On the 5th anniversary of his death, we republish one of Parry’s many prescient articles on Ukraine, this one on the risks of ignoring the 2014 coup, the neo-Nazis’s role and the war against coup resisters in the east.
Instead of sending more weapons to Ukraine, the U.S. and its NATO allies could be taking these steps to lower the rising risk of nuclear conflict, write Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies.
The West’s recent approval of more military assistance for Kiev risks nuclear nightmare, fails Ukrainian expectations and rebukes the World War II history enshrined in a prominent Soviet war memorial in Berlin.
The author finds herself getting attacked on Twitter for an article she wrote in 2018 about a CNN interview with a child about the Syrian war.
Increasingly, writes Vijay Prashad, NATO, with operations based in Norway, is replacing the Arctic Council as a decision-making authority in the region
Given the duplicitous history of the Minsk Accords, it is unlikely Russia can be diplomatically dissuaded from its military offensive. As such, 2023 appears to be shaping up as a year of continued violent confrontation.
In the mass media you’re not allowed to talk about the U.S.-NATO actions that diplomats, politicians, academics — even the head of the C.I.A. — have long warned would lead to war in Ukraine.
Even neighboring Poland, a staunch ally of Kiev in the ongoing war with Russia, has criticized the Verkhovna Rada’s Jan. 1 celebration of the birthday of Stepan Bandera.
The powerful have reasons for wanting to combat what they consider to be “disinformation” — they want their version of the truth to become ours, writes Stavroula Pabst.
The Western establishment doesn’t appear to understand how Western journalists could exercise their own agency and judgment to critique U.S. foreign policy without them being agents of a foreign power, writes Joe Lauria.
