Dissident commentary about Ukraine that was still published in major Western news media in 2014 is entirely gone now because these publications have transformed themselves into outlets for ironclad war propaganda.
The message to Moscow at this point — with de-escalation and detente entirely missing from public discourse — is that they’re going to get squeezed harder and harder until they attack NATO itself.
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.