine, j’ai été surpris
L’article Macron-Zelensky : le baiser du scorpion ? est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Les 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.
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.
L’armée russe avance dans la région de Chasov Yar en RPD, a déclaré le chef de la région, Denis Pouchiline,
L’article L’armée russe a pris le contrôle de Krasnoié et avance vers Chasov Yar est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Il existe une grave pénurie de personnel dans le secteur agricole ukrainien en raison de la mobilisation active dans les
L’article Le secteur agricole ukrainien subit une grave pénurie de main d’œuvre à cause de la mobilisation est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
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.
“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.
Deux ans après le début de la guerre en Ukraine, la réalité contredit les prévisions hasardeuses du camp occidental qui
L’article La guerre en Ukraine ou la douloureuse naissance d’un monde nouveau est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Will France/NATO invade Ukraine? How will Russia respond?
Will France invade Ukraine? How will Russia respond?
Scott Ritter goes nuclear on French President Emmanuel Macron, Poland, and the Baltic States (“over-fed chihuahuas”). Don’t watch this episode if you’re a NATO fanboy! #NewRulesPodcast pic.twitter.com/Zb3s90VxES
— NewRulesGeopolitics (@NewRulesGeo) March 21, 2024
In this week’s episode of the New Rules podcast, we’re discussing the potential of a French/NATO military intervention in Ukraine. Longtime friend of the program, former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter goes NUCLEAR on French President Emmanuel Macron, Poland, and the Baltic States.
“France is the equivalent of an overfed Chihuahua, and you don’t want to get in the ring with the really beefed up Rottweilers, especially when they’ve been trained to eat overfed Chihuahuas their entire life,” he told the New Rules podcast.
Les 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.
Le 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.
Selon 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.
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
Le 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.
Putin presented the West with a bill of exchange that it is not able to repay
By Irina Alksnis, RIA Novosti columnist.
“In an interview with Dmitry Kiselyov, Vladimir Putin stressed that the West will not just have to offer Russia guarantees of compliance with the agreements, but these guarantees: a) must be spelled out; b) suit Moscow; and c) the Russian leadership must actually believe in them.”
In an interview with Dmitry Kiselyov, Vladimir Putin paid great attention to the issue of potential negotiations with the West over Ukraine. At first glance, this might even seem somewhat unexpected, but the topic is really becoming more and more relevant and is increasingly heard in the public field, which means that it is time to clarify Russia’s position as clearly as possible. Which the president did.
The reality of the situation on the Ukrainian front, which is unpleasant for the West, is reaching more and more people on the other side. This entails quite natural consequences: the voices demanding to negotiate with Moscow are getting louder and louder. And if initially they were mostly marginal figures, on whom it was very convenient to hang the label “Russian agent” or “useful idiot of the Kremlin”, now the most mainstream and very influential forces – the media, think tanks, politicians and statesmen – up to the Pope are saying the same thing.
This point of view has not yet become dominant there and still meets impressive resistance, but it can no longer be called marginal. And judging by the way events are developing in Ukraine, the moment when it will become dominant on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean is not very long away.
However, these changes worry the politically active patriotic part of Russian society. The reason is obvious: people fear that in the course of negotiations, Russia will lose the achievements for which our soldiers pay with their blood and lives. Either the West will simply deceive us, as it has done so many times in the past, or a part of the Russian elite that remains pro-Western will be inclined to make concessions, surrendering our military victory. But no one is immune from mistakes and failures in the negotiation process – even the most ardent patriot of his country.
This is probably why the president gave a detailed and detailed commentary on this issue, touching on very different aspects that affect Russia’s position. And this is the answer primarily for us-the citizens of the country. But it can also be very useful for the West, if there are still smart enough and qualified people there who are able to hear and understand what is said, and not invent their own version of Putin’s answer in accordance with the agenda and personal beliefs (and with this there are more and more problems lately). Well, for the insufficiently nationalized representatives of the domestic establishment, who are hoping to turn the stuffing back, the president’s answer is also very useful – and makes them understand that you should not dream of the impossible.
The West, in the form of Ukraine as anti-Russia, prepared a very powerful weapon against our country, but when it did not work as expected, it had to openly enter the war itself – and this became its huge, downright fatal mistake, because it turned on the patriotic war regime in our people. Putin said that “deep Russian society”, ordinary citizens, had long been waiting for their demand for the country and the state, and the war of the West against us was exactly the situation that turned on the mechanism of national consolidation.
This means that the state has a free hand in relying on powerful and active (literally combative) popular support. He is not under pressure from public opinion, which insists on ending the fighting at any cost and as soon as possible – on the contrary, citizens consider it right to solve the issue radically, eliminating the threat to Russia in the south-western direction once and for all. This means that the SVO can continue for as long as it takes, until the West is not just ripe for negotiations (this will happen soon), but reaches the point where it hears Moscow’s position and accepts its conditions (but this may take much longer).
By the way, the president’s words made it clear why Russian officials are so actively pedaling the topic of deception on the part of the West, which Moscow has encountered many times in recent decades. You can often hear criticism of this position – saying that it exposes Russia as weak and stupid. However, it has now provided the state with an extremely comfortable and strong negotiating position: what are your guarantees, gentlemen? Because the old and, alas, unkind principle of “gentlemen take their word for it” has finally broken down.
Putin stressed that the West should not just offer Russia guarantees of compliance with the agreements, but these guarantees should: a) be spelled out; b) suit Moscow; and c) the Russian leadership should actually believe in them.
In fact, in the sphere of reputation and moral authority, the West finds itself in exactly the same situation as with the American debt, which is storming to astronomical heights and whose mere maintenance is increasingly shaking the financial system. Everyone has already realized that this is just a pyramid scheme, but it still holds, and the world is watching with curiosity (although not without concern about the consequences) what will become the “pebble” that will start the crash.
Well, by demanding guarantees at the talks, Putin swung the “pebble” of another tower – the tower of Babel of Western hypocrisy and lies.
Perhaps this is understood by American and European hawks, who are now actively rocking the topic of the need to introduce a Western contingent to Ukraine. Realizing that Moscow will not be able to push through or deceive in negotiations, they see direct participation in the conflict as the only remaining option to try to reduce the conflict to a more or less acceptable outcome for NATO countries.
However, Putin also had words for these hotheads – in particular, the word “interventionists”. Moreover, the president explicitly stated that it is precisely as an intervention on the territory of Russia that we will regard the entry of Western troops into Ukraine. And he reminded that our country has a rich experience of successfully solving this problem, which everyone in the West should remember.
In essence, Ukraine has become a conflict in which the bankruptcy of Europe and the United States – military, moral, economic – threatens to turn from expected to actual. And in his interview, Putin presented the West with a bill of exchange, which in principle it is not able to repay.
The endless ennui and envy of those incapable of abandoning phantom pains. Most useful putty in the hands of Empire
By Ambassador MK Bhadrakumar at the Indian Punchline.
Ever since its ignominious defeat in the Napoleonic wars, France is entrapped in the predicament of countries that get sandwiched between great powers. Following World War II, France addressed this predicament by forging an axis with Germany in Europe.
Caught up in a similar predicament, Britain adapted itself to a subaltern role tapping into the American power globally but France never gave up its quest to regain glory as a global power. And it continues to be a work in progress.
The angst in the French mind is understandable as the five centuries of western dominance of the world order is drawing to a close. This predicament condemns France to a diplomacy that is constantly in a state of suspended animation interspersed with sudden bouts of activism.
But, for activism to be result-oriented, there are prerequisites needed such as the profiling of like-minded activist groups, leadership and associates and supporters and sympathisers — and, most important, sustainment and logistics. Or else, activism comes to resemble epileptic fits, an incurable affliction of the nervous system.
The French President Emmanuel Macron’s halcyon days in international diplomacy ended with the recent dissolution of the Franco-German axis in Europe, which dated back to the Treaties of Rome in 1957. As Berlin sharply swerved to trans-atlanticism as its foreign-policy dogma, France’s clout diminished in European affairs.
The stakes are high in the reconciliation meeting on Friday as Macron travels to Berlin to meet Chancellor Olaf Scholz, who not only snubbed him by ruling out the use of ground troops from European countries in the Ukraine war, but also digging in on Taurus missile issue arguing that it would entail assigning German staff in support to Ukraine, which, he announced on Wednesday in the Bundestag, is simply “out of the question” while he remained the chancellor.
Of course, this is not to decry Macron’s formidable intellect — such as when he declared in a blunt interview in late 2019 with the Economist magazine that Europe stood on “the edge of a precipice” and needed to start thinking of itself strategically as a geopolitical power lest it will “no longer be in control of our destiny.” Macron’s prescient remark preceded the war in Ukraine by 3 years.
According to the newspaper Marianne, which interviewed several French soldiers, the military reportedly estimates that the Ukraine war is irretrievably lost already. Marianne quoted a senior French officer saying derisively, “We must make no mistake facing the Russians; we are an army of cheerleaders” and sending French troops to the Ukrainian front would simply be “not reasonable” . At the Élysée, an unnamed advisor argued that Macron “wanted to send a strong signal… (in) milli-metered and calibrated words”.
Marianne’s editor Natacha Polony wrote: “It is no longer about Emmanuel Macron or his postures as a virile little leader. It is no longer even about France or its weakening by blind and irresponsible elites. It is a question of whether we will collectively agree to sleepwalk into war. A war that no one can claim will be controlled or contained. It’s a question of whether we agree to send our children to die because the United States insisted on setting up bases on Russia’s borders.”
The big question is why Macron is doing this nonetheless — going to the extent of cobbling together a ‘coalition of the willing’ in Europe. A range of explanations is possible starting with Macron posturing and trying to earn political points at minimal cost, motivated by personal ambitions and intra-European friction with Berlin.
But then, until fairly recently, Macron was a supporter of dialogue with Moscow. The perception in most European capitals, including Moscow, is that Macron is making an attempt to bring the Ukrainian crisis to a new level by announcing western combat deployment against Russia publicly as an obvious political manipulation.
The geopolitical salience is that Macron who once not too long ago called for dialogue with Moscow and offered his mediation in it, who made the famous declaration of a “Greater Europe” in 2019 and maintained contacts with Russian President Vladimir Putin thereof; who as of February last year, while speaking about Russia’s “certain defeat” in Ukraine, called for avoiding Moscow’s “humiliation”; who repeatedly underscored his commitment to the matrix of diplomacy attributed to Charles de Gaulle, which assigned France the role of a “bridge between East and West” — has now swung to the other extreme of harsh Euro-Atlantic rhetoric.
This appalling inconsistency can only be seen as stemming out of the unfavourable development of events in the scenario of the Ukrainian crisis with the prospect of a Russian defeat in the war no longer in the cards even remotely and replaced by the growing possibility that peace will ultimately be attainable only on Russia’s terms. Put differently, the power dynamic in Europe is shifting dramatically, which, of course, impacts Macron’s own ambitions to “lead Europe.”
Meanwhile, Russian-French relations have also been undergoing a stage of fierce competition and rivalry — even confrontation — in a number of areas. For a start, French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejournet said in an interview with Le Parisien in January that Russia’s victory in Ukraine would lead to 30% of world wheat exports being controlled by Moscow. For Paris, this is a question of the sustainability of one of the key sectors of French national economy.
French agriculture is marked by its history that had its beginning with the Gaulois in 2000 BC. It needs to be understood that In modern history, French Revolution of 1789, which altered every part of the French social order and led to the abolition of privileges for upper classes, was also an Agricultural Revolution, which allowed a broad land redistribution. Suffice to say, the bond of French people to their agriculture is very strong.
As it is, African states are changing the structure of grain imports due to the technical regulations introduced by the European Union as part of its green agenda and French farmers consequently face rising costs, and over and above that, there is now also the looming loss of regional market share to Russia.
This is on top of the inroads Russia is making in arms exports to the African continent lately. In politico-military terms too, France has lost ground to Russia in the resource-rich Sahel region, its ex-colonies and playpen traditionally. The fact of the matter is that the birds are coming to roost over France’s neo-colonial strategies in Africa, but Paris prefers to put the blame on Russia’s Wagner group which has moved in to fill the security vacuum in Sahel region, as anti-French forces have come to power in several countries at once — Mali, Niger, Burkina Faso, Chad, CAR.
In the best traditions of geopolitics, France has begun retaliating in regions sensitive to Russian interests — Armenia, Moldova and Ukraine where Russian military presence is in French crosshairs. Unsurprisingly, Ukraine is the most strategic turf where Macron hopes to achieve a bigger French presence.
Through that, Macron hopes to advance his leadership ambitions in Europe as the navigator of the EU’s foreign policy strategy in a wide arc from the African continent across the Mediterranean to Transcaucasia — and potentially all the way to Afghanistan.
All this is unfolding against the historic backdrop of an inevitable US retrenchment in Europe as Indo-Pacific hots up and the simmering rivalry with China becomes an all-consuming passion for Washington. Indeed, alongside, the towering presence of Russia across Europe is beginning to be felt intensely as it surges as the number one military and economic power in the strategic space between Vancouver and Vladivostok.
Today, the paradox is, then Russian president Dmitry Medvedev had proposed way back in 2008 a legally binding pan-European security treaty, which would develop a new security architecture in Europe, involving the reshaping of existing, and creating new institutions and norms regulating security relations in Europe in a wider geopolitical space stretching east “from Vancouver to Vladivostok.” But, alas, the US encouraged the Europeans to see the so-called ‘Medvedev Initiative’ as a trap to enfeeble NATO, the OSCE, the EU and other European bodies, and reject that wonderful idea which would have anchored the post-cold war era firmly on a binding security architecture.
Les 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.
Certains 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.
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
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.
Les infrastructures critiques de la centrale nucléaire de Zaporojie ont été attaquées par les forces armées ukrainiennes. C’est ce qu’indique
L’article Les forces armées ukrainiennes ont attaqué les infrastructures critiques de la centrale de Zaporojie est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
And both options lead to same defeat.. Brian Berletic breaks down the Ukraine’s Manpower Crisis: No Amount of Money or Aid Can Solve It
He uses the US Army’s own [admittedly inadequate] doctrine to explain why the Ukraine is finished in terms of manpower, even if further financing and weapons resupply were possible. They lack the time, especially seasoning top cadre, in order to be combat effective. And the ideal environment in which to train within the Ukraine, already involved and enveloped in the hellscape of war. No place on the Ukraine is safe from Russian stand-off weaponry.
The options confronting the sinking West are bitter indeed: double down into nuclear war, as NATO itself lacks the tools and manpower to halt much less defeat the Russian Armed Forces. Or accept defeat and the end of their centuries-old Hegemony.
More detail from The New Atlas:
Ukraine is suffering from a growing military manpower crisis in addition to a lack of arms and ammunition;
Trained military manpower takes up to half a year to produce, new brigade-sized units can take up to 30 months to stand up;
Ukraine and its Western sponsors simply cannot produce trained military manpower faster than Russia is removing it from the battlefield;
This leaves the collective West with the choice of either accepting it has lost its proxy war with Russia, or attempting to intervene more directly;
References:
NEO – Ukraine’s Manpower Crisis: No Amount of Money or Aid Can Solve It (March 5, 2024):
The Kyiv Independent – Ukraine struggles to ramp up mobilization as Russia’s war enters 3rd year (March 3, 2024):
The Washington Post – Front-line Ukrainian infantry units report acute shortage of soldiers (February 8, 2024):
US Department of Defense – The National Defense Industrial Strategy (NDIS) (2023-2024):
NEO – Fatal Flaws Undermine America’s Defense Industrial Base (February 15, 2024):
US Department of Defense – Press Release: Evaluation of Sustainment Strategies for the Patriot Air Defense Systems Transferred to the Ukrainian Armed Forces (DODIG-2024-056) and Evaluation of the DoD’s Sustainment Plan for Bradley, Stryker, and Abrams Armored Weapon Systems (February 20, 2024):
Reuters – Ukraine considers proposal by army to mobilise another 500,000 for war (December 2023):
Reuters – Who are the forces involved in Ukraine’s counteroffensive? (June 2023):
US DoD – Defense Officials Hold Media Brief on the Training of Ukrainian Military (March 2022):
The US Army War College Quarterly – Expanding Brigade Combat Teams: IS the Training Base Adequate? (2017):
Where to Find My Work:
Website: https://landdestroyer.blogspot.com/
Telegram: https://t.me/brianlovethailand
Twitter: https://twitter.com/BrianJBerletic
L’armée russe a clarifié les chiffres des pertes des terroristes ukrainiens qui ont tenté d’envahir le territoire russe le 12
L’article Une tentative d’invasion de la Russie par l’Ukraine repoussée est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
PEPE ESCOBAR Interview: Ukrainian PR Stunt on the Russian Border, NATO in Ukraine, Multipolarity and More
The ‘Rockstar of Geopolitics’ Returns to the DDG Show! Discussing Desperate Attempts to Create Chaos Before Russian Elections, NATO Troops in Ukraine, the Collective West Running Out of Options for ‘Project Ukraine,’ and More!
Le chef de la CIA, William Burns, a averti lors d’une audition de la commission spéciale du Sénat américain sur
L’article Le directeur de la CIA admet que Kiev risque de perdre de nombreux territoires cette année est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
L’Ukraine n’a pas besoin de troupes étrangères sur son territoire ; l’armée française peut rester dans son pays aussi longtemps
L’article Zelensky : l’armée française peut rester dans son pays est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
La ministre allemande des Affaires étrangères Annalena Baerbock a soutenu l’idée du ministre britannique des Affaires étrangères David Cameron selon
L’article Baerbock favorable à l’idée de Cameron de vendre des Taurus à Londres pour vendre des Storm Shadow à Kiev est apparu en premier sur STRATPOL.
Lateo.net - Flux RSS en pagaille (pour en ajouter : @ moi) 