Uncategorized

Hungary’s Viktor Orban: Washington’s new enemy image

Posted by

0

This article was written before the South Stream pipeline was stopped.

From New Eastern Outlook Journal, November 21, 2014
By William Engdahl
http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/21/hungary-s-viktor-orban-washington-s-new-enemy-image/

Hungary and its populist nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban have come into the cross-hairs of Washington’s political elites. His sin? Not buckling under to the often destructive diktats of the Brussels EU Commission; attempting to define a Hungarian national identity. But his cardinal sin is his deepening relationship with Russia and his defiance of Washington in signing an agreement with Gazprom for bringing the Russian South Stream gas pipeline into the EU via Hungary.

Orban has himself undergone a political journey since he was elected as Hungary’s second-youngest Prime Ministers in 1998. Back then he oversaw the entry of Hungary along with Poland and the Czech Republic into NATO over Russia’s protest, and into the EU. As Prime Minister during far more prosperous economic times in the EU, Orban cut taxes, abolished university tuition for qualified students, expanded maternity benefits, and attracted German industry with low-cost Hungarian labor. One of his American “advisers” then was James Denton, linked with the Color Revolution Washington NGO, Freedom House. Orban seemed the darling of Washington’s neo-cons. In 2001 he was given the neoconservative American Enterprise Institute’s Freedom Award.

But in 2010 after six years in the opposition, Orban returned, this time with a resounding majority for his Fidesz-Hungarian Civic Union Party, Fidesz for short. In fact Fidesz won a 68% supermajority in Parliament, giving it the necessary votes to alter the Constitution and pass new laws, which it did. Ironically, in a case of the pot calling the kettle black, the United States Obama Administration and the European Parliament for placing too much power in the hands of Fidesz. Orban was accused by Daniel Cohn-Bendit of the European Greens of making Hungary on the model of Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez. He was definitely not playing by the approved Brussels Rulebook for politically submissive EU politicians. Fidesz began to be demonized in EU media as the Hungarian version of United Russia and Orban as the Hungarian Putin. That was in 2012.

Now it’s getting alarming for the Atlanticists and their EU followers. Orban has defied EU demands to stop construction of Russia’s important South Stream gas pipeline.

Russia’s South Stream gas pipeline would guarantee EU gas together with German-Russian Nord Stream that could bypass the war in Ukraine something Washington bitterly opposes for obvious reasons

Last January Orban’s government announced a € 10 billion deal with the Russian state nuclear energy company to refurbish Hungary’s only nuclear power plant at Paks, originally built during the Soviet era with Russian technology.

That caused some attention in Washington. Similarly when Orban criticized the United States this past summer for failing to ultimately resolve the global financial crisis its banks and its lax regulation caused, and praised China, Turkey and Russia as better models. He declared in words not too different from what I have often used that Western democracies, “will probably be incapable of maintaining their global competitiveness in the upcoming decades and will instead be scaled down unless they are capable of changing themselves significantly.” In addition, Orban’s government managed to free Hungary from decades of devastating IMF bondage. In August 2013, the Hungarian Economic Ministry announced that it had, thanks to a “disciplined budget policy,” repaid the remaining €2.2 billion owed to the IMF. No more onerous IMF-forced state privatizations or conditionalities. The head of the Hungarian Central Bank then demanded the IMF close its offices in Budapest. In addition, echoing Iceland, the State Attorney General brought charges against the country’s three previous prime ministers because of the criminal amount of debt into which they plunged the nation. That’s a precedent that surely causes cold sweat in some capitals of the EU or Washington and Wall Street.

But the real alarm bells rang when Orban and his Fidesz party approved a go-ahead, together with neighboring Austria, of the South Stream Russian pipeline, ignoring EU claims it violated EU rules. Orben proclaimed at a meeting with Germany’s Horst Seehofer in Munich on November 6, “”Es lebe die österreichisch-ungarische Energiemonarchie” („The Austro-Hungarian Energy Monarchy Lives.“)

The US elites sounded the alarm immediately. The ultra-establishment New York Times ran a lead editorial, “Hungary’s Dangerous Slide.” They declared, “The government of Prime Minister Viktor Orban of Hungary is sliding toward authoritarianism and defying the fundamental values of the European Union — and getting away with it.”

The Times revealed the real cause of Washington and Wall Street alarm: “Hungary’s most recent expression of contempt for the European Union is its passage of a law on Monday that clears the way for Russia’s South Stream natural gas pipeline to traverse Hungary. The new law is in clear violation of the European Parliament’s call in September for member states to cancel South Stream, and of the economic sanctions against Russia imposed by the European Union and the United States after Russia’s actions in Ukraine. Instead of issuing tepid expressions of concern over antidemocratic policies, the European Union should be moving to sanction Hungary. Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, should exercise his power to force Mr. Navracsics to resign.” Tibor Navracsics, has just been named the new European Commissioner of Education, Culture, Youth and Sport, a post in Brussels that has arguably little to do with gas pipelines.

Next we can expect the National Endowment for Democracy and the usual US Government-backed NGO’s to find an excuse to launch mass opposition protests against Fidesz and Orban for his unforgivable crime of trying to make Hungary’s energy independent of the US-created insanity in Ukraine.

F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/21/hungary-s-viktor-orban-washington-s-new-enemy-image/

 

U.S. House of Representatives votes 98% to donate U.S. weapons to Ukraine. U.S. public is 67% against. Is this democracy?

Posted by

0

By Eric Zuesse, December 7, 2014

In a remarkable disjunction between voters and their elected (supposed) representatives in the U.S. House of Representatives, the members of the House voted on December 4th, by  411 “Yea” to 10 “Nay,” to donate U.S. weapons to the bankrupt Ukrainian Government, which is engaged in trying to eliminate the civilian population of the portion of Ukraine that had voted 90% for the former Ukrainian President whom the U.S. Government (CIA, State Department, USAID, etc.) had overthrown in a violent coup in February of this year. (Click onto that link for full documentation.)

This 411 to 10 vote margin is 98%, and it contrasts starkly against the 62% of Americans who, in the most recent poll, opposed sending U.S. arms to the Ukrainian Government; 30% favored sending those weapons. (8% had no opinion.) (The above link includes also that poll-result.) So, 67% of those who had an opinion (62% divided by 92% is 67%) shared the view of the 10 members (2%) of the U.S. House who voted against this measure. Only 33% of the surveyed Americans who had an opinion on it shared the view of the 411 House members (98%) who voted in favor of this measure.

This is a war-and-peace issue, so the U.S. Constitution assigns it to the Congress; the President is assigned the executive function of carrying out the will of Congress, as the Commander-in-Chief and U.S. Chief Executive Officer.

However, the situation here is actually even a bit more extreme than that, because the way that the Pew poll of the U.S. public was phrased, it had the U.S. “sending arms and military supplies to the Ukrainian government,” and not “donating arms and military supplies to the Ukrainian government.” The Ukrainian Government cannot possibly actually pay back all of the financial obligations that it already has, much less pay those plus interest, and buy more weapons. As was documented in the first of the links within the linked report above, “The only reason that things haven’t totally imploded [for the Ukrainian Government] is because of the $18 billion package of assistance from the IMF and the $9 billion in additional assistance pledged by the United States and the European Union.” All of the weapons that the U.S. will be technically ‘selling’ to Ukraine will now go to the back of the line of creditors for Ukrainian debt — never be paid. U.S. arms-makers will receive payment for those arms from U.S. taxpayers (the sale won’t be merely technical for them, nor for the lobbyists they pay), it won’t be paid actually by the Ukrainian Government. Consequently, the U.S. taxpayer is totally funding Ukraine’s bombing campaign going forward, to eliminate the residents in the area which overwhelmingly supported the previous Ukrainian President.

In fact, on September 18th, when the U.S.-installed new Ukrainian President was greeted with standing ovations by a special Joint Session of the U.S. Congress, he addressed them and the weapons-lobbyists to cheers as if he were a hero; he said that this was “the forefront of the global fight for democracy,” and said “I urge America to help us, I urge America to lead the way.” He was doing a sell-job for them and their financial backers. Of course, those financial backers also fund the sale of these politicians to the public.

His use of the term “democracy” there was interesting. A secretly recorded phone conversation on 25 February 2014, right after the coup, was subsequently uploaded to the Internet, and the discussants were Catherine Ashton, the EU’s Foreign Affairs Minister, and her appointed investigator into how Ukraine’s President Viktor Yanukovych came to be ousted on February 22nd, Urmas Paet. In it, was revealed that the snipers who precipitated the coup had been hired by “somebody from the new coalition” (perhaps the U.S. CIA) that replaced Yanukovych, and that, “it’s really disturbing that now the new coalition, … they don’t want to investigate [since they were its beneficiaries].” Paet told Ashton that, “what was quite disturbing, the same oligarch [Poroshenko — and so when he became ‘democratically elected’ as President of all of Ukraine on May 25th, he already knew this] told [Paet] that well, all the evidence shows that the people who were killed by snipers, from both sides, among policemen and people from the streets, [this will shock Ashton, who had just said that Yanukovych had masterminded the killings] that they were the same snipers, killing people from both sides.” So, Poroshenko himself knows that his regime is based on a false-flag (meaning set up so as to falsely blame the other side) U.S.-controlled coup d’etat against his predecessor. So, there can be no reasonable doubt that, despite his rhetoric when speaking before the Special Joint Session of the U.S. Congress on September 18th, Poroshenko actually knew, by no later than February 25th, that the regime that replaced Yanukovych was being appointed by the United States Government, hardly a ‘democratic Maidan’ event (though it is sold as if it were). Continue reading →

Ukraine receives new weapons and tanks

Posted by

0

From Global Research, December 8, 2014
By Eric Zuesse

The Government of Ukraine held a ceremony on Saturday, December 6th, with the country’s President, Petro Poroshenko, reviewing newly donated weapons, from undisclosed donors.

According to the official announcement, “The Armed Forces’ units received tanks Т-64BМ ‘Bulat’, tanks Т-64 BV, Т-72 B1, Т-72UA, Т-72A, BТR-3е and BТR-4е, self-propelled artillery 2C1 and helicopters Mi-8 and Mi-2. The President personally inspected all.”

Poroshenko said:

“We are providing the troops with new armored vehicles, precise anti-tank means, counterbattery means, means of communication and protection systems. At the same time, we are holding negotiations with our partners on the procurement of modern weapons that are not produced in Ukraine.”

Weapons bought from other countries can be paid for only with borrowed money, because the Government of Ukraine is basically broke and soaring even deeper into debt, and is sharply cutting back on pensions and other expenditures than military, which is receiving the Government’s virtually total focus. Any added loans will never be able to be paid back, because Ukraine will not be able to pay back all of the existing loans. Consequently, all countries that are now ‘lending’ additional funds to Ukraine are simply donating to Ukraine. Furthermore, the IMF is demanding that the breakaway Ukrainian areas be conquered in order for additional loans to be made to the Ukrainian Government. So, all newly loaned money will be going to Ukraine’s military.

Here are the new tanks:

http://www.president.gov.ua/en/gallery/2369.html#39924

These weapons will be sent to the southeast, in order to conquer the breakaway republics that reject the regime that was forced upon them on February 22nd, in an extremely violent coup against the then-existing President, Viktor Yanukovych, for whom the residents in that area had voted approximately 90%. That rejection of the coup-regime sparked an on-again, off-again, invasion from the Ukrainian armed forces, which can be seen at various sites, such as here and here and here and here.

The official announcement of this ceremony said that the new weapons will “help Ukrainian warriors win and liberate the Ukrainian territories from the occupants.”

The election of President Poroshenko was held only in the areas of Ukraine that accepted the coup-imposed regime. “The occupants” (as the President there referred to them) in the other area did not participate in that election, the election of him, though his Government demands they accept that Government as representing them, nonetheless. After the new regime started dropping bombs on them, and sending tanks in to kill as many of them as fast as possible, their determination not to accept this Government only hardened.

The last Ukrainian Government election in which those people, “the occupants,” were voting, occurred in 2010, at which Viktor Yanukovych won above 80% in some districts, and above 90% in other districts. A map showing the vote in each district of Ukraine, in that election — the last fully national Ukrainian election — can be seen here:

 

Vladimir Putin’s Presidential Address to the Russian Federal Assembly, December 4, 2014

Posted by

0

From the Kremlin, Moscow
http://eng.kremlin.ru/transcripts/23341

Vladimir Putin delivered the annual Presidential Address to the Federal Assembly. The Address was traditionally delivered at the Kremlin’s St George Hall before an audience of over 1,000 people.

In his Address, the President set out his views on the situation in Ukraine and outlined Russia’s position with regard to events taking place there. In the foreign policy section of the Address, Mr Putin also spoke about international security issues and the integration processes taking place in the world.

On the subject of Russia’s economic strategy, the President said that Russia is open to the world, to investment and to carrying out projects together, but ultimately, Russia’s development depends above all on the country’s own efforts. Mr Putin named development of new technology and competitive goods, giving the country’s industry and financial sector a more solid foundation, and training the needed personnel as priority tasks. 

The President also talked about relations between the state and business, in particular the need to free up the environment for doing business as much as possible and the concrete steps that can be taken to achieve this. Mr Putin proposed that no changes be made to the current tax rules for the next four years, and also proposed an amnesty for capital returning to Russia.

The President set the goal of reaching growth rates above the world average within the next 3-4 years.

Mr Putin also set objectives in the financial sector, agribusiness, and the banking sector, and declared the need to free Russia from dependence on foreign technology. Import substitution is a long term strategy, the President said, and is a goal for Russia regardless of the situation with sanctions. Mr Putin also gave the main target figures for Russian exports and investment levels.   

The President proposed implementing a national technology initiative that will involve forecasting the technology needs required to guarantee Russia’s national security and ensure high living standards and economic development over the coming 10-15 years.

The President also spoke about demography, healthcare and education.

In his concluding section, Mr Putin focused on the dialogue between the state authorities and the public and the need to raise civic activeness and Russia’s civil society potential.

The ceremony was attended by members of the Federation Council, State Duma deputies, members of the Government, heads of the Constitutional and Supreme Courts, heads of the constituent entities, chairpersons of regional legislative assemblies, heads of Russia’s traditional faiths, public figures, including heads of regional civic chamber, and executives of Russia’s major media outlets.

* * *

PRESIDENT OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN: Citizens of Russia, members of the Federation Council and deputies of the State Duma,

Today’s address will be related to the current situation and conditions, as well as the tasks we are facing. But before delivering it I’d like to thank all of you for the support, unity and solidarity you have shown during the landmark events that will seriously influence the future of our country.

This year we faced trials that only a mature and united nation and a truly sovereign and strong state can withstand. Russia has proved that it can protect its compatriots and defend truth and fairness.

Russia has done this thanks to its citizens, thanks to your work and the results we have achieved together, and thanks to our profound understanding of the essence and importance of national interests. We have become aware of the indivisibility and integrity of the thousand-year long history of our country. We have come to believe in ourselves, to believe that we can do much and achieve every goal.

Of course, we will talk about this year’s landmark events. You know that a referendum was held in Crimea in March, at which its residents clearly expressed their desire to join Russia. After that, the Crimean parliament – it should be stressed that it was a legitimate parliament that was elected back in 2010 – adopted a resolution on sovereignty. And then we saw the historical reunification of Crimea and Sevastopol with Russia.

It was an event of special significance for the country and the people, because Crimea is where our people live, and the peninsula is of strategic importance for Russia as the spiritual source of the development of a multifaceted but solid Russian nation and a centralised Russian state. It was in Crimea, in the ancient city of Chersonesus or Korsun, as ancient Russian chroniclers called it, that Grand Prince Vladimir was baptised before bringing Christianity to Rus.

In addition to ethnic similarity, a common language, common elements of their material culture, a common territory, even though its borders were not marked then, and a nascent common economy and government, Christianity was a powerful spiritual unifying force that helped involve various tribes and tribal unions of the vast Eastern Slavic world in the creation of a Russian nation and Russian state. It was thanks to this spiritual unity that our forefathers for the first time and forevermore saw themselves as a united nation. All of this allows us to say that Crimea, the ancient Korsun or Chersonesus, and Sevastopol have invaluable civilisational and even sacral importance for Russia, like the Temple Mount in Jerusalem for the followers of Islam and Judaism.

And this is how we will always consider it.

Dear friends,

We cannot fail to mention today our perspective on the developments in Ukraine and how we intend to work with our partners around the world.

It is well known that Russia not only supported Ukraine and other brotherly republics of the former Soviet Union in their aspirations to sovereignty, but also facilitated this process greatly in the 1990s. Since then, our position has remained unchanged.

Every nation has an inalienable sovereign right to determine its own development path, choose allies and political regimes, create an economy and ensure its security. Russia has always respected these rights and always will. This fully applies to Ukraine and the Ukrainian people.

It is true that we condemned the government coup and the forceful takeover of power in Kiev in February of this year. The developments we are currently witnessing in Ukraine and the tragedy unfolding in the country’s southeast prove that we were right to take such a stand.

How did it all begin? I will have to remind you what happened back then. It is hard to believe that it all started with a technical decision by President Yanukovych to postpone the signing of the Association Agreement between Ukraine and the European Union. Make no mistake, he did not refuse to sign the document, but only postponed it in order to make some adjustments.

As you recall, this move was fully in line with the constitutional authority vested upon an absolutely legitimate and internationally recognised head of state.

Against this background, there was no way we could support this armed coup, the violence and the killings. Just take the bloody events in Odessa, where people were burned alive. How can the subsequent attempts to suppress people in Ukraine’s southeast, who oppose this mayhem, be supported? I reiterate that there was no way we could endorse these developments. What’s more, they were followed by hypocritical statements on the protection of international law and human rights. This is just cynical. I strongly believe that the time will come when the Ukrainian people will deliver a just assessment of these developments.

How did the dialogue on this issue begin between Russia and its American and European partners? I mentioned our American friends for a reason, since they are always influencing Russia’s relations with its neighbours, either openly or behind the scenes. Sometimes it is even unclear whom to talk to: to the governments of certain countries or directly with their American patrons and sponsors. Continue reading →

U.S. Congress approves “No Social Security for Nazis” Act, while providing ongoing U.S. military and logistical aid for Ukrainian Nazis

Posted by

0

“Congress never intended for participants in Nazi persecution[i] to be allowed to enter the United States or to reap the benefits of United States residency or citizenship, including participation in the Nation’s Social Security program.”

Last week, Congress unanimously approved the “No Social Security for Nazis” Act – HR 5739.[ii] It was a reaction to a scandal that broke out this fall.

In October, the news media reported that Nazi immigrants, some brought to the U.S. under Operation Paperclip, were induced to leave the country by allowing them to retain Social Security benefits.

Outrage reigned in this pseudo-scandal. Taxpayer dollars were spent to support Nazis? How could this be?

Lawmakers quickly put together HR 5739 to show their opposition to Nazis… that is “1940s Nazis who directly supported Hitler” Nazis, not American Nazis, not Nazis in other countries since then. Conveniently, there are reportedly only 4 of the HR 5739 Nazis left.

The rules about who may not enter the United States are here: http://www.uscis.gov/iframe/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-2006.html

Read the very carefully defined scope of Nazis.
———————————————————————-
From the Immigration and Nationality Act — INA:

(E) PARTICIPANTS IN NAZI PERSECUTION, GENOCIDE, OR THE COMMISSION OF ANY ACT OF TORTURE OR EXTRAJUDICIAL KILLING 

(i) Participation in nazi persecutions.-Any alien who, during the period beginning on March 23, 1933, and ending on May 8, 1945, under the direction of, or in association with- 

(I) the Nazi government of Germany, 

(II) any government in any area occupied by the military forces of the Nazi government of Germany, 

(III) any government established with the assistance or cooperation of the Nazi government of Germany, or 

(IV) any government which was an ally of the Nazi government of Germany, ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any person because of race, religion, national origin, or political opinion is inadmissible.
————————————————————-

Notice the very narrow time frame and geographical reference. Notice that it does not include current governments or organizations. However, the U.S. government even violated these provisions for programs such as Operation Paperclip and Operation Nightingale (Nachtegall) (not to be confused with the current Nightingale program, named perhaps to confuse, and providing archaeological training to veterans).[iii]

Interestingly, there are INA provision that apply to these Ukrainian officials and leaders, including Voldymyr Parasiuk[iv] and President Poroshenko. For instance,

(ii) Participation in genocide.-Any alien who ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in genocide, as defined in section 1091(a) of title 18, United States Code, is inadmissible.

There is also a lengthy section on terrorism.

However, these individuals are not just allowed into the United States. They are welcomed, feted, and given standing ovations in Congress if they serve a specific foreign policy objective.

And what about the Americans who assist and train them?

The House just approved supporting Ukrainian Nazis in H. Res 758. And the National Defense Authorization Act 2015 has specific provisions supporting these same ultra-nationalist and Nazi groups. The CIA and FBI provide assistance and training to these groups. The California National Guard continues to train and assist the Ukrainian National Guard, including bringing them into the United States. Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland stated in May that the U.S. had spent $5 billion on Ukraine thus far. She was directly involved in selecting the current Kiev regime leaders.

When Congress gave its robust welcome to Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko this fall, it clearly demonstrated either a profound and dangerous ignorance about events and history in Ukraine (an example of ignorance about other critical areas of U.S. policy) or a warm support for U.S. historical intervention, covert operations, and regime change in Ukraine.

The United States recently refused to approve the latest UN resolution condemning Nazism and hate crimes, and it has refused to approve the previous ones.

So, don’t lie to me about United States condemnation of Nazism. This hypocritical action will be used as a PR stunt together with the powerful Jewish lobby to show opposition to Nazism, when the exact opposite is true — support for ongoing, current Nazi, ultra-nationalist actions and genocide in the Ukraine, and a welcome mat into the United States and other Western nations.

————————————————————————-

[i] It’s not clear what they’re saying: persecution by Nazis or persecution of Nazis. Currently, it seems that the latter definition applies.

[ii] https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/5739/text

[iii] http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-and-americas-global-war-on-terrorism-is-us-nato-applying-the-syria-model-in-ukraine/5380611

[iv] http://journal-neo.org/2014/11/12/stewart-colbert-and-the-upcoming-nazi-terrorist-conference-in-new-york-city/

Petition: No new nukes, dismantle old nukes

Posted by

0

Sign the petition and pass it on http://diy.rootsaction.org/petitions/no-new-nukes-dismantle-old-ones

Then let your elected officials know how you feel.

From Roots Action –

To the U.S. Congress, President, Department of “Defense”:

Build no new nuclear weapons. Stop struggling with an aging arsenal and begin dismantling it, as required by the Non-Proliferation Treaty.

Why is this important?

It is an outrage that the U.S. President is planning to ask the Congress for ONE TRILLION DOLLARS over the next 30 years to perpetuate the nuclear terror by building a new nuclear bomb factory, as well as new nuclear bombs, and their delivery systems — missiles, planes and submarines capable of destroying all life on earth many times over.

We can either eliminate all nuclear weapons or we can watch them proliferate. There’s no middle way. We can either have no nuclear weapons states, or we can have many. As long as some states have nuclear weapons others will desire them, and the more that have them the more easily they will spread to others still. If nuclear weapons continue to exist, there will very likely be a nuclear catastrophe, and the more the weapons have proliferated, the sooner it will come. Hundreds of incidents have nearly destroyed our world through accident, confusion, misunderstanding, and extremely irrational machismo.

Recently nuclear bombs were mistakenly flown to Mississippi from their bases in North Dakota and no one knew they were missing for over 38 hours. And a number of soldiers with their finger on the nuclear button in the missile launch silos were dismissed for drunkeness and cheating on tests, while silo doors were found to be improperly secured.

Possessing nuclear weapons does absolutely nothing to keep us safe, so that there is really no trade-off involved in eliminating them. They do not deter terrorist attacks by non-state actors in any way. Nor do they add an iota to a military’s ability to deter nations from attacking, given the United States’ ability to destroy anything anywhere at any time with non-nuclear weapons. The United States, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, France, and China have all lost wars against non-nuclear powers while possessing nukes.

The elimination of nuclear weapons is globally a widely recognized need, as well as a legally mandated action, and a step toward a world beyond war.

 

NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander General Philip Breedlove warns about militarization of Crimea, but not about NATO’s expansion and military activities

Posted by

0

General Philip Breedlove’s philosophy, along with the U.S. and British government, is that the U.S. and NATO can take any action they want, right up to a country’s borders, and no country is allowed to take a responsive action. Even raising an eyebrow is condemned. In July, there was repeated shelling of border posts and over the border into Russia by Ukrainian government forces . A Russian citizen was killed in a  town on the other side of the border, as well as several injured, but this causes no condemnation, though it is as act of war. [1]

Illogical? Absolutely.  This is American and Western entitlement and arrogance at its worst. Every country of the world must realize the threat of “manifest destiny” which is at the root of American history and values. Independent countries are perceived as an unallowable encroachment on American dominance — territorial, commercial, financial, militarial. “Sea to shining sea” means everywhere — full spectrum dominance.[2]

Americans who find this utterly repugnant, who want respectful and harmonious relations with all nations, must stand up, expose, and condemn these racist, ultra-nationalist, and predatory American values.

We must build something different, and we must do it now.

From NSNBC, November 27, 2014
By Christof Lehmann
http://nsnbc.me/2014/11/27/nato-saceur-breedlove-warns-militarization-crimea/

General Philip Breedlove, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and commander of the U.S.’ European Command warned against what he described as Russia’s militarization of the Crimean peninsula and provocative Russian military flights through NATO airspace. Breedlove did not mention NATO’s sustained expansion of its presence in eastern Europe, the Baltic and the Black Sea. 

USS Ross, participated in NATO’s Sea Breeze drills hosted by Ukraine in the Black Sea in September and used Turkish ports to circumvent the Montreux Convention.

After meetings with Ukrainian government officials in Kiev, NATO SACEUR Breedlove addressed the press, warning about Moscow’s military buildup which includes cruise missiles as well as surface to air missiles, adding that this upgraded profile projects military power and influence throughout the region. General Breedlove added:

“We are very concerned with the militarization of Crimea. We are concerned that the capabilities in Crimea that are being installed will bring an effect on almost the entire Black Sea”.

Breedlove also expressed concerns about what he described as “the provocative Russian military flights” being flown over NATO countries, but added, that these flights all took place in international airspace.

Not mentioning any legal arguments, Breedlove would rather make use of strategic argumentation, saying:

“The number and the pattern has changed, maybe as much as three times as much as we have seen before. … Also, we see that some of these flights have increased in size, normally before seeing only one or two airplanes and now seeing a group of airplanes”.

Breedlove stressed that there has been observed “an unusual spike” in Russian military flights over the Black Sea as well as over the Baltic and North Sea and over the Atlantic Ocean.

Asked by several reporters, Breedlove consistently dodged questions whether the U.S. administration of President Obama should supply Ukraine with arms and other questions about NATO’s eastwards expansion and its increased presence in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea. Breedlove’s answer, coming most closely to a response to such questions was:

“We continue to look at the requirements here in Ukraine. We continue to advise and offer thoughts on these, and nothing at this time is off the table“. (emphasis added)

The Obama administration has approved of a $118 million non-lethal aid package for Ukraine which reportedly includes body armor, that can be used by offensive forces, night vision devices which can be used by offensive forces, as well as three portable anti-mortar radar systems, which also can be used by offensive forces.

The U.S. administration consistently alleged that Russia is “fomenting an insurgency” in Ukraine’s Donbass region and that Russian forces, including Speznaz (Special Forces) crossed the border and are among the local self-defense forces in the Donbass region.

Not one Russian soldier, however, has been captured, documented to be killed, nor has it otherwise been “documented” with evidence that was made available to independent media for independent verification, that could support these claims. This is particuarly noteworthy in a time and age where almost everybody has cell-phones with both photo and video cameras. Russia vehemently rejects these claims.

To understand the bearing of General Breedlove’s statement it is necessary to understand NATO’s structure.

The vast majority of western Europeans are unaware of of the actual structure of NATO and that all key decisions are made in Washington.

It is a common misconception, especially in western Europe, that NATO is led by its Secretary-General. NATO’s Secretary-General is usually a European, which leads western Europeans to assume that Europe plays a significant role with regard to NATO policy.

The actual command structure of NATO in Europe, however, is led by the SACEUR, which is, and which always has been a U.S. general. The role of the Secretay-General is ceremonial and to some degree diplomatic, with NATO’s diplomatic posturing being determined in and by Washington. The selection of a Secretary-General can, however, help to determine which policies NATO plans to implement over a given period of years.

Breedlove did not mention that NATO has increased its presence in Poland and the Baltic countries; has increased its patrol activities over the Baltic Sea in cooperation with Sweden; has deployed missiles and jest as close to the Russian border as possible, has violated the agreement not to expand NATO beyond East Germany; has chosen Poland as base for the newly established “Rapid Response Force” which is directed against Russia; and has significantly, and in circumvention of the Montreux Convention increased its Navy presence in the Black Sea.

UNA-UNSO Marching in Ukraine.

NATO’s Black Sea vessels are predominantly vessels of the Arleigh Burke Destroyer Class which is capable of launching cruise missiles.

The Russian naval base in Sevatopol has, in other words, come under an increased and direct threat of cruise missile attacks, which would explain that Russia is forced to deploy strategic countermeasures.

It is also noteworthy that NATO’s covert warfare and covert “stay-behind” armies in Europe, a.k.a. GLADIO, are under the supervision and command of NATO’s SACEUR,

It is a well known fact that the Ukrainian UNA-UNSO, which is associated to the overtly NAZI Pravy Sector, and which has been re-dubbed into “special regional military units” also works in liaison and under the command of the at any time functioning NATO SACEUR. That is, for the time being, General Philip Breedlove.

CH/L – nsnbc 27.11.2014

Source:

[1] http://www.uacrisis.com/ukrainian-army-shoot-at-russian-territory-again-trying-to-provoke/

[2] from the American patriotic hymn, “America the Beautiful”

Video: “Overkilled” by Isao Hashimoto

Posted by

0

Can we afford a nuclear war?

In this short, simple, and powerful video, the filmmaker drops a bead for Hiroshima, then another bead for Nagasaki, then a bead for each nuclear weapon in the global arsenal onto a glass table.

2:10

http://youtu.be/PMweTJAe2u8

The United States wants to spend billions to update and expand its nuclear arsenal. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/sep/29/congress-nuclear-weapons-new-mexico-radioactivity

How wise is that?

If you care about the earth, if you care about your family and friends, put this on a disc and show it at public meetings, including city meetings. Show it to your friends, to classes, to children. Share this with elected officials. It’s a conversation starter and a wake-up call.

We must stop this madness.

Ron Paul: Reckless Congress Declares War on Russia

Posted by

2

From Strategic Culture Foundation, December 5, 2014

Today the US House passed what I consider to be one of the worst pieces of legislation ever. H. Res. 758 was billed as a resolution “strongly condemning the actions of the Russian Federation, under President Vladimir Putin, which has carried out a policy of aggression against neighboring countries aimed at political and economic domination.”

In fact, the bill was 16 pages of war propaganda that should have made even neocons blush, if they were capable of such a thing.

These are the kinds of resolutions I have always watched closely in Congress, as what are billed as “harmless” statements of opinion often lead to sanctions and war. I remember in 1998 arguing strongly against the Iraq Liberation Act because, as I said at the time, I knew it would lead to war. I did not oppose the Act because I was an admirer of Saddam Hussein – just as now I am not an admirer of Putin or any foreign political leader – but rather because I knew then that another war against Iraq would not solve the problems and would probably make things worse. We all know what happened next.

That is why I can hardly believe they are getting away with it again, and this time with even higher stakes: provoking a war with Russia that could result in total destruction!

If anyone thinks I am exaggerating about how bad this resolution really is, let me just offer a few examples from the legislation itself:

The resolution (paragraph 3) accuses Russia of an invasion of Ukraine and condemns Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty. The statement is offered without any proof of such a thing. Surely with our sophisticated satellites that can read a license plate from space we should have video and pictures of this Russian invasion. None have been offered. As to Russia’s violation of Ukrainian sovereignty, why isn’t it a violation of Ukraine’s sovereignty for the US to participate in the overthrow of that country’s elected government as it did in February? We have all heard the tapes of State Department officials plotting with the US Ambassador in Ukraine to overthrow the government. We heard US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland bragging that the US spent $5 billion on regime change in Ukraine. Why is that OK?

The resolution (paragraph 11) accuses the people in east Ukraine of holding “fraudulent and illegal elections” in November. Why is it that every time elections do not produce the results desired by the US government they are called “illegal” and “fraudulent”? Aren’t the people of eastern Ukraine allowed self-determination? Isn’t that a basic human right?

The resolution (paragraph 13) demands a withdrawal of Russia forces from Ukraine even though the US government has provided no evidence the Russian army was ever in Ukraine. This paragraph also urges the government in Kiev to resume military operations against the eastern regions seeking independence.

The resolution (paragraph 14) states with certainty that the Malaysia Airlines flight 17 that crashed in Ukraine was brought down by a missile “fired by Russian-backed separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.” This is simply incorrect, as the final report on the investigation of this tragedy will not even be released until next year and the preliminary report did not state that a missile brought down the plane. Neither did the preliminary report – conducted with the participation of all countries involved – assign blame to any side.

Paragraph 16 of the resolution condemns Russia for selling arms to the Assad government in Syria. It does not mention, of course, that those weapons are going to fight ISIS – which we claim is the enemy — while the US weapons supplied to the rebels in Syria have actually found their way into the hands of ISIS!

Paragraph 17 of the resolution condemns Russia for what the US claims are economic sanctions (“coercive economic measures”) against Ukraine. This even though the US has repeatedly hit Russia with economic sanctions and is considering even more!

The resolution (paragraph 22) states that Russia invaded the Republic of Georgia in 2008. This is simply untrue. Even the European Union – no friend of Russia – concluded in its investigation of the events in 2008 that it was Georgia that “started an unjustified war” against Russia not the other way around! How does Congress get away with such blatant falsehoods? Do Members not even bother to read these resolutions before voting?

In paragraph 34 the resolution begins to even become comical, condemning the Russians for what it claims are attacks on computer networks of the United States and “illicitly acquiring information” about the US government. In the aftermath of the Snowden revelations about the level of US spying on the rest of the world, how can the US claim the moral authority to condemn such actions in others?

Chillingly, the resolution singles out Russian state-funded media outlets for attack, claiming that they “distort public opinion.” The US government, of course, spends billions of dollars worldwide to finance and sponsor media outlets including Voice of America and RFE/RL, as well as to subsidize “independent” media in countless counties overseas. How long before alternative information sources like RT are banned in the United States? This legislation brings us closer to that unhappy day when the government decides the kind of programming we can and cannot consume – and calls such a violation “freedom.”

The resolution gives the green light (paragraph 45) to Ukrainian President Poroshenko to re-start his military assault on the independence-seeking eastern provinces, urging the “disarming of separatist and paramilitary forces in eastern Ukraine.” Such a move will mean many more thousands of dead civilians.

To that end, the resolution directly involves the US government in the conflict by calling on the US president to “provide the government of Ukraine with lethal and non-lethal defense articles, services, and training required to effectively defend its territory and sovereignty.” This means US weapons in the hands of US-trained military forces engaged in a hot war on the border with Russia. Does that sound at all like a good idea?

There are too many more ridiculous and horrific statements in this legislation to completely discuss. Probably the single most troubling part of this resolution, however, is the statement that “military intervention” by the Russian Federation in Ukraine “poses a threat to international peace and security.” Such terminology is not an accident: this phrase is the poison pill planted in this legislation from which future, more aggressive resolutions will follow. After all, if we accept that Russia is posing a “threat” to international peace how can such a thing be ignored? These are the slippery slopes that lead to war.

This dangerous legislation passed today, December 4, with only ten (!) votes against! Only ten legislators are concerned over the use of blatant propaganda and falsehoods to push such reckless saber-rattling toward Russia.

Here are the Members who voted “NO” on this legislation. If you do not see your own Representative on this list call and ask why they are voting to bring us closer to war with Russia! If you do see your Representative on the below list, call and thank him or her for standing up to the warmongers.

Voting “NO” on H. Res. 758:

1) Justin Amash (R-MI)
2) John Duncan (R-TN)
3) Alan Grayson, (D-FL)
 4) Alcee Hastings (D-FL)
5) Walter Jones (R-NC)
6) Thomas Massie (R-KY)
7) Jim McDermott (D-WA)
8 George Miller (D-CA)
 9) Beto O’Rourke (D-TX)
 10 Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA)

Source:

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/12/05/ron-paul-reckless-congress-declares-war-on-russia.html

Lack of coal may bring Ukraine to its knees this winter

Posted by

0

This situation endangers the nuclear reactors in Ukraine.

Posted at Strategic Culture Foundation, 11/27/14
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/11/27/lack-of-coal-may-bring-ukraine-to-its-knees-this-winter.html

A shortage of coal, rather than gas, is likely to plunge Ukraine into freezing darkness this winter as conflict in its east seals off supplies that used to make it self sufficient.

Kiev has said any hopes it had of Russian coal coming to the rescue were dashed when Moscow suspended exports.
 
Ukraine has declared a state of emergency in its electricity market and blackouts are imminent unless it can import coal, analysts and industry officials say.
 
“We have no energy reserves now, everything works on maximum and every technical problem can lead to sharp power cuts,” said Andrey Favorov, managing director of energy investment company Energy Resources of Ukraine.
 
“The only way to avoid freezing this winter is to negotiate, to pull out politics: we need to look at buying coal from reliable traders, import coal from South Africa, Australia, Vietnam, other countries.”
 
While EU officials have spent months brokering a deal to try to avert a supply crisis following Russia’s cut-off of gas to Kiev in June, fighting in east Ukraine has shut down mines and rail links used for transporting coal to power plants.
 
Ukraine was self-sufficient in coal, producing more than 60 million tonnes last year, but since June separatist fighting in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions has halted production from 66 coal mines, leaving only 60 running, European coal association Euracoal said.
 
It is estimated that Ukraine needs 1 to 2 million tonnes of imported coal a month between now and April. [Ed.: A South African company shipped only 500,000 tons, and then refused to send more]
 
Hydroelectric and nuclear power plants are running flat out to help cover the shortfall but the country’s old electricity grid and infrastructure to do not guarantee reliable supply.
 
LIMITED OPTIONS
 
Ukraine is one of Europe’s biggest coal producers and gets roughly 40 percent of its electricity from coal. The rest comes from nuclear (45 percent), gas (10 percent) and hydroelectric power (5 percent), the International Energy Agency says.
 
Russia cut off its gas because of a row over pricing and unpaid bills. A fragile deal last month which could lead to the restoration of supplies, but so far that has not happened as Ukraine has been avoiding making any upfront payments for new deliveries.
 
Ukraine’s gas storage sites currently hold around 3.5 months’ supply, depending on the weather.
 
“While emergency measures might ease the severity of a power shortage, both domestic and industrial users will have to be prepared for rolling outages over this winter,” said Ganna Korniyenko, analyst at Thomson Reuters Point Carbon.
 
Emergency measures include cutting consumption and public information campaigns to save energy, while in the long term the Kiev government is trying to raise energy prices to market levels to end a culture of energy waste based on decades of unrealistically cheap energy.
 
Anthracite, or hard coal, is used in Ukranian power plants but it makes up around only 1 percent of world coal reserves and is only mined in just a handful of countries. Ukraine’s ability to pay for that coal is also hampered by its weak currency.
 
Ukraine can import electricity from Russia and the energy ministry said on Wednesday it will allow this, but in limited quantities. (Additional reporting by Svetlana Burmistrova in Moscow, Pavel Polityuk in Kiev and Peroshni Govender in Johannesburg, editing by William Hardy)
 
Reprinted under Fair Use Rules.