Because of their grossly inaccurate assessments of the Russian president and his country, “Putin Whisperers” in the West have Ukrainian blood on their hands.
Any retrospective on the Russian-Ukraine conflict begins with a modicum of interest in how Moscow defines the conflict. First of an article in two parts.
The problem isn’t “global inaction” to prevent mass atrocities, as The Guardian claims, writes Jonathan Cook. It’s intense U.S. and U.K. support for atrocities so long as they bolster their global power.
The idea that Ukraine’s senior command had the ability or daring to execute the complex and risky venture of blowing up the pipelines without involving the U.S. beggars belief, writes Jonathan Cook.
After the meeting of U.S. and Indian foreign and defence ministers, M.K. Bhadrakumar says Delhi is shedding its strategic ambivalence and joining Washington‘s adversarial stance on China.
A hunger for genocide and ethnic cleansing colours senior Israeli officials’ statements and has influenced their conduct in this war. Talk of civilian casualties is brushed off, and so are calls for a ceasefire, writes Vijay Prashad.
Illusory talk about a “stalemate” and U.S. feelers about peace talks underscore Ukraine having no options left and Russia having plenty, writes Tony Kevin.
As the world’s failure to stop massacre after massacre in Gaza shows the deep failure of the U.N.-centered international system, Vijay Prashad turns attention to the conflict looming over Northeast Asia.