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.
As we approach the halfway mark of this president’s first term, it’s good to consider the top seven reasons why he is so much better than his predecessor.
The Democratic Party has become the party of permanent war, fueling massive military spending which is hollowing out the country from the inside and flirting with nuclear war.
It’s hard to imagine a more disgraceful way for a correspondent to retire than with a standing ovation at the Pentagon.
Meanwhile, the Pentagon gives its Ukraine proxy the go-ahead to launch long-range attacks on targets inside its neighboring nuclear superpower. Not too long ago this was unthinkably terrifying. This is where we are now.
Communications between the U.S. and Russia are essential for preventing an out-of-control crisis and a conduit exists for ongoing, high-level dialogue. But what is it really for?
If it passes, the Reed/Inhofe amendment invoking wartime emergency spending powers will give the merchants of death what they are looking for, write Medea Benjamin and Nicolas J. S. Davies.
The depth of the militarization of the United States and the harshness of its wars abroad have been concealed by converting death into something sacred, writes Kelly Denton-Borhaug in an address to U.S. veterans on Veterans Day.
Disarmament activists condemned Washington’s effort to intimidate the Albanese government from shifting its position on a treaty that the vast majority of Australians, according to a poll in March, support signing and ratifying.
