Translated by Val from Osahttp://www.vz.ru/opinions/2014/12/25/722171.html
Saturday, 3 January 2015
By Nikolai Starikov
Translated by Val from Osahttp://www.vz.ru/opinions/2014/12/25/722171.html
Translated by Val from Osahttp://www.vz.ru/opinions/2014/12/25/722171.html
How long the West is willing to pay for the crumbling economy of Ukraine without guarantees of the beginning of its war with Russia? The Western strategy rule says: lost control over the territory – create the Antithesis.
It is possible to understand what is happening in Ukraine, it is much more difficult to evaluate and forecast the development of events. Whatever the case, it is necessary to consistently follow one rule: set emotions aside. Blood, death and destruction are the most serious emotional blows, but if you follow your emotions, neither proper assessment nor correct forecast will result.
Therefore, as hard it can be, set emotions aside. To assess the geopolitical game (and this is what we are looking at) we need only the head. Only conscious manipulators want you to think with your heart (and vote with your heart – as for Yeltsin in 1996).
The United States and the West are facing of the strongest crises in its history. The strength and depth of the problem are compounded by the fact that … the West has won. It incorporated practically all of Europe, crushed, to varying degrees, the whole world with a few exceptions.
Therein lies the problem – all its life the West lived by robbery. Now those who can be robbed are fewer and fewer, and those with whom it is necessary to share the “stolen goods”, that is the standard of living that rests on unrestricted dollar emissions, are more and more. Hence the huge national debt. In the United States it is 18 trillion dollars, but such debts, and even worse ratios of the national debt to GDP, exist in all so-called developed countries.
What solution the US and its closest allies are looking for in this situation? It is now evident to everyone. The solution is war. Chaos. But this chaos and this war must lead to a “controlled collapse”.
As a result the US must eliminate two threats to its power – China and Russia. Ideally, make them clash with each other. To do this the US need to change regime in one of these countries. Obviously, the Americans think that the regime change in Russia is an easier task.
The question is how to achieve this? Orange technologies did not work in 2011, Putin became president again.
What the West does when it loses in any territory is most important for understanding the events in Ukraine.
When we talk about a Western loss we mean the failure of its plans and loss of control over a certain area, full or partial.
What do the Western strategists do in such a situation?
1949. Britain is “kicked out” of India. Before leaving the British set up the Anti-India – a new state of Pakistan. Tensions, military conflicts between the new states ensue. In short, many opportunities for the Anglo-Saxons.
Again in 1949. As a result of the civil war in China, pro-Soviet Mao Zedong wins. The US lose control over China. What do they do? Create the Anti-China -Taiwan. Evacuate there the army of Chiang Kai-shek under the protection of the US Navy. Tensions, the permanent possibility of war between China and the Anti-China ensue. Tiananmen Square, 1989, Beijing – who can tell the “desperate” mainland Chinese from the agents of the Taiwanese special services?
Attention please. In the geopolitical game to grant a diplomatic recognition is to follow the current ‘national’ interests, and nothing more. First, the United States recognizes Taiwan as China. For those who do not know: until 1973 the representative of Taiwan at the United Nations was seated as the representative of China. But later Washington changes its position, recognizes Beijing and ceases to recognize Taipei. At the same time it strongly supports Taiwan and prevents the reunification of the two “Chinas”
Let’s not stray far into history. The rule of the permanent Anglo-Saxon Western strategy states: lost control over the territory – create Antithesis.
In 2011 the West loses control of Russia – not completely yet, but its plans to deny Putin another presidential term fail. The dismantling of the fifth column begins, Russia strongly defends its interests in the world.
What is the West to do? Create Antithesis. That is the Anti-Russia.
And the Anglo-Saxons start creating it, the soil is prepared in Ukraine. Propaganda starts in 1991 and even earlier, militants are trained, money is allocated, the elite is bought and well fed.
According to the US plans, Yanukovych should be removed during the elections in 2015. Remove him in such a way as to launch anti-Russian hysteria and begin to create the Anti-Russia from Ukraine. Circumstances force an earlier start, but according to the main rule: not the peaceful departure of Yanukovych is required, but a bloody overthrow in order to blame Russia.
What is happening today in Ukraine is nothing more than the creation of the Anti-Russia. Propaganda, hate, readiness to destroy and kill on the part of the nationalists and some deceived common citizens.
Where do the US go with that? To war between Ukraine and Russia. On the “initiative” of Ukraine. When? When they pump up the Ukrainian army, equip it, create it, and prepare it. It will take about five years. After that the US will try to pit the two parts of the same nation against each other, set Ukraine against Russia. Occasion – Crimea.
Were the Crimea not reunited with Russia, it would still remain an excuse. Basing the Russian army in Crimea, pro-Russian population living there would give a lot of opportunities for the organization of conflicts and provocations. Therefore, regardless of the actions of Putin and the people of Crimea the Western plan would remain the same.
What can stop the development of this terrible scenario of sliding into a major war between brothers?
Support of those in Ukraine itself who do not agree with this turn of events.
The West creates the Anti-Russia, Russia must help and support the Anti-anti-Russia.
When in the Southeast of Ukraine the people who do not agree with the Kiev’s coup rose up, few had a clear idea that they were “blocking the road” of such a terrible scenario. The presence of the Anti-anti-Russia as a part of a federalized Ukraine, refusing either to arm for the West, nor to pull the chestnuts out of the fire for it, blocked the Western plans to unleash the Ukrainian-Russian war. Remember the end of the spring of 2014?
Moscow’s insistent calls for the territorial integrity of Ukraine, for federalization, for negotiations. Moscow needs a unified Ukraine, where the pro-Russian part of the society will “tie” the hands of the militants and bought politicians, and will not allow to draw the whole Ukrainian people into the war.
The West needs not the peace, not the prosperity of Ukraine. It needs a militarized state with an aggressive ideology in the form of hatred directed against Russia.
Kiev begins aggressive actions against Donbass. Immediately the propaganda about the “terrorists” and the Russian military starts. Military actions, conducted with cruelty to civilians, give the West two possibilities:
- To win by military means and then start the planned collapse of the economy of Ukraine as the beginning of its preparation for war with Russia. The well fed do not want to fight. The West can blame Russia for the difficulties and hardships, whereas the military service provides an income, albeit a tiny one;
- To draw Russia into war, forcing her to send troops into Ukraine. The defeat of the Ukrainian armed forces does not matter for the West. It wants not the victory but the war itself.
And the more Ukrainian citizens will die in the fratricidal war, the better for the West – the rebellious Slavic nation eliminates itself. As a result of the war in Ukraine the West will try to repeat 1917 and “overthrow the bloody Kremlin regime.” All of it in order to take the course toward preparation of the war between Russia and China.
And then a problem happened. Neither military success nor the military invasion by Russia and its participation in the civil conflict was achieved.
And then what? That’s what.
The existence of the DNR and LNR as Anti-anti-Russia is the key to inability of the West to start a war between Ukraine and Russia.
The cannonball on its leg does not let the United States to push Kiev toward this Great War with tens of thousands, hundreds of thousands of victims.
That is why Moscow is helping Donbass in every way possible that is why Sergei Lavrov says that we are for the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
That is why Russia does not recognize the DNR and LNR as independent states. To recognize them, to let them secede means to launch countdown for war with Ukraine. In this scenario the Western plan kicks in: there is Russia, there is Anti-Russia, and there is Novorossia. Anti-anti-Russia is no more. In case of incorporation of Donbass into Russia, those in Washington will stand up and give a standing ovation. This is it: the war becomes practically inevitable. The image of Russia as the enemy is created by Russia itself.
In today’s situation the Russian tactics in Ukraine are the only correct ones. US must pay to support 40 million people, Russia must help 3 million people in the Donbass and 1.5 million refugees. Moscow constantly insists on negotiations, not allowing the aggressor being shaped by the west to “remove the weight” from its leg, not allowing DNR and LNR to be defeated militarily.
How long will the West be willing to pay for the crumbling economy of Ukraine without guarantees to begin its war with Russia? These guys do nothing without a reason, they do not throw money away. Even to the militants in Chechnya in the 90’s they gave no dollars, instead they gave them clichés for printing fake dollars.
Self-financing – is the principle of the Anglo-Saxon politics, in extreme cases a refund within a short period of time. A striking example: the Bolsheviks paying with Russia’s gold through Swedish banks and the subsequent concessions, today’s Libyan “freedom fighters” with the oil dollars leaving Libya for unknown destinations.
Time is of great importance today. The bet of the West – to organize a new Maidan in Russia, now that the path to war in Ukraine was blocked by the courage and determination of the DNR and LNR militia fighters. The bet of Russia – wait till the West loses its interest in Ukraine because of high costs without any tangible benefits.
Washington’s desire to get “at least something” leads to the pressure on Europe and the paradoxical desire of the Europeans not to allow the construction of the “South Stream”.
Paradox? No paradox. Washington wants to use the instability of Ukraine at least for a possibility of gas blackmail of Moscow. And Europe.
That is the essence of current and past events in Ukraine.
And the last thing I want to say in this regard.
Few in today’s Ukraine understand what a tremendous role the courage of the Donbass residents plays in today’s world politics. They are rescuing the entire Russian world today. And the paradox, they save the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens.
The same children that today are “jumping” in Ukrainian schools, whose parents collect money for ATO, support the Kiev authorities, in case of defeat Donbass, in a very short period of time they will become gun fodder, according to the US plan.
That’s what all of us need to remember, regardless of our current citizenship.
|Yuriy RUBTSOV | 31.12.2014 | 00:00|
This is the first substantial upgrade of Russia’s military doctrine published in February 2010. The document had to be revised by the end of 2014 in response to the growing pressure exerted on Russia by the West after Moscow refused to recognize the legitimacy of the coup in Ukraine. A military doctrine offers no spectrum of responses to isolated threats but rather provides guidance on countering the long-term trends undermining the country’s security. The revised version of the doctrine describes the following factors that pose threats to Russia:
– the growing military potential of NATO and its expansion bringing the alliance’s military infrastructure close to the borders of the Russian Federation;
– the deployment of foreign military contingents on the territories of the states adjacent to Russia;
– the construction and deployment of strategic missile defense by the Pentagon undermining global stability, the implementation of Prompt Strike Concept and the plans to place weapons systems in space;
The doctrine provides guidance on how to respond to emerged threats and challenges. The new provisions are introduced as a reaction to the events in Ukraine and around it, as well as in Africa, Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan which threaten the Russian Federation. The specific features of contemporary military conflict include «the complex use of military force in combination with political and economic measures, information warfare and other actions of non-military nature implemented with intensive use of people’s protest potential» along with the use of political forces and public movements controlled and financed from outside. The authors of the document say it openly that Russia is ready to counter the organizers of «color revolutions».
The revised military doctrine remains to be of defensive nature. Russia would resort to the use of force only when all non-violent ways to solve a conflict are exhausted.
The document is added by a new provision on non-nuclear deterrence which envisions the implementation of foreign policy and military measures to prevent an aggression against the Russian Federation when the use of nuclear weapons is premature or unjustified.
As one can see the nuclear weapons are not viewed as the only means of deterrence. At that the West exerts unprecedented pressure on Russia and the talks about the return of Cold War posture are renewed. It makes the strategic nuclear forces the most important factor to guarantee security. The revised document does not envision changes in the order the nuclear forces could be used. A nuclear strike could be delivered in response to the use of nuclear weapons or other weapons of mass destruction against Russia and its allies or in case Russia becomes a victim of conventional attack when the very existence of the state is threatened. Belarus and other partners - members of the Collective Security Treaty Organization are the Russia’s allies to be defended.
The Russian military leadership pays special attention to upgrading the nuclear shield. On the very same day the Russian President signed the document a RS-24 intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM) blasted off from Plesetsk successfully hitting a designated target at the Kura test range on the Kamchatka peninsula in the Far East. The solid-fuel Topol-M and Yars ICBMs designed for mobile platforms and silos make up the backbone of Russia’s contemporary strategic potential. Over 20 mobile and ground-based Yars ICBMs will be added to the inventory of the Russia’ Strategic Rocket Forces next year.
The day before the Commander of the Strategic Rocket Forces of Russia Colonel-General (three stars) Karakayev officially announced the development of a heavy solid-fuel ballistic missile known as RS-26. Starting from 2016 the RS-26 is to reinforce the group of solid-fuel rockets, such as Topol-M and Yars of the Strategic Missile Forces. The characteristics are classified but it is known that the missile already dubbed by media the «killer of missile defense» will be able to break through any type of missile defense.
The silo-based systems are upgraded too. The RS-20B Voyevoda (NATO classification – Satan) is the most powerful nuclear weapon in service today. It can penetrate the multi-echelon missile defense deployed by the US. It is in service since the 1980s. Its service life was extended but the time is drawing near for its replacement.
In a few years the heavy 100-ton Sarmat will take its place. It will be produced only by Russian enterprises to exclude the risks like in case of Satan, for instance, when some components were produced by Ukrainian Yuzhnoe design bureau and manufacturer. The Sarmat heavy ballistic missile will be deployed in Uzhur (Krasnoyarsk region) and the village of Dombarovsky (Orenburg region). There is one more inspiring news to confirm the strong political will of Russian leadership. Russia was unwise enough to take out of service the RT-23 railway ICBM launching system (NATO reporting name SS-24 Scalpel). As a platform a train could cover a thousand kilometers a day and it was impossible to track it from satellites as it was undetectable among many thousands of other trains moving on the ground. Strategic Rocket Forces Commander Col.Gen. Sergei Karakayev stated a new military railroad missile system dubbed Barguzin is being developed for Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces. An R&D project was rolled out to develop a new rail-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile with the first prototype to be completed in 2020. The weapon's mobility makes it difficult to track, thus complicating a preemptive strike. On his part, Russian Deputy Defense Minister Anatoly Antonov said the new system does not violate the START Treaty which stipulates that each side has a right to independently decide the structure and composition of its strategic nuclear potential.
One regiment (that is one train) of the new Barguzin rail-mobile system will include six (MIRV-multiple independently targeted vehicle) Yars missiles. The Scalpel system included three RT-23 Molodets ICBMs. The strategic forces will have a division including five railway missile platforms (regiments) constantly changing the location as they will move across the country’s vast plains. The Scalpel railway ICBM platform used to be a never ending headache for Americans to make them strongly insist that the system be taken out of service. One can only imagine what kind of nightmare the Barguzin will become for the USA. The system’s life service is to last till 2040.
NATO spokeswoman Oana Lungescu responded by saying in a statement that the alliance «poses no threat to Russia or to any nation.» «Any steps taken by NATO to ensure the security of its members are clearly defensive in nature, proportionate and in compliance with international law», she said. No matter it evidently contradicted the facts the spokeswoman said «In fact, it is Russia's actions, including currently in Ukraine, which are breaking international law and undermining European security.» Such statements evoke no surprise, especially after it was stated in Washington that Russia moved to the borders of NATO - not the other way around.
The official representative of the alliance added that NATO seeks constructive relationship with Russia. It is logical to guess that the revised military doctrine and the measures taken by the Russian government to upgrade the country’s defense will give a new impetus to this process.
By Taylor Goel
On Dec. 28, 2014, tens of thousands gathered in Roboski, a tiny village in the Şırnak province of southeast Turkey near the Iraqi border, to commemorate the killing of 34 Kurdish civilians by a Turkish military airstrike three years ago. Acting on information captured from drones, mistaking the group for armed members of the Kurdish Workers Party (PKK), two Turkish jets had bombed a group of civilians who were crossing the border into Turkey. Nineteen of the 34 casualties were children.
Addressing the massive crowd at the commemoration ceremony in Roboski, Lami Özgen, president of the Confederation of Public Workers’ Unions (KESK), said:
“Our pain is as new as the first day of massacre. We have never forgotten the Roboski Massacre. We salute the struggle and resistance of Roboski families. We are Roboski, Roboski is us.”
Another speaker at the event, People’s Democratic Party (HDP) deputy Ertuğrul Kürkçü, said:
“The murderers of our youth are Necdet Özel, Chief of General Staff of the Turkish Armed Forces and the Prime Minister at the time, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. There is no need to search anywhere else. … They have not hesitated to order this massacre. … Sooner or later, we will have the power to hold these murderers accountable.”
All the speakers and the thousands in the commemoration ceremony vowed to continue the struggle for justice.
Roboski investigations—a big coverup
After the massacre, here is what the PM of the ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) had to say:
“The planes bombarded the villagers because they thought they were terrorists. That was a terror zone; compensation was paid to the relatives of the victims. It is not necessary to make a big deal out of this. The terror organization [Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK)] is exploiting this incident.”
In January 2012, a special parliamentary investigation commission was formed. Over a year later in March 2013, the commission came up with a report that was nothing more than an official cover-up concluding that the massacre was a result of lack of coordination between military officials and civilian authorities, without deliberate intent.
Commenting on the report, Levent Gök, a member of the commission from the opposition party, CHP, said:
“When I read the draft, I felt ashamed in the name of humanity. It is a black stain on the historic record of the commission. … It does not point out anybody as responsible; sufficing with a flaw of coordination between military and civilian authorities. There is nothing there about the military staff; it is as if an army from the outer space did all that.”
In May 2012, the prime minister of the time, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, desperately tried to bury the incident by associating anyone who is demanding justice with terrorism:
“Whoever is still bringing up the Uludere (Roboski) issue is actually related to terrorist organizations.”
In June 2013, after an investigation of 18 months, like the parliamentary commission, the state prosecution also concluded that there was no deliberate intent by the military, only negligence. The case was transferred to the military prosecution. In January 2014, the military prosecution followed suit, deciding not to press any charges against the military staff, citing that no investigation was necessary as “the military staff made a major mistake but performed their duties within the given orders.”
Speaking at last year’s commemoration ceremony, the co-chair of the Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) which later became the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), the main Kurdish opposition party, Demirtaş implicated that it could have been Erdoğan, the prime minister at that time, who gave the order for the military operation:
“Let me now tell you the information we have. That night, the General Staff received a piece of intelligence about a convoy at the border. They are told that [senior PKK commander] Bahoz Erdal is in the convoy but that civilians, too, may be in it. This secret information is withheld from officials here in Şırnak and Uludere. The prime minister [Erdoğan] is informed on the phone. They tell him it will be a risky operation … that they will be striking Bahoz Erdal but civilians may be also involved. It is the prime minister who gives them the go-ahead, he orders them to strike. The warplanes take off on his order to take our 34 kids away from us. Later, they realize that all in the convoy were Roboski villagers. Ever since, they have been trying to cover this case up.”
In January 2014, it was also reported that the chief of the general staff, Necdet Özel, had personally authorized the operation about 90 minutes before the Turkish Air force initiated the strike.
Report: In past 5 years, 110 people killed on Turkey’s southeast border
According to a report released by the Human Rights Association of Turkey (İHD), at least 110 people were reportedly shot dead and 130 others wounded on Turkey’s southeastern border between 2009 and 2014 by the Turkish military or armed gangs. Speaking at a press conference held on Dec. 26 before the third anniversary of the Roboski massacre, Raci Bilici, vice president of İHD said:
“The perpetrators of this massacre have yet to be found after three years. The state and the government have been hiding the perpetrators of this massacre like a mystery.”
He added that the relatives of the massacred, their friends and the peoples of Turkey have not forgotten this massacre, and that the massacre’s pain would never be alleviated until the perpetrators of this crime are prosecuted.
The struggle for justice will continue
The AKP government has done everything possible in the last three years to cover up the Roboski massacre. After all the lengthy showpiece investigations, reports and legal proceedings, according to Turkish courts, nobody is responsible for the slaughter of 39 civilians. While AKP and its courts may think that they have closed the Roboski case and will get away with murder, in the conscience of the people of Turkey, this case is still open and their struggle for justice will continue until all those responsible from this massacre are brought to justice.
بقلم نارام سرجون
لاأدري من الذي كان ينتظر عام 2015 وقد بدا أن انتظار الاعوام لايأتي بالجديد .. وحدهم من لاينتظرون الأعوام هم الذين يصنعونها ويعرفون أسرارها ومفاتيح أسرارها ..
نحن لن نستجدي الزمن ليمر بنا ويحمل لنا في حقائبه بعض أمنياتنا وآمالنا ويشفق علينا ويحمل بعض الصدقات أو الهبات أو الزكاة .. بل سنسير اليه ونملي عليه ماذا عليه أن يفعل وماذا عليه أن يحمل للقاعدين في محطات الزمن وهم ينتظرون ..
في عام 2014 أدرك الذين ينتظرون هزيمتنا منذ ثلاث سنوات على محطات الربيع والثورات أنهم كانوا مثل الدراويش في انتظار يوم القيامة .. ولكننا تعلمنا في هذه السنوات الثلاث أن أعنّة يوم القيامة هي بأيدي الشعوب .. وأن أبواق اسرافيل لاتنفخها الولايات المتحدة ولا قرارات مجلس الامن ولافصله السابع .. ولاينفخ اسرافيل الأبواق الا فوق جثامين الأمم التي تنتظر أقدارها ولاتصنعها ..
اليوم مر الرئيس الأسد على خطوط النار حيث تتم صناعة ساعة زمن القرن الواحد والعشرين التي سيضعها في معصمه لمئة سنة قادمة وقد تمت صياغة تكات ثوانيها بالرصاص ..
ليس مرور الأسد على خطوط النار في جوبر حدثا غريبا .. بل الغريب ألا يمر الأسد في ليلة رأس السنة في جوبر بالذات التي أريد بها أن تكون رمزا لتحدي دمشق .. ولكننا أردنا أن تكون فيها مفاتيح العام الجديد ..
وصول الأسد الى خطوط النار ليتناول العشاء في صحون العسكر وأطباقهم وليقتسم معهم الخبز اليابس وقطع البطاطا والطعام البسيط والمرق والفول المسخن على الجمر .. وليحتسي الشاي معهم من ابريق عتيق تسخنه مدفأة الحطب ليس فيه رسائل لأحد ولاتقليد لأحد ولابرامج انتخابية .. بل هو القرار الحاسم أننا لاننتظر الأعوام بل نحن من تنتظرنا الأعوام والسنوات لتعرف مصيرها وطالعها .. ونحن من تسترق الأيام النظر الى موائدنا لتعرف سر من لاينتظر الزمن لأنه يسعى خلف الزمن ويطارده للقبض عليه ..
لن نطلب من ثوار الفنادق الباريسية وفلاسفة الحرية في استانبول ولا من أمراء المؤمنين أن يقلدوا الرئيس الأسد وينزلوا الى "شوارعهم المحررة" كما يدعون في ليلة رأس السنة الهجرية ولا الميلادية ولا في ليلة القدر ولا في ليلة المولد النبوي الشريف .. ولن نطلب منهم المرور على معسكرات اللجوء الباردة والخيام التي تلتحف بالثلج وتفترش الطين وتتسلى بعواء الرياح وتحكي حكايات الوعود لساكنيها وتطبخ عظام الوهم لهم ولحم الانتظار في القدور .. فلايوجد لدى هؤلاء وقت يمضونه خارج الفنادق .. وليس لدى العالم وقت في رأس السنة لتصوير هؤلاء القادة ولا لرصد حفلات التسول والحملات الانتخابية التركية .. كما أن وقت أنجلينا جولي المخصص للحزن على الضحايا قد انتهى لأن كاميرات العالم وحدقات الفضاء مثبتة الآن على الألعاب النارية للعواصم السكرى والتي لاتبالي ببرامج التسول وتمثيليات قادة الثوار المرفهين مع أبنائهم في دفء مواقد النار في باريس ولندن واستانبول ودبي والدوحة .. وهذه الكاميرات ذهبت بسفراء هوليوود الوقحين الى الملاهي والمراقص وهم الذين كانوا يمرون على اللاجئين كما يمرون على محميات الحيوانات الطبيعية في كينيا وتنزانيا ويتصورون معهم كما يتصورون مع الدببة القطبية في ثلوج القطب الشمالي وهم في طريقهم لذرف الدموع على اللاجئين السوريين ..
عندما رأيت صورة الرئيس في مائدة عشاء جوبر انتابني شعور بالحيرة .. فمن سأشكر هنا؟؟ هل أشكر الأسد لأنه كان مع الأسود في هذه الليلة الباردة ؟؟ أم أشكر الأسود الذين كانوا مع الأسد والذين أوقفوا ساعات العالم وضبطوها على ايقاع أحذيتهم وبنادقهم؟؟ .. صورة هزت مشاعري بصدقها وحميميتها .. وتمنيت من الاقدار لو أنها كانت أخذتني دقيقة واحدة الى مائدة العشاء في جوبر لأنضم الى عشاء الأسود .. لأشاركهم تقطيع الأرغفة المقمرة ولأغمس الخبز في المرق أو الفول ولأشرب الشاي من ذلك الابريق العتيق الذي سيكون فيه الشاي المعطر بالبارود ألذ من أي نبيذ هذا العام .. فكيف أصافح العام من دون أن أعاتبه بقوة لأنه بدأ دون أن يدعوني الى مائدة الأسود؟؟ .. وكيف لي أن اغفر له أنه يحيرني فلاأعرف من يستحق الشكر أولا أو يستحقه أكثر .. فهل أشكر الرئيس الأسد أم أسود الرئيس؟؟ ..
لم يعد الجواب يعنيني بل مايعنيني هو أنني لم أعد منشغلا بما سيحمله عام 2015 لأن المكتوب مقروء من عنوانه في جوبر .. فهذا العام سيسلم مفاتيحه في جوبر ودوما .. وفي حلب .. وفي الرقة .. وادلب .. ودرعا .. هذه مدن تنتظر مائدة الأسود مع الأسد .. أو مائدة الأسد مع الأسود ..
وللعلم فهذه الدعوة ليست عامة بل للأسود فقط .. والمائدة على بساطتها عامرة .. عامرة بالبطولة والرجولة .. وأحاديث الأسود ..
كل عام وأسودنا بخير ..
وكل عام وسورية حبيبتي ..
By Stephen Lendman
On New Year’s eve, Bloomberg’s Josh Rogin headlined “Inside Obama’s Secret Outreach to Russia.”
Saying administration officials have been “working behind the scenes for months to forge a new working relationship with Russia…”
A a time Putin bashing remains intense. Blaming him wrongfully for US crimes.
Irresponsibly claiming he “has shown little interest in repairing relations with Washington or halting his aggression in neighboring Ukraine.”
Putin wants cooperative relations with all nations. Stressing it many times forthrightly. “(O)n an equal basis,” he said at his yearend press conference.
“(O)n the condition that (Russia’s) national interests are respected, in the sphere of security and in the sphere of the economy.”
“The problem (with) international relations is that” Washington and EU nations have other ideas.
He defended Russia’s Ukraine policy. Going all out to resolve crisis conditions peacefully.
Debunking notions otherwise. Criticizing US hypocrisy. Saying “(t)o take Texas from Mexico is fair, but when we make decisions about our territories, it is unfair.”
“I believe we are right in the Ukrainian crisis and our Western partners are wrong.”
America’s empire of bases is everywhere, he said.
“(A)ll over the world, and you’re trying to say that we’re being aggressive.”
America’s military budget is over tenfold greater than Russia’s.
“Do we place our troops at US borders? Who is placing NATO troops, military infrastructure closer to us?”“Does anyone listen to us, talk to us about it? No, nothing. There is always the same response. It’s not your business.”
Washington’s menacing missile defense system threatens Russia.
“They have been deploying strategic missile defense elements not only on Alaska, but also in Europe, in Poland and Romania, right at our borders,” said Putin.
What kind of reset is possible under these conditions? US policy belies its rhetoric. Its outreach more head fake than real.
Putin justifiably blamed Western countries for Ukrainian crisis conditions. “But for the West’s position, there wouldn’t be civil war in Ukraine,” he said.
The road to peace requires building common humanitarian space. Not walls, he stressed. “Russia pays the cost of remaining a nation, a civilization and a state.”
According to Rogin:
“Obama’s National Security Council finished an extensive and comprehensive review of US policy toward Russia that included dozens of meetings and input from the State Department, Defense Department and several other agencies, according to three senior administration officials.”“At the end of the sometimes-contentious process, Obama made a decision to continue to look for ways to work with Russia on a host of bilateral and international issues while also offering Putin a way out of the stalemate over the crisis in Ukraine.”
One official told Rogin he sees no major reset coming. Washington wants to see what Moscow is “actually willing to do…Regardless of the likelihood of success.”
In other words, to what extent can America convince Moscow to bend to its will? Accept Washington rules. Sacrifice Russian interests in the process.
Putin is very clear. So are other key Kremlin officials. Russian sovereignty is inviolable. Too important to compromise.
Relations with other countries must be based on mutual respect for each other’s interests. Equal give and take. According to international law.
Not one nation dominating others. Longstanding US policy. Claiming what it says goes. Seeking unchallenged global hegemony.
Staging coups to install subservient regimes. Wars elevating handpicked stooges to power.
Wanting all independent governments ousted. Replaced by pro-Western ones. Especially key rivals China and Russia.
Rogin said John Kerry is Obama’s point man. Intended a fall meeting with Putin. Negotiations got to the point of scheduling.
Then “scuttled because (of) little prospect of demonstrable progress.” White House officials even approached Henry Kissinger to help, said Rogin.
It’s unclear what followed. On the one hand, Kerry and Sergey Lavrov meet often. Maintain ongoing diplomatic relations.
On the other, “Obama and Putin…are known to have an intense dislike for each other and very rarely speak,” said Rogin.
In discussions with Lavrov, Kerry floated notions about easing US sanctions, Rogin added. Provided “Russia adher(s) to September’s Minsk agreement and ceas(es) direct military support for the Ukrainian separatists.”
“The issue of Crimea would be set aside for the time being, and some of the initial sanctions that were put in place after Crimea’s annexation would be kept in place.”
Administration officials said Washington is “willing to isolate the issues of Donetsk and Lugansk from the issue of Crimea.”
“If there was a settlement on Donetsk and Luhansk, there could be a removal of some sanctions while maintaining sanctions with regard to Crimea. That represents a way forward for Putin.”
It bears repeating. Washington blames Russia for its own wrongdoing. Its imperial adventurism. Ousting Ukraine’s legitimate government. Elevating fascist putschists to power.
Co-opting Ukraine as America’s newest colony. A dagger pointed at Russia’s heartland. Threatening its security. Obama making outrageous statements.
Saying “Russian aggression in Europe recalls the days when large nations trampled small ones in pursuit of territorial ambitions.”
Polar opposite Moscow’s policies. Describing America’s longstanding agenda. “Trampl(ing)” over one nation after another.
Kerry is testing the waters. Can he get Moscow to bend? How far? Short of mutual cooperation between both nations on equal terms. What Washington never tolerates.
Believing US policies are working. Weakening Russia’s economy. Including sanctions. Market manipulated lower oil prices. Attacking the ruble.
One US official told Rogin “(w)e’ll see how they feel as their economy continues to deteriorate…”
Putin and Lavrov insist Russia won’t roll over for anyone. No nation ever defeated it. Not Napoleon. Not Hitler. Nor will America.
Its policies belie its rhetoric. Its word isn’t its bond. The Ukraine Freedom Support Act (UFSA) of 2014 targets Russia.
Authorizing lethal and non-lethal aid. Besides what’s already supplied. Approved more sanctions. Other measures targeting Russia’s economy.
In mid-December, Obama embargoed Crimea. By executive order “prohibit(ing) the export of goods, technology, or services to Crimea and prohibits the import of goods, technology, or services from Crimea, as well as new investments in Crimea.”
(A)uthoriz(ing) the Secretary of the Treasury to impose sanctions on individuals and entities operating in Crimea.”
Russia’s Foreign Ministry called his action “politicized discrimination.” Against Russia and its people. Lavrov said:
“We have repeatedly stressed that attempts to speak to Russia using the language of ultimatums is totally unacceptable and will yield no results.”“We are ready to develop mutual and equal relations with all those who show an oncoming willingness to do that.”“…(E)very nation has the inalienable right to self-determination and the sovereign right to choose its own path of development.” Russia respects this choice.
Containment won’t work,” he stressed. “The White House has set a course for confrontation, blaming Russia for all sins in connection with the Ukrainian crisis that they had provoked to a significant extent.”
US-led NATO shows hostile intentions. “(S)trengthen(ing) (its) military capacity at Russia’s borders.”
Obama irresponsibly includes Russia on his list of global threats. Regime change is longstanding US policy.
Reset is wishful thinking. Expect no easing of US relations toward Russia ahead. Increased hostility is likely.
Perhaps the unthinkable. Direct confrontation. Potential war between the world’s most formidable nuclear powers.
Madness if happens. Frightening to imagine on New Year’s day. Or any other.
The top priority for cooler heads to prevent. Lose-lose for everyone otherwise.
Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at firstname.lastname@example.org.
His new book as editor and contributor is titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine: US Drive for Hegemony Risks WW III.”
Visit his blog site at sjlendman.blogspot.com.
Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.
It airs three times weekly: live on Sundays at 1PM Central time plus two prerecorded archived programs.
- Thoughts on New Year’s Eve
- Comments on Palestine’s UN Failure
- US Vetoes Palestinian Statehood Resolution
- Bahrain: Profile of a Police State
- Escalated US Wars Ahead?
- The Year Ahead
- Putin’s Approval Rating v. Obama’s
- Palestine: Between a Rock and a Hard Place
- West/Russia Rapprochement?
- Low Oil Prices: Boom or Bust?
By any measure 2014 has been a truly historic year which saw huge, I would say, even tectonic developments. This year ends in very high instability, and the future looks hard to guess. I don't think that anybody can confidently predict what might happen next year. So what I propose to do today is something far more modest. I want to look into some of the key events of 2014 and think of them as vectors with a specific direction and magnitude. I want to look in which direction a number of key actors (countries) "moved" this year and with what degree of intensity. Then I want to see whether it is likely that they will change course or determination. Then adding up all the "vectors" of these key actors (countries) I want to make a calculation and see what resulting vector we will obtain for the next year. Considering the large number of "unknown unknowns" (to quote Rumsfeld) this exercise will not result in any kind of real prediction, but my hope is that it will prove a useful analytical reference.
The main event and the main actors
A comprehensive analysis of 2014 should include most major countries on the planet, but this would be too complicated and, ultimately, useless. I think that it is indisputable that the main event of 2014 has been the war in the Ukraine. This crisis not only overshadowed the still ongoing Anglo-Zionist attack on Syria, but it pitted the world's only two nuclear superpowers (Russia and the USA) directly against each other. And while some faraway countries did have a minor impact on the Ukrainian crisis, especially the BRICS, I don't think that a detailed discussion of South African or Brazilian politics would contribute much. There is a short list of key actors whose role warrants a full analysis. They are:
- The USA
- The Ukrainian Junta
- The Novorussians (DNR+LNR)
- The EU
1 - The USA
Of all the actors in this crisis, the USA is by far the most consistent and coherent one. Zbigniew Brzezinski, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland were very clear about US objectives in the Ukraine:
Zbigniew Brzezinski: Without Ukraine Russia ceases to be empire, while with Ukraine - bought off first and subdued afterwards, it automatically turns into empire…(...) the new world order under the hegemony of the United States is created against Russia and on the fragments of Russia. Ukraine is the Western outpost to prevent the recreation of the Soviet Union.Between the three, these senior US "deep-staters" have clearly and unambiguously defined the primary goal of the USA: to take control of the Ukraine to prevent Russia from becoming a new Soviet Union, regardless of what the EU might have to say about that. Of course, there were other secondary goals which I listed in June of this year (see here):
Hillary Clinton: There is a move to re-Sovietise the region (...) It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that, (...) But let's make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.
Victoria Nuland: F**k the EU!
As a reminder, what were the US goals in the Ukraine: (in no particular order)
I have color-coded objectives these objectives into the following categories:
- Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine
- Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev
- Boot the Russians out of Crimea
- Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier
- Create a Cold War v2 in Europe
- Further devastate the EU economies
- Secure the EU's status as "US protectorate/colony"
- Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies
- Politically isolate Russia
- Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar
- Justify huge military/security budgets
Achieved - black
Still possible - too early to call - blue
Compromised - pink
Failed - red
Current "score card": 1 "achieved", 5 "possible, 2 "compromised" and 3 "failed".Here is how I would re-score the same goals at the end of the year:
- Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine
- Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev
- Boot the Russians out of Crimea
- Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier
- Create a Cold War v2 in Europe
- Further devastate the EU economies
- Secure the EU's status as "US protectorate/colony"
- Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies
- Politically isolate Russia
- Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar
- Justify huge military/security budgets
At first glance, this is a clear success for the USA: from 1 achieved to 6 with the same number of "failed" is very good for such a short period of time. However, a closer look will reveal something crucial: all the successes of the USA were achieved at the expense of the EU and none against Russia. Not only that, but the USA has failed in its main goal: to prevent Russia from becoming a superpower, primarily because the US policy was based on a hugely mistaken assumption: that Russia needed the Ukraine to become a superpower again. This monumental miscalculation also resulted in another very bad fact for the USA: the dollar is still very much threatened, more so than a year ago in fact.
This is so important that I will repeat it again: the AngloZionist Empire predicated its entire Ukrainian strategy on a completely wrong assumption: that Russia "needed" the Ukraine. Russia does not, and she knows that. As we shall see later, a lot of the key events of this year are a direct result of this huge miscalculation.
The US is now facing a paradox: "victory" in the Ukraine, "victory" in Europe, but failure to stop a rapidly rising Russia. Worse, these "victories" came at a very high price which included creating tensions inside the EU, threatening the future of the US shale gas industry, alienating many countries at the UN, being deeply involved with a Nazi regime, becoming the prime suspect in the shooting down of MH17 and paying the costs for an artificially low price of gold. But the single worst consequence of the US foreign policy in the Ukraine has been the establishment of a joint Russian-Chinese strategic alliance clearly directed against the United States (more about that later).
Can the US stay the course next year? That is hard to predict but I would say that in terms of direction the US policy will be more of the same. It is the magnitude (in the sense of will/energy to pursue) of this policy which is dubious. Traditionally, US policies are typically very intensive in the short term, but lack the staying power to see them through in the long term and there is no reason to believe that this case will be different. Furthermore, the US foreign policy establishment is probably simply unable to imagine a different approach: the United States do not really have a real foreign policy, rather they issue orders and directives to their vassal states and threats to all others. Finally, just as some banks are considered "too big to fail" the US policy towards the Ukraine is "too crazy to correct" thus any change of course would result in a major loss of face for an Empire which really cannot afford one more humiliating defeat right now. Still, when the political and financial costs of this policy become prohibitive, the US might have to consider the option to "declare victory and leave" (a time-honored US practice) and let the EU deal with the mess. There is also the very real risk of war with Russia which might give some US decision-makers pause. This is possible, but I am afraid that the US will try to play it's last card and trigger a full-scale war between the Ukraine and Russia.
Why would the US want to do that? Imagine this:
A full scale war between Russia and the Ukraine
The Ukrainians are told to attack Novorussia again. This time, they are more numerous, better equipped and their attack is fully supported, if not executed, by American "advisers" and retired US Army officers. Imagine further that the Ukrainians are given full intelligence support by US/NATO and that their progress is monitored 24/7 by US/NATO commanders who will help them in the conduct of the attack. Finally, let us assume that the Novorussians are overwhelmed by the sheer magnitude and speed of the attack and that Lugansk and Donetsk are rapidly surrounded. At this point the Russians will face a stark choice: either to abandon Novorussia to the Nazis or intervene. The first option would be catastrophic for Putin politically, and it would "solve" nothing: the Ukrainian junta, the US, EU, NATO have all clearly and repeatedly stated that they will never accept the reincorporation ofCrimea into Russia. Furthermore, if the Russians let the Nazis overrun Novorussia, the next logical step for the Ukrainians will be to move south and repeat the very same operation in Crimea at which point Russia will not even have a choice and she will be forced to engage the Ukrainians to defend Crimea. Thus, if the Russians realize that the Ukrainians will push on no matter what, then Russia would be far better of engaging the Ukrainians over Novorussia then over Crimea.
If the Russians make the call that they have to openly intervene to save the Donbass from the Nazis, the Ukrainians don't stand a chance and everybody knows that. The Russians would very rapidly defeat the Ukrainian forces. Such a Russian move would be greeted by a massive media campaign denouncing the Russian "invasion" and Kiev would probably declare the Ukraine at war in which case the combat operations would probably spill over into other parts of the Ukraine or even Russia (the Ukrainians could, for example, try to strike Russians airports around Rostov or in Crimea). Whatever the Ukrainians decide, it is certain that they would have nothing to lose by escalating the situation further. In military terms, Russia can easily handle whatever the Ukrainians can try to throw at them. However I would not expect the Russians push to Kiev or the Dniper River, even if they could. They are most likely to do what they did to Saakashvili in 2008: protect the attacked region and only go as far as needed to disarm their enemy (in 2008 Russia could *easily* have occupied all of tiny Georgia, but she ended up withdrawing behind Ossetian and Abkhaz lines).
Such a Russian victory would be a crushing military defeat for Kiev, but not for the USA. The Americans would have their 'proof' of Russian imperial "aggression" and declare that the EU needs "protection" from the "Russian bear". The US would finally have the Cold War v2 it wants so badly, the EU politicians would play along, just to terrify their own population, and a "wonderful" arms race and a situation of extreme tension would pit all of Europe against Russia for a long, long time. Even for the junta in Kiev a military defeat might be a wonderful opportunity to blame it all on Russia and a way to get the population to rally against the "aggressor". Such a war between Russia and the Ukraine could also justify the introduction of martial law and a massive and vicious crackdown against "Russian agents" (i.e. any opposition) who would be designated as "saboteurs" and responsible for the inevitable Ukrainian defeat.
In the Ukraine and in Russia there is this black-humor joke which says that "the USA will fight Russia down to the last Ukrainian" and this is exactly what might happen as this option offers a lot of major advantages for the USA. For one thing, it is a win-win proposition: either the Ukrainians re-take Novorussia and then the very same plan can be repeated in Crimea, or they are defeated by Russia, in which case the resulting crisis offers huge benefits for US imperial ambitions.
Now let's look at the options for the Ukrainian junta.
2 - The Ukrainian Junta
For the Nazi regime currently in power things are not going well and unless something changes they are headed for disaster: Crimea is gone, the Donbass is slowly but surely building up its instruments of statehood, the economy is basically dead and the "holes in the dam" harder and harder to plug. An explosion of popular unrest is inevitable. Worse, there are exactly *zero* future prospects for the Ukrainian economy and an official default is quasi inevitable. So what can the junta do?
Here it is crucial to remember that no Ukrainian politician has any real power, not even Poroshenko, Iatseniuk or Turchinov. The real rulers of the Ukraine are the US ambassador and the Kiev CIA station chief. These are the people who literally administer the Nazi junta on behalf of the US deep state and its imperial interests. As for the Ukrainian members of the junta, they all perfectly understand that their future is 100% dependent on being a faithful servant of the AngloZionist Empire. They all understand that they came to power by means of an completely illegal coup, that the elections they organized this year were a total farce and that they will soon have to use repressive measures against their own population just to stay in power. Last but not least, these are the folks who not only used chemical munitions, cluster bombs and even ballistic missiles against their own people, but who also send their own armed forces to be slaughtered in useless and criminally irresponsible "surprises" ordered by Poroshenko (the attempt to encircle Novorussia and to cut it off from the Russian border). We are talking about hardened war criminals here, people with no conscience whatsoever, sociopaths with a total lack of any moral compass. These are the folks who spoke a "barbecue of insects" in Odessa when 100+ people were tortured to death or burned alive and who giggled about shooting down the wrong place about MH-17 (Kolomoisky video). In fact, they are currently engaged in a racist hate-campaign.
Check out these posters which were recently shown in Kiev as part of a competition of patriotic posters. If a picture is worth one thousand words, just glancing at these few will tell you all you need to know about the wordview of the Nazi junta: (note: I translated the meaning of the slogans)
|All together we will stop Russian terrorism|
|God's speaks through the people's voice|
|Fuck off Eurasian bastard!|
|May each slave wake up in a coffin|
|Getting a Russian passport makes you a Eurasian faggot|
|Don't pass by - kill!|
But there is much more then just words to pay attention to.
The Ukrainian budget has finally been adopted by the Rada. It can be summarized as such: less services, more taxes and everything for the military and security services (3% of the GDP for the former, 2% for the latter). For a country which is essentially bankrupt this is a huge effort. Not only that, but the junta has also announced that it will execute another mobilization next year (the 4th one in less than one year!!). Now ask yourself a basic question: could such a truly titanic effort have been made without some very real expectations of a "return on investment"? When you see a regime stirring up racial hatred against part of its own population and against a neighboring country while putting all of its tiny and much needed resources towards preparations for war - is that not a surefire sign that a war in imminent?
As a former military analyst myself I can tell you that by now the Russian intelligence community's "indicators and warnings" should be "flashing red" and that in all likelihood Russia is already preparing for war (more about Russia later). But before we look at the Russian position, we need to look into the situation of Novorussia.
3 - The Novorussians (DNR+LNR)
The Novorussians are finishing the year in which they have achieved an absolutely amazing feat: from literally being *nothing* they spontaneously got together to stand up against the Nazi junta and they prevailed even with the entire Ukrainian military was launched at them. It is hard to believe that just 12 months ago the Donbass only meekly requested some language rights and some local autonomy or that earlier this year very almost nobody predicted that the Donbass would rise up and defeat the junta's death squads. And yet this miracle happened. How much did Russia really help? I would argue that not that much at all.
Initially, the Russian move to protect Crimea and the subsequent resolution of the Council of the Federation to allow Putin to use military power to protect the Russian minority in the Ukraine definitely played a key role in the first seizure of state buildings in Slaviansk and other town. Furthermore, Strelkov apparently believed that if he held on long enough the Russian armed forces would come and relieve the exhausted Novorussian militias. It never happened.
There is no doubt whatsoever that this apparent Russian "zag" left a lot of bad feelings in Novorussia and the theory that the Kremlin is about to "sell out" Novorussia is still discussed not only in the Russian blogosphere, but even on Russian TV (including yesterday on the most famous weekly talk show "Sunday evening with Vladimir Soloviev). Here is how this version goes: Putin is inherently weak and tries in vain to appease the West while Russian oligarchs are making a behind the scenes deal with their Ukrainian counterparts. Truth be told, this version is plausible, even if incorrect. The Kremlin's policy towards the West sure does look like appeasement while Russian and Ukrainian oligarchs have tried to arrange deals whether with or without the knowledge of the Russian government.
Any model is valid as long as it helps to explain the observed reality and this "Kremlin sells out Novorussia" does explain a lot. But it fails in many crucial aspects:
- It fails to explain why following Strelkov's removal the Novorussians went on their highly successful offensive which pushed the Ukrainians as far as Mariupol.
- It fails to explain the Russian Voentorg.
- It fails to explain why the Russian government has done nothing to stop the volunteers and supplies coming from Russia.
- It fails to explain why Russia would provide full informational support for a region and it's leaders if she intended to trade it away.
For a while we witness the short lived but strong development of a "let's not stop before we win" party. These are the folks who advocated at the very least liberating Slaviansk and Mariupol and who were absolutely disgusted when Russia clearly ordered the Novorussians to stop and pull back. This party of what I could also call "let the strength of arms decide" has clearly lost as one after the other the top Novorussian commanders accepted, however bitterly, the Kremlin's demands. Some gave their strong and total support to Putin (Givi, Motorola, Bezler) while others gave a more reluctant acceptance of thefait accompli (Mozgovoi, Strelkov).
I won't even bother discussing the "shoulda, coulda, woulda" about whether the Novorussians could have freed Mariupol, Slaviansk or other cities. What is important here is something else: Novorussia and Russia have different priorities, different goals, different interests and if the two sides disagree, the bigger one - Russia - imposes her will. In other words, the Novorussians simply cannot fight the Nazi death squads and try to politically prevail against Putin in the court of Russian public opinion. They tried, and they failed.
So what's next?
The sad reality for the Novorussians is that they are stuck in the middle of a much bigger war and that what they see as "their" war is but a minor skirmish for the big players. Yes, the future of Novorussia is crucial to Russia, but it is not enough. Russia simply cannot live with a situation where a Ukrainian-Nazi equivalent of ISIS in Iraq remains in power in Kiev, regardless of who is in power in Novorussia (I would argue that neither can Novorussia, but that is an argument I made elsewhere already). Clearly the Kremlin analysts made the call that while Novorussia should be protected from the Ukrainian Nazis it should not be allowed to fight an open-ended war to free all of Novorussia or, even less so, the entire Ukraine (I happen to agree with this conclusion, but that is immaterial for this discussion).
For a while I was under the impression that Strelkov might become a "spokesman for Novorussia" in Russia, but that clearly did not happen (for whatever reason). In fact, right now there is no such ambassador or spokesman for Novorussia in Russia, nobody to make the Novorussian case in front of the Russian public opinion. I don't think that this is a good thing, but that is the reality.
As a result, the Novorussians are basically stuck. They have to prepare for the almost inevitable Ukrainian assault and pray that they will have the strength to push it back. Should they fail, they will have no other option than to pray for a Russian intervention which, considering the undeniable Russian zigs-zags in this matter, will not appear certain to all. This is a bad situation for the Novorussians, but they have no other options. Putin has successfully imposed his will on the Novorussians and now their future depends on him, for better or for worse.
4 - Russia
So far Russia stands undefeated by the AngloZionist empire, but she is far from having prevailed either. In fact, Russia is waging a much bigger war or, more accurately, a number of much bigger wars.
First, Russia is trying to survive the attempt by the AngloZionist Empire to economically blockade her.
Second, in order to survive that blockade, Russia is trying to reform her economy to make it less dependent on the export of raw materials, more autonomous and connected to new partners, especially in Asia and Latin America.
Third, Russia is trying to de-fang the Empire by pulling herself out from the dollar and the US/UK controlled international financial system.
Fourth, Russia is trying to prevent the USA from permanently installing a russophobic Nazi regime in power.
Fifth, Russia is preparing for both a major war in the Ukraine and a full scale US/NATO attack on Russia.
It is important to stress here that point #5 does not mean that the Kremlin has come to the conclusion that a full-scale war with the Empire is inevitable. That only means that the Kremlin has decided that such a war is possible, even if most unlikely. You think I am exaggerating?
Let me show you two videos. One a commentary by the most senior journalist in Russia - Dimitri Kiselev - while the other one is a video report shown to President Putin at the end of the year by the Ministry of Defense during a conference on the status of the Russian military and later posted on the Ministry of Defenses' website.
First the political context:
And second, the military's preparations for war:
Combine the two and you will clearly see that a) nobody in Russia has any illusions about what the Empire really wants (submit Russia) or about the tools the Empire is willing to use (full scale war). And to leave no doubt in anybody's mind, Russia has also revised her 2010 military doctrine to designate NATO expansion eastwards by name as the bigger threat to Russia and to restate that Russia reserves the right to use nuclear weapons if her conventional forces fail to protect her.
When in Mach of this year I wrote that Russia was ready for war I got a lot of replies accusing me of being over-the-top. Today the writing is all over the wall: Russia does not want war, but she is definitely preparing for it.
I would, however, argue that the biggest threat for Russia is internal, not external. Nothing is more dangerous for the future of Russia then what I call the "Atlantic Integrationists" and which Putin even called the "5th column". And make no mistake here, we are not talking about Khodorkovsy in New York or Navalnii in the streets of Moscow. We are talking about powerful, rich, influential people who for decades (since Gorbachev's times, or even before) have infiltrated all the levels of government and who today are even in the government of Prime Minister Medvedev. True, these pro-AngloZionist 5th columnists have suffered a series of setbacks and they have been weakened by Putin's relentless assault on their power, but what does "weaker" really mean in our context? According to Mikhail Khazin the Eurasian Sovereignists and the Atlantic Integrationists are now roughly at 50/50 in terms of power. That's right, Putin is far from having total control of Russia and he is in fact locked into a war for survival against a formidable foe who will try to capitalize on every setback Russia suffers, especially in her economy. Putin knows that and he is therefore in a race against time to de-couple Russia from the economic and financial mechanisms which make it possible for the AngloZionists to hurt Russia.
How much does this 5th column account for the apparent zig-zags and apparent appeasement of the West by Russia?
I honestly don't know. Neither does anybody else who is not a true Kremlin insider. In some cases, such as the Minsk agreements, I think that this apparent "zag" was an true expression of Russian political goals. But when I see that Russia is selling coal to the Ukraine on credit (?!) I can only conclude that this is a case of sabotage of Russian national interests. But we will never know for sure. All we can do is to accept that Russia is like a ship or aircraft which is generally holding a specific course, but which regularly zig-zags on the way because the folks in the cockpit are fighting for the control of the helm. In practical terms this means that next year Russia will mostly stay the course. Why? Because time is on Russia's side. For Russia every month, week or day which can delay an overt confrontation with the Ukraine or the West is one day won for preparation internal reform. It is also one more day for the junta in Kiev to slide down one further notch, for the EU economies to carry the full impact of anti-Russian sanctions and for the US to suffer the political consequences of their arrogant, irresponsible and generally unpopular imperial policies.
The single most important political development for Russia is the Russian-Chinese Strategic Alliance (RCSA) which fundamentally changes the entire strategic posture of Russia. I will discuss this tectonic shift in world politics further below, but right now I want to the position of the EU.
5 - The EU
2014 was truly a historical year for the EU marked by the wholesale and abject surrender of the EU political leaders to the United States. From the EU guaranteed agreement between the opposition and Yanokovich which was broken the very next day, the Victoria Nuland's famous words which were never challenged, to the introduction of sanctions the day after the signing of the Minsk agreement, to the political and economic seppuku against South Stream, to the shameful silence and even collaboration with the murderers of the passengers of MH17 - the EU has proven to all that it is only a spineless colony of the AngloZionist Empire and that the EU and the Ukraine are equally subservient puppets of the United States. There is no EU to speak of. It is a US controlled territory whose administration is entrusted to Germany to whose power all the EU nations have bowed. And in this system, countries such as Poland or Lithuania have a special role: to lead the EU in subservience to the USA.
From the latest statements of Putin and Lavrov it is pretty clear that they fully share Victoria Nulands opinion of the EU which they now seem consider as some kind of "geopolitical Conchita Wurst" not worthy of any respect or credibility.
Truly, the EU and its Eurobureaucratic elites have passed a point of no return. If in the past they could still pretend like the EU project was making the EU stronger and that in maintained the sovereignty of its member, now this kind of statement will only be met with a disgusted laughter. As a system the EU has committed suicide and nothing can be further expected of it until it collapses. The riots which have taken place in almost every country of western Europe are a clear sign that most Europeans are either fed-up or desperate or both. In a way, we could say that the EU is run by a Soviet-stylenomenklatura which lives in complete detachment from the rest of the European people in a kind of US-built ivory tower high above the common people. Exactly the kind of situation which results in bloody uprisings and revolutions. I am personally convinced that an explosion of anger could happen anytime, especially in the EU countries bordering the Mediterranean. But unlike the Russians, the Europeans prefer their revolution in the warm weather. So maybe next summer?
The Russians have now officially declared that the NATO expansion into the east was the biggest threat for Russia. And yet I will make the case that NATO is a paper tiger, at least in military terms and that NATO simply does not have what it takes to attack Russia (for my reasons for stating that, please see here). I recently explained that on the blog, and I think that it is worth repeating this once more today:
One more thing: the Russians are most definitely upset about the very aggressive NATO stance because they - correctly - interpret it as a sign of hostility. But, contrary to what a lot of bloggers say, the Russians have no fear of the military threat posed by NATO. Their reaction to the latest NATO moves (new bases and personnel in Central Europe, more spending, etc.) is to denounce it as provocative, but Russian officials all insist that Russia can handle the military threat. As one Russian deputy said "5 rapid reaction diversionary groups is a problem we can solve with one missile". A simplistic but basically correct formula. Putin said the very same thing when he clearly spelled out that in case of a massive conventional attack by "anybody" Russia would engage tactical nukes. In fact, if NATO goes ahead with its stupid plan to deploy forces in Poland and/or the Baltics I expect Russia with withdraw from the IRNF Treaty and deploy advanced successors to the famous RSD-10 (SS-20). As I mentioned before, the decision to double the size of the Russian Airborne Forces and to upgrade the elite 45th Special Designation Airborne Regiment to full brigade-size has already been taken anyway. You could say that Russia preempted the creation of the 10'000 strong NATO force by bringing her own mobile (airborne) forces from 36'000 to 72'000.This is typical Putin. While NATO announces with fanfare and fireworks that NATO will create a special rapid reaction "spearhead" force of 10'000, Putin quietly doubles the size of the Russian Airborne Forces to 72'000. And, believe me, the battle hardened Russian Airborne Forces are a vastly more capable fighting force then the hedonistic and demotivated multi-national (28 countries) Euroforce of 5'000 NATO is struggling hard to put together. The US commanders fully understand that, and they also know that the real purpose of NATO is not to attack Russia, but to maintain the US control over Europe. As early as in 1949 the first NATO Secretary General, Lord Ismay, candidly admitted that NATO's true goal was "to keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down" (notice that in the typical russophobic way of the western elites, Russians are considered as the source of the threat even though in 1949 a Georgian was at the helm of the Soviet Union and that Russians had paid a much higher price in repressions then the non-Russian ethnic groups).
Little has changed since, except that with the "Soviet threat" gone NATO had to scramble to find a justification for itself and that it now wants to find it in the "need to protect European democracy from the resurgent Russian Bear". In other words, the ideal situation for NATO is a crisis just one notch below a full-scale war. In case of a real, shooting, war against Russia NATO will be crushed, but as long as NATO can *pretend* it is defending Europe against Russia it is justifying its existence. Hence the silly hunts for Russian ghost submarines, the "interception" of Russian aircraft in international airspace and the constant stream of dramatic statements that NATO will never allow Russia to attack Poland or Lithuania (as if Russia wanted to do that in the first place!).
NATO will continue doing exactly that: pretend like Russia was going to attack Moldova next and that NATO must prevent that. The flow of incendiary and even frankly irresponsible statements will continue, NATO official will continue to deliver stark warnings to Russia with all the required gravitas and the Empire's corporate media will report them as if they had a factual connection to reality. Keeping the Russians out, the German down and the Americans in will be an easy mission since the Russians don't want in, the Germans have totally surrendered along the rest of Europe, and the Americans are already fully in charge.
7 - China
It is amazing for me to see that most observers and analysts have apparently failed to realize that China is now a key actor in the Ukrainian war. Anybody doubting this claim should read the Vineyard of the Saker White Paper written by Larchmonter 445 entitled The Russia-China Double Helix. To make a long story short, China and Russia have decided to keep their own "hands" (their armed forces) and their own "heads" (their political leadership) but to share a common "torso" (their economies, natural and human resources, their industrial and technological know-how and everything else which allows a society to prosper). I call this the Russia-China Strategic Alliance (RCSA) but really it is something even bigger then that - it is a long term decision to share a common fate and to take the risk to become inseparable. An alliance, a treaty, can be broken or withdrawn from. But once your "internal organs" are shared with another entity you are bound together, for better or for worse. What has happened is truly a tectonic geopolitical shift: two empires have decided to join together while remaining sovereign and independent. To my knowledge this has never happened in history and Putin and Xi have already changed the course of history by this monumental decision.
The two countries are ideal symbionts: everything one has the other needs and vice versa. China needs Russian raw materials, especially energy, Russian high technology (aerospace, engines, power plants, etc.) and Russian armaments (everything from the rifle bullet to the ICBM). Russia needs two things from China: money and "Walmart" (consumer goods). Together these two giants not only have immense currency resources but the biggest stash of physical gold on the planet. And, to make things even better, Russia and China are the undisputed leaders of BRICS and SCO. Taken together these two countries are already far more powerful than the AngloZionist Empire and that trend will only grow.
|A Russian, a Russian Asian and a Chinese solider|
In the Ukraine, China still play a crucial role by providing Russia will all the economic aid needed to overcome the western sanctions and restructure the Russian economy. The Chinese have now officially declared that. It is both ironic and beautiful that after decades of Russian fears that China might try to conquer Siberia (even Solzhenitsyn shared these fears) Putin and Xi have found a much more intelligent solution - Russia will sell Siberia's riches to China while China will protect Russia from the West. Again, this is truly a historic development whose importance cannot be overstated.
Adding up all these vectors
So let's add it all up now. In summary:
The USA now has no other option then to press on their assault on Russia because what is at stake is quite literally the future of the AngloZionist Empire and, therefore, the future of our planet. China uniting with Russia is definitely bad news, but it is too late for the USA to back down now or even to change course. The Americans probably realize that they have fired their best shots already and that the Ukrainian junta is in deep trouble and that the collapse of their Nazi "Banderastan" is just a matter of time. In other words, the Empire is now in a "use them or lose them" situation and "fighting Russia down to the last Ukrainian" is now the best option for the US 1%ers.
The Ukrainian Junta members are basically in the same situation as the USA: they must realize that their days are numbered and that their best chance is to do the US bidding and trigger a huge crisis.
The Novorussians are stuck: they have to do whatever the Kremlin wants them to do, hope for the best, prepare for the worst and courageously face anything in the middle.
Russia needs to avoid an open confrontation with the West for as long as possible.
The EU will remain as irrelevant and pathetic as ever.
NATO will play a dangerous game of brinkmanship trying to create as much tensions as possible without triggering an actual conflict.
China will do whatever it takes to protect Russia from the economic war waged against her.
From the above I conclude that unless some major development substantially alters the current dynamic the resulting vector clearly points at the inevitability of a full-scale war between Russia and the Ukraine along the scenario outlined above ("A full scale war between Russia and the Ukraine"). There is no reason whatsoever to expect the US, the Nazi junta, NATO or the EU to begin acting in a responsible or constructive manner. For these reasons, Russia will be alone in trying to avoid an intervention the Donbass and the inevitable war with the Ukraine following it. The best way for Russia to achieve this goal is to arm Novorussia to the teeth, to provide much more humanitarian support then now, to try re-launch as much of the Novorussian economy as possible (preferably by investments and contracts, not just grants) and generally help to make Novorussia as viable as possible under the current conditions. If the Novorussian could repeat their amazing feat once more and repel or, even better, deter the future Ukrainian attack this would be a crushing defeat not only for the junta in Kiev, but also for all its supporters in the AngloZionist Empire. The "equation" is simple: if Novorussia can stand up to the Ukrainians and Russia is not forced to intervene the Nazi regime in Kiev is finished along with the entire Neocon plan against Russia. If Russia is forced to intervene, Novorussia will be saved and the junta finished, but the Neocons plan will have succeeded and Russia will suffer a major geostrategic setback
Russia desperately needs more time and I expect the Russian diplomacy to try every possible delaying tactic imaginable to buy as much time as possible before the inevitable Ukrainian attack on Novorussia. I am even willing to consider that the recent sale (really, a gift) of coal to Kiev might be such a delaying tactic, I don't know. What is clear for me that most of these delaying tactics will look like "appeasement" to the external observer and that, in the end, our perception of these moves will depend on our assumptions and, basically, our take on the person of Vladimir Putin. I might be wrong, but I personally trust him and short of very strong evidence I will never believe that he will "sell out" Novorussia or anybody else in the Ukraine. Not only do I believe that he is way too smart to do such a stupid and self-defeating thing, but I have also come to the conclusion that he is a highly principled person who will never betray the people he took an oath to defend.
My very tentative "guesstimates" for 2015:
2014 has been a historic year and so will be 2015, if only because 2014 set a great deal of things in motion, but resolved none of them. I have come to the conclusion that there is a 80% chance of a massive Ukrainian attack on Novorussia next year, probably in the first part of the year. My best guesstimate is that Novorussia will probably be able to beat back this attack, albeit with great effort and big losses. The Russian economy will continue to suffer and appear to be sinking for the next six months or so at which point it will gradually start reversing that trend. The EU economy will enter into full and deep recession resulting in widespread social unrest. As for the USA, they probably will be able to pretend like nothing big, not big disaster, is happening, if only thanks to the money printing machine and the best propaganda machine in history. What the US will be unable to do is to prevent the gradual but inexorable de-dollarization of more and more of the world economy, lead by China and Russia. The true and final collapse of the AngloZionist Empire is inevitable, but not for the next couple of years.
I wish you all the very best for 2015 and, above all, I wish you peace.
May God protect us all from war!
PS: I am now taking a couple of days of rest (I worked 16 hours yesterday to write this report and I am exhausted) and, barring some major event, I will not post anything here until January 2nd. The "donate" button on the left will still work (hint, hint). I will continue to moderate so please feel free to use the comments section below as an "open thread".
PPS: The credit for both videos used in this report should go to:
Transcript & Translation: Mikhael, Dancing Queen, S, Marina, Natasha, DzhMM, Roobit & Eugene
Production: Marina & The French Saker
Crucial assistance: Marina, Francois, Augmented Ether
POSTED BY VINEYARDSAKER: AT 18:30