The U.S. and NATO are pouring weapons into Ukraine. Kiev says it plans no offensive against Donbass, but if Washington forced one, Moscow would have a major decision to make, writes Joe Lauria.
Ukrainian government tanks in eastern Ukraine, 2015. (OSCE)
By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News
United States plans to weaken Russia by imposing punishing sanctions and bringing world condemnation on Moscow depend on Washington’s hysteria about a Russian invasion of Ukraine actually coming true.
At his press conference on Tuesday, Vladimir Putin said,
“I still believe the United States is not that concerned about Ukraine’s security, though they may think about it on the sidelines. Its main goal is to contain Russia’s development. This is the whole point. In this sense, Ukraine is simply a tool to reach this goal. This can be done in different ways: by drawing us into some armed conflict, or compelling its allies in Europe to impose tough sanctions on us like the US is talking about today.”
At the U.N. Security Council on Monday, Russia’s U.N. envoy Vassily Nebenzia said: “Our Western colleagues say that de-escalation is needed, but they are the first to build up tension, enhance rhetoric and escalate the situation. Talks about an imminent war are provocative per se. It might seem you call for it, want it and wait for it to come, as if you wanted your allegations to come true.”
The war mania being drummed up in U.S. and British media recalls even Zbigniew Brzezinski‘s warning that “whipping up anti-Russian hysteria … could eventually become a self-fulfilling prophecy.”
Without an invasion the U.S. seems lost. No sanctions, no world opprobrium, no weakening of Russia.
If the U.S. is trying to lure Russia into a trap in Ukraine, what might it look like?
Offensive on Donbass
Ukraine says it is not planning an offensive against the breakaway provinces of Luhansk and Donetsk, which border Russia in the east. But just ten days ago Ukrainian President Zelensky said:
??President Zelensky speaking to the Foreign Intelligence Service of Ukraine:
“We have learned to contain external threats. It is time we begin offensive actions aimed at securing our national interests. Our citizens are united in wanting their territory returned” pic.twitter.com/iumwOKNEZ5
— Murad Gazdiev (@MuradGazdiev) January 24, 2022
Joe Biden has said a Russian invasion will come in February, when the ground freezes. But it could also be the time for a Kiev offensive to recover the two Donbass provinces. NATO nations are pouring weapons into Ukraine supposedly to defend it against the “invasion.” But the weapons transfers could instead be preparation for an offensive, on orders from Washington. The U.S. essentially runs the country since the 2014 U.S.-backed coup, which led the ethnic Russian provinces to declare independence from Ukraine and led to Kiev’s war against them. All Ukrainian leaders, including Zelensky, serve at the pleasure of the U.S. president.
The ground will also be frozen for Kiev’s forces in February, which was the month of the 2014 coup, while Putin was in Sochi for the Winter Olympics. He is now in Beijing for the 2022 Winter Olympics, away from the command center in Moscow. (The 2008 Summer Olympics in Beijing was also the time Georgia instigated its war with Russia against its renegade provinces at the behest of the United States.)
When Kiev stepped up attacks against Donbass in March and October 2021, Russia both times increased its troop deployments near the Ukraine border, which this time is being interpreted by Washington as plans for an “imminent” invasion.
It is an invasion the U.S. absolutely needs to implement its plans to weaken Russia (and ultimately to replace Putin with a pliable leader in the mold of Boris Yeltsin.) As Moscow has never openly threatened such an invasion, the U.S. appears to be devising ways to get it.
The Russian ‘Plot’
On Thursday U.S. intelligence leaked what it says is a diabolical scheme by Russia to stage a provocation in Donbass or even on Russian territory itself to provide a pretext for an invasion. The New York Times reported the lurid details of this supposed plot:
“The plan — which the United States hopes to spoil by making public — involves staging and filming a fabricated attack by the Ukrainian military either on Russian territory or against Russian-speaking people in eastern Ukraine.
Russia, the officials said, intended to use the video to accuse Ukraine of genocide against Russian-speaking people. It would then use the outrage over the video to justify an attack or have separatist leaders in the Donbas region of eastern Ukraine invite a Russian intervention.
The video was intended to be elaborate, officials said, with plans for graphic images of the staged, corpse-strewn aftermath of an explosion and footage of destroyed locations. They said the video was also set to include faked Ukrainian military equipment, Turkish-made drones and actors playing Russian-speaking mourners.”
Of course unsaid is that the U.S. can get Kiev to launch an actual attack, even inside Russia, and then say it was the false flag event, to try to prompt the Russian intervention.
As usual, the U.S. “intelligence officials” refused to provide any evidence for such a plot. “Officials would not release any direct evidence of the Russian plan or specify how they learned of it, saying to do so would compromise their sources and methods,” the Times reported.
That prompted AP State Department correspondent Matt Lee to have this exchange with spokesman Ned Price on Thursday. Because Price was unable to produce any evidence he resorted to smearing Lee as taking “solace” in Russian information.
Reporter: “It’s an action that you say they have taken, but you have shown no evidence to confirm that. […] This is like – crisis actors? Really? This is like Alex Jones territory you’re getting into now.”
Must-watch exchange between @APDiploWriter Matt Lee and @StateDeptSpox. pic.twitter.com/RPIPb2zwf5
— The Hill (@thehill) February 3, 2022
It's the job of reporters to ask for proof to back up government statements. Doing so does not mean one believes propaganda put out by U.S. adversaries. I imagine these officials know that. Are they simply throwing out these accusations in an effort to deter further Qs? 6/6
— Felicia Sonmez (@feliciasonmez) February 3, 2022
So if the offensive comes this month, with or without a false flag, how will Russia respond?
Options for Russia
If a major offensive attempts to regain Donbass (likely downplayed by Western media) there’s no reason to doubt Russia would continue supplying arms, ammunition, intelligence and logistical support to the militias there.
However if those defenses begin failing, the Kremlin would have a major decision to make: intervene with regular Russian units to save the inhabitants, most of whom are Russian-speakers, or abandon them to avoid giving Washington the invasion it seeks to prompt the harsh U.S. response.
If Russia did not intervene it would see massive refugees, destruction of the Minsk agreements that would give Donbass autonomy, and a hostile Ukrainian force at its borders. Putin would also have hell to pay from the Duma that has been moving legislation to annex the provinces to Russia, a move resisted so far by Putin. If they became part of Russia, Moscow would argue it was no invasion at all.
Political analyst Alexander Mercouris told CN Live! on Wednesday that he thought an offensive unlikely because of the low morale of senior Ukrainian military. But, he said:
“If there were an offensive in eastern Ukraine, Russia would back the militia … and if there were a chance of a Ukrainian breakthrough, I think the Russians would respond, and respond decisively. I don’t think this is speculation. If you look at the statements that Russian officials have made, including by [Foreign Minister Sergei] Lavrov, including to a great extent Putin himself, I think it’s absolutely clear what the Russian response would be.”
But that, as long as Donbass remains part of Ukraine, would be the invasion Washington has been screaming about and much of the world has been prepared to believe is about to happen. And it would mean that Russia had taken the bait and fallen into the U.S. trap.
Precedents for a Trap
April 18,1991: Demolished vehicles line Highway 80, also known as the “Highway of Death”, the route fleeing Iraqi forces took as they retreated fom Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm. (Joe Coleman,/Air Force Magazine,/Wikimedia Commons)
There are precedents for this. One is the clear signal given to Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein by April Glaspie, the U.S. ambassador to Iraq, in 1990 that the U.S. would do nothing to stop him from invading Kuwait. She told Saddam that the U.S. had no “opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait.” But it wasn’t just Glaspie that left the door open to Kuwait. The Washington Post reported on Sept. 17, 1990:
“In the same week that Ambassador April Glaspie met a menacing tirade from Saddam with respectful and sympathetic responses, Secretary of State James Baker’s top public affairs aide, Margaret Tutwiler, and his chief assistant for the Middle East, John Kelly, both publicly said that the United States was not obligated to come to Kuwait’s aid if the emirate were attacked. They also failed to voice clear support for Kuwait’s territorial integrity in the face of Saddam’s threats.”
Following the 1979 Islamist revolution in Teheran that overthrew the U.S.-backed Shah, the United States sought to contain Iran by supplying billions of dollars in aid, intelligence, dual-use technology and training to Iraq, which invaded Iran in 1980, spurring an eight-year long brutal war. The devastating conflict ended in a virtual stalemate in 1988 after the loss of one to two million people.
Though neither side won the war, Saddam’s military remained strong enough to be a menace to U.S. interests in the region. The trap was to allow Saddam to invade Kuwait to give the U.S. a reason to destroy Iraq’s military. For instance, retreating Iraqi soldiers were essentially shot in the back in the massacre on the Highway of Death.
The ‘Afghan Trap’
Another U.S. trap was to lure the Soviet Union into Afghanistan in 1979. In a 1998 interview with Le Nouvel Observateur, Brzezinski admitted that the C.I.A. essentially set a trap for Moscow by arming mujahiddin to fight the Soviet-backed government in Kabul. He said:
“According to the official version of history, CIA aid to the Mujahiddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President Carter signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet military intervention.
He then explained that the reason for the trap was to bring down the Soviet Union, (much as the U.S. today would like to bring down Putin’s Russia.) Brzezinski said:
“That secret operation was an excellent idea. It had the effect of drawing the Russians into the Afghan trap and you want me to regret it? The day that the Soviets officially crossed the border, I wrote to President Carter, essentially: ‘We now have the opportunity of giving to the USSR its Vietnam war.’ Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a war that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that bought about the demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.”
Brzezinski said he also had no regrets that financing the mujahideen spawned terrorist groups like al-Qaeda. “What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?,” he asked.
So if the U.S. is setting a similar trap in Ukraine for Moscow, will it work?
“I think the Russians are smarter than Saddam,” said military analyst Scott Ritter. “Any Ukrainian incursion into Donbass would be handled by the pro-Russian militias, backed by Russian forces. I don’t think Russia would move on Ukraine unless NATO membership was invoked.”
It remains to be seen whether Russia steps into a U.S. bear trap in Ukraine.
Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and numerous other newspapers. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He can be reached at [email protected] and followed on Twitter @unjoe
Thank you, Mr. Lauria for the facts and context which prism puts the Russia, Ukraine, NATO dilemma into sharp focus. In an age of the “infinite growth alongside finite resources,” one looks with awe and disbelief at the U.S./NATO provoking of Russia in the Donbass coal region: Donetsk and Luhansk regions. The references to historic, war-provoking actions taken by April Glasbie and Zbigniew Brzezinski, names and actions neither reported nor contextualized by U.S. mainstream media, portends more political illiteracy among common Americans and more tragedy for all.
Question: Who/What first instigated the ongoing further global destabilizing chaos taking place in the Ukraine – Eastern Europe?
Answer: The U.S. of course, by its interference over its dissatisfaction with the outcome of a sovereign countries democratic election result; causing the duly elected President to flee to Russia for protection; and Russia’s legitimate reactive steps to counter such interference on its immediate border.
Based on the events of 911 and the 20 year aftermath Zbigniew Brzezinski’s crystal ball doesn’t seem to have been capable of seeing far enough into the future.
In addition that story is out, the low down dirty underhanded ploy the US State Department used on Saddam to induce the invasion of Kuwait leading to the 1991 massacre of Saddam’s army. An event very typical of Bush 41’s CIA mentality. Bush is much more likely to have told Zbigniew what he wanted and Zbigniew gave back to him in writting. And that didn’t happen that long ago.
The lesson here seems to be never underestimate the terrible behavior of a low down, dirty low life SOB. I say this because 41 fit the bill.
I believe Putin is much more savvy than his predecessors when it comes to U.S. actions. Big difference there.
U.S. failures in Afghanistan and Iraq are something Putin must have thoroughly enjoyed.
It is about time Americans realized that our countries obsession with arming the world ad infinitum must be broken. Some one needs to tell Biden it’s time.
Biden needs to ask himself if the CIA has the “Bear” or the Bear has him, because the CIA isn’t talking and we would never know for sure.
Could be the best thing to come of this affair is for Putin to reveal the U.S. for what it is. A bully and trouble maker, so far he is doing a good job of it.
Thanks CN
Thanks for this highly informative analysis.
It seems to me there is another important player in this drama. Russia has vast natural resources, and a banking cartel in the City of London, with an extension in Wall Street, has historically used UK and US militaries to plunder other countries’ natural resources. India, South Africa, South America, and the Middle East are examples. Through their control of the corporate media (necessitating independent news outlets like CN), and overwhelming political money, they control the minds of citizens, governments, and thus their militaries.
In addition to using war to plunder resources, another of their historical profit centers is war itself. Back in 1791 Tom Paine wrote, “That there are men in all countries who get their living by war, and keeping up the quarrels of nations, is as shocking as it is true”.
Robert Parry wrote a couple of very good articles on how neocons engineered the US coup provocation in Ukraine in order to sabotage US-Russian cooperation in the Middle East, keeping up the conflicts there.
And there are interesting cases to be made that these bankers also engineered WWI and WWII. If so, another war in Europe may be on their drawing board.
In any case, their political and media puppets cannot be expected to act rationally. They will serve their masters’ agenda. And they will not tell us what that agenda is.
They not only profited from WWI and WWII, they engineered them.
The history of bankers and Sullivan and Cromwell’s involvement in WWI, the Versailles Treaty and debt peonage that left Germany to face a Weimer moment and eventually fascism seems almost modern history now. Funding fascism is now the norm.
The Ukraine is over far more than Russia. It is about the US, the mother island, Stratfor and the military .
Intermarian
hXXp://www.derechos.org/nizkor/biblio/intermarium.html
A pre and post war concept of the Earth Island.
Zbigniew Brzezinski’s doctrine of controlling Eurasia by controlling the “pivot point” of Ukraine.
Fundamental to this analysis is the concept of the Earth Island or World Island as it is sometimes known.
Brzezinski, in turn, draws on the geopolitical theories of Sir Halford Mackinder, and, later contemporary Intermarium adovcates such as Alexandros Petersen. (For more about Petersen, see below.)
Stretching from the Straits of Gibraltar, all across Europe, most of the Middle East, Eurasia, Russia, China and India, that stretch of land: comprises most of the world’s land mass; contains most of the world’s population and most of the world’s natural resources (including oil and natural gas.) Geopoliticians have long seen controlling that land mass as the key to world domination.
This new usage of the Intermarium concept has been revived by Stratfor, a private intelligence think tank whose customers include large corporations as well as government agencies such as the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, the Marines, and the Defense Intelligence Agency.
The earliest Stratfor email mentioning the notion of Intermarium dates from 2009 and advanced the concept in the context of Poland’s solidarity with Georgia following the August 2008 war with Russia.[86] A total of 394 Stratfor emails up to December 2011 (leaked by Wikileaks) contain the term “Intermarium.”[87]
Since around 2012, Stratfor has also used the term publicly. In 2012, the Hungarian-born geopolitical analyst and advisor George Friedman, founder of Stratfor and still at the time its head, was vocally promoting an Intermarium project in which Poland should distance itself from the EU and form a bloc with other Central and Eastern European countries between Germany and Russia. In a video from the European Forum of New Ideas in October of that year, he stated:
“Poland must now depend on itself. Why? It’s a nation of 38 million, it has a vibrant economy, it has highly intelligent educated people, and it is rising. I will put a more radical idea forward to you, which I think is a fundamental one that we get from General Pi?sudski, the Intermarium, [which] basically says we are caught between Germany and Russia, and that stinks […][88]”
hXXps://covertactionmagazine.com/2019/03/23/imagined-geographies-of-central-and-eastern-europe-the-concept-of-intermarium/
Very compelling and new for me. By “cartels” what exactly does this word describe? Index funds, majority equity ownership of specific companies of the variety of defense contractors, what we would loosely term as a market manifestation of “Deep State”? (A term currently much too loosely used). Would not some of these Russians themselves be among Putin’s Sanctum Sanctorum? Admittedly, this description defines strict capitalist spirit: money and its preservation through use of any power at its disposal.
Some say that military history has 1 lesson: Don’t Invade Russia!
If there’s a second lesson, it’s Don’t Invade Afghanistan, either.
Third lesson: No One Learns from History.
Tnx Joe CN continued TruTel… Scotts OODA Loop xtreme Value NuInfo.
As 1 MSM NowDemos reluctance2 visit “Beach” (AdRev not Issue) EARTH should be GRATEFUL4 Process beginning!
I don’t mean to be frivolous… but…
“They said the video was also set to include faked Ukrainian military equipment, Turkish-made drones and actors playing Russian-speaking mourners.””
Does this mean The New York Times has become the Alex Jones of journalism?
The New York Times is the propaganda arm of the United States military/industrial/intelligence complex. It always has been.
Without power for 13 hours yesterday, so just reading this now, Saturday morning.
Not just a reaction to the Editor’s (Joe?) reply, but something that has been on my mind for some time. I do not agree that those calling the shots need favorable approval of a majority of their citizens to carry out any government action. As “proof” I’ll again refer to the mid-term election of 2006 (which I’ve done repeatedly): that election we witnessed a popular electoral repudiation of the GW Bush administration and Republican control of the legislature. Hardly had the polls closed than Democratic leadership proclaimed that impeachment was “off the table” (a national course correction that may have completely changed the course of history.) Not only that, but the electoral motivation AGAINST the Iraq fiasco and ongoing GWB admin military adventurism was completely ignored by the newly elected Democratic majority.
Of course, NOTHING is single-faceted; that election saw the even greater perversion of the Democratic Party by a very sizable number of blue dogs, many of whom reside there still today. This is not to say that the D’s without the BD’s would be less reprehensible.
Gillens and Page showed us the truth – via unimpeachable statistical analysis – that most of us already knew to exist. A follow-up study confirmed their conclusions and, if anything, painted an even bleaker assessment of US citizens’ loss of agency.
If there is concern for winning the approval of a population then it is my assessment that population, or rather populations, are European. There is where much political ju jitsu is being applied, and it is what is decided there which will decide the outcome of this moment. US citizen opinion is irrelevant.
I see a much more serious and immediate issue with the Democrats and I don’t have a dog in that fight. It’s a difference between left and right fascism to me
However from my perspective as project manager I announced the silent beginning of a US civil war.
It seems that, per a recent poll, 70% of Democrats would like 80% of Republicans interned for lack of Covid compliance. Their confidence is boundless and their contempt for your constitution perverse.
In typical truly incompetent leadership and planning they are just winging it. I think the Republicans need to take this seriously.
I think it will be a bloodbath with the Democrats on the losing side if this continues. I have no projection on when this escalates, such things are invariably triggered by single events.
If I gave an impression of partisanism, then my comment was poorly composed. Today, in 2022 both US political parties are owned by the same wealthy powerful interests. The point is, we are organized as a representative democracy (as opposed to something reminiscent of the traditional Swiss, or by direct referendum on all matters) and yet both parties seldom represent or legislate along lines in agreement with public opinion, needs, and least of all – aspirations.
The Viet Nam War was a bipartisan pursuit, as was the first Gulf War and absolutely was the second. All of the lies, phony accusations, claims and corrupted “intelligence” was meant to give cover to the Congress (supposedly our representatives) to approve the second AUMF. To this day no-one has been held to account for what was not only the worst foreign policy decision in our history, but illegal according to international law and therefor a crime against humanity – the invasion, destruction, and occupation of Iraq.
But none of this should be surprising. Almost all through the ages who have contemplated democracy realized that it may fail along the lines so clearly marked in the US today. I’m not arguing against democracy, but I don’t have better ideas than anyone else how to make it work better. And what would that look like? GHWB embracing a Peace Dividend instead of what he actually did in stating that there would be none? I only chose that as an example because it was an inflection point in history. There has been very little deviation in the character and direction of US policy (post 1945) no matter which party controls the WH or Congress.
The PNAC document of 2000 heralded the most recent – perhaps final – coup by the MICIMAT against a representative US government. I don’t consider it hyperbole to refer to what has happened as a coup. When GWB addressed the joint Congress and announced a generational conflict I was fairly certain that the US would pursue aggressive war for at least the next 50 years, and here we are 5 presidential terms later still at it, with no end in sight.
I hope the European people are better informed or have more agency than we are. Or perhaps, better informed with more agency than Americans.
I think people here are sick and tired of the lies and the wars but may not have recognized yet that what they feel – that the wars have not served this country at all, have devastating consequences and have robbed the treasury – that feeling makes sense because those lies and those wars have, all along, been a “racket” and served only the for profit war machine, not some grand illusion.
If we considered that all the jobs tied in some way to the Pentagon, could, with better planning, be compounded into more and better jobs which would help us shift away from for profit military boondoggle spending and help us achieve a sustainable, stable economy, including a shift to renewables, clean energy, Medicare4All , a function infrastructure and so on.
The glaringly obvious precedent I see here is Poland, 1939. Nowadays it is the ultimate in political incorrectness, that will get the heretic instantly condemned as an antisemitic neonazi, but the reality is that London encouraged the Polish military dictatorship to provoke Germany so Britain would have what seemed like a good reason to try a second time to eliminate her most feared European economic rival. Whitehall declared war so precipitously in the mistaken belief that the act would bring about an immediate coup against Hitler (they actually bungled that opportunity in 1938), or failing that, that the new war would repeat the stalemate of the Great War, with the Royal Navy again starving the enemy into submission – with FDR’s enthusiastic (and quite illegal) pledges of assistance. To save the empire, the arrogant fools destroyed their empire. And a case can be made that elements in Washington schemed that Britain could be manipulated into doing just that. Many Americans understand their country’s flagrant imperialist ambitions and actions in the years up to 1917, and after 1945, but for some reason find it impossible to consider that those same intentions motivated our participation in the German wars as well, with the greatest prize of all, domination at last of England herself, as its objective.
We learned to play “the great game” all too well from our mother, the ever “perfidious Albion.” Our State Department is playing with the same fire today, unable to conceive that they too might be subject to the law of unintended consequences, in a world in which the balance of power, like formerly great Britain’s in 1939, is no longer theirs to control.
Interesting thesis; can you supply links to citations to support the Whitehall belief and the FDR pledges?
A cited source with cited details would be interesting to read.
“… the reality is that London encouraged the Polish military dictatorship to provoke Germany so Britain would have what seemed like a good reason to try a second time to eliminate her most feared European economic rival.”
I would like to see more evidence for such claim like
1. what actions or statements of Polish government in 1939 were “provoking Germany”?
2. explanation how the “phony war” on the Western front, French and British forces staying put from September 3, 1939 to May 10, 1940 (when Werhmacht invaded the Netherlands, Belgium and France) was consistent with a plan to “eliminate economic rival”?
Sadly, I must agree, for I find much to love and admire about British culture (science and the arts) outside the political sphere. Examine the preparatory education of those who emerge as American political elites occupying positions of power. Examine certain curricula, the instructors of the curricula, the milieu and social culture in the elite U.S. private schools and private universities. examine their boards of directors. Ask what it is that most Americans aspire to outside that web whose aspirations have little to do with political or social-historical literacy, and you will understand the cynical and deprived political underclass in the cyber age of distraction, as well as the narcissistic, meritocratic classes who believe in, or at least settle for violent, imperial strategies–their conventional wisdom. An added explanation of our condition may be more fully explained by our current experience of social anxiety instigated by a world population of more than 7.9 billion people in an age of unacknowledged diminishing resources and expectations.
It sickens this American veteran,from a family full of veterans from my father to three other brothers who served that my country could hold the great Russian people in such contempt as to want to make them suffer even more after what they went through in the Twentieth century. The sacrifice of these great people is manifold in defeating fascism and the saving of thousands of American veterans lives in WW1 and WW2. The sheer number of Russian dead in WW2 alone, 27-45million, according to what historian you choose to believe compared to American dead 403 thousand total for both European and Pacific theaters should make one stop and think, haven’t they suffered enough?
Gary Swallows: A person of dignity naturally acknowledges and respects the efforts of others. The America people have a hard time respecting the efforts and sacrifices of anyone. This is perhaps because most Americans make few sacrifices,at least compared to most people in the world, while feeling entitled to everything. And the richest and most privileged most of all.
I appreciate your thoughtful comment, Gary Swallows. And I can’t imagine the emotional pain that you and your family must feel because of the shallowness of purpose, corruption, unconstitutional abuse wrt serving the people of this country especially those who have given their lives to serve. Witness the foreign policy that serves only the interests of the for profit MIC (now MICIMATT, as Ray McGovern describes it).
As I understand it, people who serve pledge to defend this country from invasion. No one is threatening the U.S. even though we use that lie to “justify” diverting tax dollars into a black hole of F35’s and catastrophic wars against weak countries for the short term interests of powerful elite corporations and billionaire investors and too big to fail banks.
The people of this country are not respected, including, sadly the people who serve who, if we were serious about climate change, would be brought home to help us shift to a sustainable economy.
My only contribution to what you say about the Russia people and why its such a crime to demonize those people is also their huge contribution to the arts. Back when I followed this decades ago, maybe even today, Russian ballet was artistically, technically, otherworldly. Their composers and musicians made huge contributions to the arts.
Even Kruschev honored music above politics when he was asked by the judges of the Tchaikovsky competition in 1958 what they should do when the audience loved Van Clyburn’s wonderful performance and he said – give it to the best; so they gave it to Van Cliburn who played Tchaikovsky’s First Piano Concerto.
The Russians love the performing arts so much.
.
Van Cliburn did his best to serve as an ambassador between the two countries based on their shared love of the musical arts.
This American hero would be devastated by what’s going on today – valuing profits over peace and the arts and sustainability.
It’s all heartbreaking and enraging.
And I believe that the current lack of trust of our institutions may have helped con man Donald Trump win in 2016 and lies at the feet of the corrupt Democratic and Republican Parties.
It’s indeed a great pity, Garry, that the American Governing elites continuously demonise the Russian people, the two countries could have formed a bond to the great benefit of both, the coupling of the Russian natural resources with the imaginative inventiveness of your people would have produced wonders not just for the two peoples, but for the world at large.
Considering the mountains of past deceit and complete lack of morals exhibited by their self-declared American enemies and Washington’s constantly threatened (by America) “allies,” Russia had better take into consideration another scenario, namely that Washington will impose these promised harsh sanctions regardless of what Russia does in the geopolitical realm, whether that involves the battlefield or not. After all, most of the scores of such sanctions already levied against Russia have been totally gratuitous–absolutely without cause, such as the knee-jerk accusations of “meddling” in our elections, which is a skill we ourselves have practiced without equal since the founding of the republic. I don’t think any of our contrived “enemies” are even capable of fathoming the depths of American political perdition.
Russia must always be cautious and conservative in any moves it makes because the leadership there feels an obligation to the quality of life that its citizens can enjoy, and which they deserve considering how much they have suffered as a consequence of America’s relentless bully boy tactics to sabotage everything that country does, nearly all of which is totally innocuous to America’s hegemonic goals. America is so paranoid it’s kept a long list of such counties it has found expedient to demonise for basically all of my 75 years of life on the planet. Washington, in contrast, never considers the implications to its citizens (most of the audience here) for repeatedly squandering its national treasure (our hard-earned tax dollars) to impose its will upon the world with its reckless and morally objectionable “forever wars” scattered across the entire globe, a mechanism responsible for the deaths of millions (mostly innocent) and the displacement of multi-millions (also mostly innocent but observably disruptive of society itself in America’s feeble flunkies in its NATO scheme to pass on the costs, blame and moral responsibility to hapless countries that still cannot afford to say “no” even after 77 years of occupation by the hegemon), and this is to say nothing of the 800 American military bases infesting the planet along with its load of thermonuclear devices that it trots around to be as madly intimidating as possible. Just about any scenario that could bring this juggernaut without a legitimate purpose down would be a boon to the whole world and a solution to many dozens of specific crises deliberately generated around the whole freaking world by Washington’s evil geniuses.
The US cannot go to war or impose sanctions without taking American public opinion into account and thus without a public justification. Even if the justification is totally fake, like WMD in Iraq or Russiagate, all that matters is whether a majority of Americans believe it. So it would be difficult to impose these massive new sanctions promised on Russia willy-nilly without a reason. The reason the American people have been given is a Russian invasion of Ukraine. It would be hard to impose them without it.
I do not know what proportion of Americans agree with very cruel sanctions on Venezuela, I suspect that vast majority does not care, and the impact of those sanctions on their lives is minor. But “massive” sanctions on Russia would lead to a trade war that would accelerate inflation in USA in a very visible manner, and perhaps cause multiple, hard to solve, problems with American industry. Directly, this would include aerospace grade titanium indispensable to produce Boeing airplanes, but if sanctions would include China, for providing alternative payment system for Russian exports and imports, supply chains could be shredded on both sides of the Pacific. I am sure that USA would survive, but I would be less optimistic about Democratic Party.
OTOH, if USA would tolerate workarounds for financial sanctions, the Administration would look week and ineffective, the favorite Trumpian slogan, again, a very bad prognosis for the Democratic Party.
Sure, the current shortage of raw materials will not last forever, but that may be skimpy solace for the end of liberalism (lesser evil?) in USA.
China has President Xi & Russia has a Leader in Putin, who doesn’t fall into the brainless & stupid traps that America amateurishly telegraphs? Putin is not dumb or stupid, unlike America’s idiotic POTUS’s! That’s why Putin is hated, despised & demonised because of his intellect & capacity for rational thought? Putin is no drunken buffoon like Boris Yeltsin or a pushover like Mikhail Gorbachev? Putin’s sane, tranquil diplomacy & calm leadership is in direct contrast to the American leadership, now under the bumbling Biden, which is a insane, irrational, unhinged, hysterical & insane shambles that’s running around the World with its hair on fire? America falls into traps of its own making, all Russia has to do is sit back with a big tub of popcorn & watch America’s devious schemes implode & collapse in on itself like a Blackhole!
… while Ukrainian forces devastate Donbass. Pass another bowl of popcorn.
The key objective of this continuing and rather risky charade has nothing to do with Ukraine, the country’s security, NATO membership, or even the containment of Russia which Putin’s talking about, however worthwhile these aims may be, the last one in particular, the Holy Grail of it is more specific, it’s the Nord-2 pipeline, better still, the Full Monty of Russia’s supplies of fossil fuels to Germany and the whole of Europe. That’s what is targeted, what has to end, be cut off, destroyed. Energy is the bloodstream of any economy, it’s the one ingredient without which life itself cannot be, who controls it controls the rest of everything, the sovereignty of any country is underwritten by its energy sources.
One would expect not an invasion of Donbas, not yet anyway, not even a false flag op that can be figured out, may even be turned against the instigators, rather one would expect another dose of Novichok to find its usefulness, it’s one of the best known brands worldwide, it has been used by the ‘evil Putin’ twice, cost Russia dearly, it may become useful again, If that were to happen, the target were to be a reasonably well known Ukrainian figure that can be disposed of, if only temporarily, would any European country, including Germany, still have the guts to continue buying oil and gas from Russia?
Overstated. The pipeline is one element in this but hardly the only one. Global dominance is the overriding motive.
If Russia were to respond to a Ukrainian attack on Donbas with stand-off weapons (e.g. artillery, missiles etc), would that be considered an invasion? I should think that is all that would be required to settle the matter, and maybe not even that.
The US would certainly try to construe it that way.
Joe Biden’s hyper-ambitious neocon-administered State Department cabal are probably really enjoying themselves, can’t you just imagine their thrill-seeking, appetite for vengeance and danger personalities this amped up and quivering, and being so central to the world news focus in this moment?
Appetite for destruction I call it, all amygdalas and id unleashed.
“On Thursday U.S. intelligence leaked…” U.S. intelligence. Ponder that with me. Go where it leads your own autonomous intelligence.
Between our rabid State Department—who likely and delusionally imo think their actions considered and measured in this high stakes environment–and our “my way or the highway” U.S. intelligence proven time and again clustrfck, I have to wonder if they’ve ever truly observed a mountaintop minute snowball in the proper meteorological conditions become an unstoppable chain reaction that culminates in a massive avalanche? It happens all the time in nature.
Our wizards in Washington seem to think that “I’ve got this thing,” or considering their mindset of hubris— “Hold my beer, watch this..!” As if everything is going to play out in a sequence of their heady choosing. After all, in their secreted big table cloistering they’ve sat for how many hundreds of hours analyzing President Putin’s psychology and his staff as to action-reaction, the odds of this then sequentially following that, “A” inevitably leading to “B” and then according to their notional rules, ultimately to “checkmate.”
If only.
Here in Life and Death world, playing for all of the marbles this time, with survival of Russia’s entire foreseeable future at stake, this moment appears to be actually favoring Russia’s military tech, offensive AND defensive. Now I do not discount the U.S. potentially having advanced secret weaponry with which to counter at least some of Russia’s advances, but to my wee knowledge their hypersonic missile defensive weapons make ICBM’s a very vulnerable asset, i.e. as in stopping a major part of our offensive arsenal well before it can reach its presumed target. I stand ready to be corrected if this is not so.
So let us now take into account Russia’s Poseidon system—the nuclear-powered torpedo of vast mega-tonnage designed to send massive tsunamis against major U.S. coastal targets such as our ports, low-lying U.S. Naval assets like Chesapeake Bay’s Annapolis area, straight up the Potomac, New York / New Jersey/Florida/Texas/California/Washington state/Oregon (Columbia River) Strait of Juan de Fuca—Seattle to Vancouver, B.C.—let’s just say a target-rich environment coast-to-coast.
Do our wizards know conclusively whether or not (likely(?)-unlikely(?)-“The Lady or The Tiger?” these fearsome weapons are already deployed—thanks to their consummate and obdurate belligerence?
Or, have they factored into their sure-thing-foolproof conclusions that Russia actually knows the score. that the relentless drive of the West to subsume and dominate Russia is the 100 year plus goal of the West—that is the UK and U.S. in their forever imperial ambitions?
So would it be considered asymmetrical to the U.S. State Department-“Intelligence” Comintern that Russia just might seek to take care of business that would otherwise be left to future Russian leadership as an ongoing burden to bear in this gravitas-laden moment?
Just saying: Our leadership has us playing with fire. And a shit-ton of raging cold and radioactive water.
“The Lady or the Tiger?” Here’s hoping we’re still maintaining normal comms by the beginning of next week. Because too many things we take for granted? They ain’t necessarily so.
Ukraine Oligarchs include Victor Pinchuk, a billionaire, who seems to be an unethical businessman to say the least, contributed between $10 and $25 million to the Clinton Foundation.from 1996 to 2005. Ukraine Mafia, a separate breed, include six men who have dual citizenships with Israel and a third with Switzerland. February 2017, former CIA clandestine operative Cofer Black (1995-2005). was appointed Ukraines Burisma Oil & Gas Company’s the Board of Directors. Burisma has contributed to The Atlantic Council. Additional funding from all of our defense contractors, State Department, Energy Department, Marine Corp, Army Future Studies Group, UAE, et al. Members of Atlantic’s board of advisors include Generals Scowcroft, James Jones, Charles Wald, Petraues, McMaster, and James Cartwright plus CIA Mike Morell, Michael Hayden.
An excellent article in which Joe Lauria offers some penetrating insights about the Ukraine issue that many political observers and anti-war activists will find useful to understand the way the US rulers may have laid a trap for Russia to fall into that serves their unrestrained global power and domination.
The calculations aren’t really any different depending on who starts what.
Russia has an overwhelming military advantage and an army that has practical experience from Syria and Georgia to draw on.
A few weapons shipments won’t change that fact, not that Russia could easily roll into Berlin if they wanted to.
Russia is also significantly more sanctions proof today, thanks to China and India.
Any war would have devestating results for the American and especially the European economy, and would be deeply unpopular, so you’d expect Europe to try an intervene as quickly as possible.
Biden might come to his senses and realize that a war, and a divided NATO, is the last thing he needs in an election year where his party is already poised to lose.
The Evil Empire operates by projecting its own evil deeds on others.
What was planned was an invasion of the Donbas by the Ukies, courtesy of all the shiny new military freebies from the US/ UK taxpayer and the drones from the Turks, followed by ethnic cleansing of the region by the Nazi militias if successful.
The propaganda video story was just intended to discredit likely Azov atrocities in advance.
The Lugenpresse could be relied upon to peddle whatever propaganda narrative they were fed.
If successful, this would be a humiliation for Putin and Russia and a gain for the Evil Empire.
If, as is more likely, this all ended in another Debaltsevo type disaster for the Ukies, who cares? They are just so much cannon fodder in the greater scheme of things. Russia can be targeted for “aggression” with all out hybrid war.
Russia and China need to insulate themselves completely from western aggression, and co opt all those states in their cross hairs. Iran, Venezuela, major oil producers. Even smaller states like Cuba, Bolivia, Sudan, DPRK, can make a significant contribution to an alternative bloc covering much of the earth’s surface and a substantial proportion of its population and resources.
You’ve drawn no lines to or from the most salient truths in this story: a). the Russian annexation of Crimea b). The many active duty Battalion Tactical Groups who have been fighting inside the Ukraine since 2014. c) The written proposal from the Kremlin to NATO that clearly states their goal of reversing the European integration and influence over former eastern bloc nations. (There is even a condition that NATO agree to suspend military assistance to NATO members who have joined since 1995…essentially all of the eastern bloc). Your litany of “whatifs” don’t align to the plain spoken and documented realities on the ground.
We have published numerous articles over the past weeks on the draft treaty proposals from Russia to NATO and the U.S. Russia’s troop deployments on its own soil can be seen as a negotiating tactic to send a message to the US and NATO that it’s serious this time about stopping NATO expansion but also to Kiev to not move on Donbass.
Please provide evidence that Russian Battalion Tactical Groups are deployed anywhere in Ukraine.
Crimea is Russia. The people of Crimea voted for it. That ship sailed into the Black Sea eight years ago.
Couldn’t Russia pre-empt the trap of being dragged into helping the two predominantly Russian-speaking provinces by doing something similar to what they did with Crimea: simply annex them following a referendum showing they’d rather be part of Russia?
Destroy the Ukrainian military from the rear fowards, troops at the front would be left cut off and paralysed at the mercy of the seperatist states. Russia will have a plan and it will not need to invade to accomplish it, stand off weapons will suffice.
What a great synopsis of years of maneuvers and machinations. The US never (?) does anything for altruistic reasons. The concern over Ukraine boils down to a distraction for Russia and that meno Pans Russia can no longer block US moves against Assad. But crediting Biden for any current moves is like crediting a six year old for diplomatic prowess.
What would it take for Putin to agree to and to implement the legislation to annex the Donetsk and Luhansk republics?
Since the UN recognizes those territories as part of Ukraine, and there’s signed agreements from Russia stating that they’re part of the Ukraine… it’s much more than a legislative matter within Russia’s Duma.
I brought up legislation only because they were mentioned in the article.
Care to elaborate further? Would a Crimea process (i.e. local voter approval/request) be necessary? sufficient?
Bizarrely, since NATO’s rules forbid the entrance of nations with territorial disputes, a clean solution to the “conflict” in Ukraine isn’t in neither Russia’s nor NATO’s interest.
Of course, in a sane world a referendum monitored by neutral parties would be held in the areas in question, perhaps followed by minor adjustments of population or borders, and the results would be respected.
Alas, we live in clownworld. Where an administration is warmongering over a NATO-membership of a country that isn’t even eligible for membership.
And where a stooge of a president who still thinks it’s 1995 (literally much of the time, probably) pretends to be in power, while admitting that he has no idea what the other side wants or will do.
Are you suggesting their is no such NATO-entry-blocking, official Kiev dispute over the Crimea annexation?
The rules can be changed, Victor, they are not a part of the Ten Commandments.
Sure the rules can be changed.
(The prohibition against allowing countries with unsettled territorial disputes to become NATO members, seems far too… Sane)
But is it likely that they’ll be changed?
NATO is already split on Ukraine: France and Germany aren’t too keen on a conflict. Like Leia’s Italy, Greece, Bulgaria and others. And of course the black sheep of NATO: Turkey.
(Ironically, one of the only members of NATO aside from the US that has a functioning military bigger than battalion sized formations.)
A NATO split (or just further fragmentation) would be something the warmongers and uniparty would try to avoid at all costs. The possibility of never again selling military hardware to countries like Bulgaria and Greece is surely something they’d regret even more than missing out on a war with Russia.
Victor,
Could you please supply the location of the rule in question, about nations with territorial disputes?
This is not a challenge.
I originally remember hearing/reading it here, but I believe I’ve found it.
hxxps://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/official_texts_24733.htm
“States which have ethnic disputes or external territorial disputes, including irredentist claims, or internal jurisdictional disputes must settle those disputes by peaceful means in accordance with OSCE principles. Resolution of such disputes would be a factor in determining whether to invite a state to join the Alliance.”
Thanks.
This has to be one of the most incisive and useful analyses of the Ukraine crisis I’ve read.
The long and the short of the matter is: The cold war didn’t end in 1989, but continued to be fought by other means, overtly and, since Obama, covertly. And instead of a responsible media, we have the Ministry of Truth. The fact that there are still thinking journalists like Matt Lee out there (not to mention the small vanguard of real journalists such as Joe Lauria, a very endangered species) gives some small reason for hope.
Putin: “Its main goal is to contain Russia’s development. This is the whole point.”
Russian propaganda? Prima facie truth?
Was Smedley Butler wrong? Was Ike?
I’d be willing to put more faith in diplomacy if it had changed the overall downward trajectory to any lasting degree within the last quarter century (at least).
Looks to me as if the so-called diplomatic corps has gone the way of most other corpses of so-called executive professionals who zombify every rank & chamber and become politicized (either self or 6ways induced), dismissive of any further need for honest, impartial appraisals of most critical matters (just look at the security agencies, the military, the courts, the media etc., etc.).
As your political analysts are fond of reminding us, words and how they’re used are important in gleaning intentions. Thank you for employing some appropriate ones to this current scenario, CN. This report is much appreciated.
“Looks to me as if the so-called diplomatic corps has gone the way of most other corpses of so-called executive professionals who zombify every rank & chamber and become politicized (either self..”
When the State Dept hires ex CIA people like the hapless Ned Price, doing his imitation of Colin Powell prenting “evidence”
This is the purpose for which the American people voted Biden in over Trump? Why would any American citizen ever vote for a Democrat again..? And abroad, why would Europe or any rational government, notably excluding the banally led UK, ever support the US again..?
A leader, whether an individual or nation, is only a leader because he or she inspires followers. A leader without followers is simply a mirage. With all this elite narrative manipulation on public display, with the depth of ineptitude, viciousness, and utter lack of concern for anyone or thing beyond its own self-serving interest, the Biden administration is providing the concrete evidence that America’s decline into insanity is not a product of Trump but is America itself, controlled by its elite interests. Biden is even now putting the final nail in the coffin of US leadership in the world, a whimpering and ignoble death by its own hand. This is the inevitable outcome when you elevate ideological fools.
Nothing is more urgent than removing these fools from office. They are stupid and dangerous and if America clings to them, shun it too.
Amen to that. 100%.
JD.
John Doran: Thank you. I certainly wish it were not true but I have watched closely since 2016 and the “DP” has only doubled down in their disdain for the public including their own base and in their distance from democracy.
I’ve never seen a case where rewarding bad behavior changes it for the better, and, bingo!, here we are with Biden & Co. And so I believe it is up to the public to “just say no” to another 70 years of Cold War horror and throw them out while there is still a chance.
Lots of talk about the D’s running Michelle Obama at the next election. Think that one through.
Foggy World: Thanks. I’ve heard something about that too. I thought perhaps that they might also try Obama himself again and if things go South, I imagine that HRC would also make a bid. But since this conflict is all coming out of the “DP,” the Ukrainian coup in 2014, for example, was shepherded by Nuland on Obama’s watch, I am unwilling to reward the “DP’s” abhorrent behavior regardless of who they run. It just seems like another bait & switch. I certainly don’t remember Biden running on the platform of “Well, instead of leading the way on climate mitigation and making a better future for the entire world, my administration is going to create a new Cold War, dooming the international cooperation that we desperately need to survive, instead.” Nonetheless, here we are. Thus my disdain at the prospect of more “American leadership” in the world.
NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER THAN THE TRUTH.
citizen v: A little vague. Which part..?
‘Further than the truth’ or ‘further from the truth’
I think you mean the latter perhaps, which in any case is also wrong .)
Perfectly stated. We have clowns on parade masquerading as leaders, defenders of freedom and an independent free press. These are the people Orwell warned us about in his prescient novels.
Lois Gagnon: Thank you. Spot on with Orwell. It is frightening how true his words have proven to be. Even more so because it is happening right in front of our eyes and we are like frozen spectators.
UK happy to
play its role as Airstrip One
first to be nuked
This most fraught epoch in American history since WWII all started under the great betrayer Barack Obama and has, through pure politics, devolved to possibly the worst man ever for the job, Joe Biden. The Democrats and their co-conspirators in the quest for full spectrum dominance over the entire planet, the Republicans, are focused first and foremost upon destroying Russia’s future like the whole world depends on this evil deed and for some reason would actually thank them for this madness. Frankly, there was no good reason for Washington to deliberately and methodically destabilise Ukraine, overthrow its legitimate elected government and replace it with a stridently fascistic leadership hostile to its neighbor Russia on every conceivable issue. The icing on the cake was Washington’s intent to draft Ukraine into NATO and seize Russia’s only warm water naval port on the Black Sea. Russia has resisted those American aggressions as a matter of simple survival as a nation state. Now the last of the high-minded American news organisations is actually discussing Washington’s potential tactics to trap and seriously wound or even destabilise and fragment the present Russian state, now called the Russian Federation.
Just why, by all that’s not yet totally FUBAR, do these maniacs find it even remotely necessary to trap and destroy Russia. These idiots have no conception of what they are putting into motion EVEN IF the fall out is not ultimately high in Strontium-90 and Cesium-137. Obviously, the think tank imbeciles have to account for some very heavy casualties by both sides in an all out war, no matter which side “wins.” What’s the cost/benefit ratio there, my fine American capitalists? In a less intense war there will still be multiple 55-gallon drums of worms better left unopened. Except perhaps for some super secret classified reason (space aliens perhaps?) prompting Washington to actually prefer such a major disruption to distract from imminent collapse of the economy, the dollar, and societal stability (probably so the culprits in power can abscond), I cannot see any potential outcome where what is gained surpasses what is lost by destroying Russia, however they intend to do such a despicable deed.
These American hijinks will encompass the entire world and BILLIONS will be harmed, to say nothing of killed. That outcome is NOT justifiable even if every American walks because we delivered a preemptive nuclear strike. Of course, Washington NEVER tells the truth, so they can glibly pass off their repeated misdeeds without the slightest compunction. It’s all good as long as our elites are served well. However, there is no body of law that says it is A-Okay to destroy entire other societies just because it is expedient and the “profit margin” is advantageous, or just because they may presently be out-competing us on some level. The latter is our proffered justification for warring on China. However, economic warfare IS war. It IS immoral if you wouldn’t want it done to you. See JC’s “golden rule” of doing unto’s.
Heaven forbid I start arguing like a “peacenik” because Washington has never had any respect for such kind, not even our own. Honestly, can somebody sane logically and morally justify the imperative to trap and destroy a civilisation 5-times as old as our own (10-times as old in the case of China) and nearly as accomplished technologically, culturally and artistically. That should all go up in flames or down the tubes in another economic collapse, again instigated by the government of the United States of America. What a loathsome outfit that is. If it would stop its lying, we would find out the reality is they simply want to transfer all the natural resources and wealth of that country from Siberia to New York City and London as though our plutocrats have first dibs on everything in this plane of existence. But, the smart money will say, that’s just the real world kid. If really so, stop the lies. Just refute all the platitudes passed down to posterity in the wake of WWII and simply shout to the mountain tops: On further review, “Might makes right.” Happy days are here again. More contracts for Hunter.
“This most fraught epoch in American history since WWII all started under the great betrayer Barack Obama –”
The War on Terrer, mass surveillance, the invasions and occupations of Iraq and Afghanistan began under George W. Bush.
I was referring to the tiff with Russia which has the potential to escalate directly into Armageddon. Otherwise I might have started with Slick’s intrusion into Bosnia and intensive bombing of Serbia, or maybe Bushdaddy’s Gulf War I. They all do pass the baton seamlessly once they commit to becoming an heroic “war president.” Just seemed to me that Obomber was the one who pointedly decided to tangle with Russia rather than some mere local tyrant, including lots of insults and empty accusations conflated to the max. Otherwise, it is difficult to find a chief executive who represented a bona fide interlude between wars. Maybe Jimmy Carter who refrained from unloading on Iran in his single term.
The US “tiff with Russia” started 4 months after the 1917 Russian revolution that the US (and its original “coalition of the willing”) invaded Russia in attempt to counter.
In addition, George W. Bush pulled out of the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty, which poses a huge threat to Russia. I’m not defending Obama by any means, but it didn’t start with his administration. Russia is not a Democrat vs. Republican issue.
Friendly reminder that China, far from being a neutral or even benevolent bystander, has actively interfered and harmed the country.
From mass espionage on an almost industrial scale (against both military and private enterprises), to technology and capital transfers to the hollowing out of American industry, China has proven itself to be a determined and adversary on more than just the geopolitical scene.
China sees its fortunes as tied to America’s downturn, make no mistake about that.
No, the answer to that problem shouldn’t be a military one, and yes: China’s offensive was to a large extent helped by American plutocrats and its ruling class, but that doesn’t change the fact that China started its political and economic warfare a long time ago.
Realist: Indeed. I would describe it as the late stage addiction of America’s neoconservative class, a gathering of sociopaths, who seem to inevitably rise to the top of the power structures in America’s culture of government and business. Instead of being confined to mental institutions or jails and universally shunned by a sane society, they continue to rise higher and garner more influence. Praising them has even become a political bipartisan tradition, ie. Dick Cheney. It boggles the mind. Unfortunately, the consequences are real and widespread as you have described. And you are correct, what society ever survives such a total abandonment of morality? Against the nonnegotiable backdrop of unmitigated climate effects that are surging in front of our eyes, this is becoming all the more true.
I would say that Obama is the great betrayer because his was the moment and perhaps the only opportunity to turn it around. In fact, he ran on that promise. Instead, he embraced pragmatism in his own self-interest and normalized their behavior. And here we are…