Cuban Minister of Foreign Affairs speaks to the UN Security Council – US violates international law and sovereign rights


From the Cuban Ministry of Foreign Affairs – Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores

Statement by H.E. Mr. Bruno Rodríguez Parrilla, Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Cuba, at the General Debate of the Eighty First Session of the General Assembly of the United Nations. New York, September 26, 2026.

Mr. President of the General Assembly;

Madam Deputy Secretary-General:

In approximately three hours, exactly 66 years will have elapsed since Commander in Chief Fidel Castro Ruz, in a memorable speech from this rostrum, said, and I quote: “Let the philosophy of plunder disappear, and the philosophy of war will have disappeared! Let the colonies disappear; let the exploitation of countries by monopolies disappear; and then humanity will have reached a true stage of progress!”.

However, the advance of expansionism, usurpation, conquest as well as military and economic aggressions are alarming. The US government aspiration to impose peace through force is absurd and unrealizable. The fundamental pillars of International Law and the United Nations Organization, such as the sovereign equality among States, are under permanent attack.

The genocidal crime of Zionism against the Palestinian people; the pirate attacks against vessels and the extrajudicial executions in the Caribbean Sea and some areas in the Pacific; the military aggression against the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela and the war against the Islamic Republic of Iran are new expressions of this atrocity.

They are also a reflection of the crisis of identity and relevance imposed on this United Nations Organization, and even on the General Assembly, the most universal, democratic and representative body of the international community.

We are convinced of the indispensable need to preserve and strengthen the United Nations, as we make it more democratic and effective; and of placing it closer to the peoples.

As is well known, in Cuba we are facing a multidimensional aggression from the United States government; a permanent, abusive and ruthless hostility that has lasted for almost seven decades already. Since January, 2026, this aggression has strengthened and become crueler and more dangerous, with the imposition of an energy blockade that, by resorting to intimidation and coercion, prevents any country from exporting fuel to Cuba -an equivalent to a naval blockade-, which is classified by International Law as an act of war.

Through the adoption of successive measures, the government of the United States has been applying new prohibitions on all countries with regard to products and services that cannot be exported or transported to Cuba. More than 7 thousand containers remain stranded in different ports; many of them are loaded with foodstuffs, medicines and medical devices or have even been paid for by Cuban private companies.

It is an unusual and unprecedented action. A superpower unilaterally deprives all States of their right to export the commodities that they wish to the country that they wish and continuously and comprehensively violates freedom of trade and navigation.

Added to this is the intimidation of entrepreneurs of different countries so that they abandon, against their will, their investments and businesses in Cuba; the obstacles and tricks to prevent the arrival of absolutely legitimate commercial shipments; the pressures to prevent the entry of visitors and tourists; and the efforts aimed at restricting as much as possible Cuba’s legitimate access to financing, technology and markets.

The United States has gone as far as to exert unsuspected pressures on sovereign governments so that they renounce the medical services they requested from us for the benefit of their respective populations and which are offered altruistically by Cuban professionals, because the US government is opposed to such cooperation, regardless of the impact and harm this may cause to those populations if they are deprived of free, quality medical care; that is to say, deprived of an elemental human right. On Thursday last, while this General Assembly was in session, the State Department convened a humiliating meeting, specifically with the States that are the recipients of this cooperation, in order to exert pressure and make threats.

According to the Secretary of State, the US official policy is to shut down every relief valve, block every possible way out and eliminate any form of survival for Cuba.

The impact of such an iron-clad and ruthless siege has a human face. The economic warfare is aimed against the people. It harms the Cuban people as a whole. It takes a toll on human lives. It causes individual and collective pain; it causes anguish. It is not “collateral damage”. It is a policy deliberately designed to wound the deepest sensibilities of Cuban families; disturb their wellbeing and hurt the dignity of the people.

It is an act of collective punishment; a crime proscribed by International Humanitarian Law. The obvious short-term goal pursued by such policy is to induce a humanitarian crisis in Cuba, which is also a crime.

The government of the United States and the US State Department have been forced to recognize the suffering inflicted on the Cuban people, but they have the impudence and cynicism to insist in putting the blame on the government of Cuba. The executioner blames the victim.

They are following the formula recommended by the State Department since 1960 in the infamous Mallory Memorandum, which established as an official policy, [in] force up until today, the overthrowing of the Cuban government through the economic suffocation and the extreme suffering of the Cuban people out of material shortages, hunger and desperation.

A few days ago, the President of the United States declared in this podium that Cuba was ‘a failed State’. If that were the case, why did they have to impose a fuel blockade? Why did they impose secondary sanctions? Why do they have to threaten, persecute and exert pressures on every State on the planet? He also recognized that his government is putting on Cuba the biggest pressure ever applied against any other State. A few months before, he had said that “all that is left is to go in and destroy everything.”

The threat of the use of military force against Cuba persists. This behavior is a violation of International Law and an infringement of the San Francisco Charter.

Should it materialize, it would be a major crime. It would cause the death of Cuban and American youths as well as huge destruction. We expect it never happens. Cuba will exercise, with utmost resolve and energy, its legitimate right to defend itself. This aggression is being accompanied by a brutal media and cognitive warfare aimed, not only against the Cuban people, but also against the US citizens and the international public opinion. It is characterized by its gross and brazen attempts to interfere in the internal affairs of Cuba, which likewise is another international crime.

We are often asked what is the US pursuing with such an aggressive behavior, and the question usually surprises us, because the representatives of that government have outrightly declared their purpose to take Cuba, control the country and dominate the economy. In other words, nullify, through an aggression or economic suffocation, the national sovereignty which several generations of Cubans have struggled for since the nineteenth century -first to achieve it, and later on, after conquering the full freedom in 1959, to tenaciously defend it against the biggest risks, including that of a holocaust.

The US behavior relies on the fallacy, proclaimed early on this year, that Cuba is an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and the foreign policy of the United States -a nonsense shamelessly repeated by that government. In a futile attempt to substantiate such an assertion, the US government inundates its huge communication platforms with false claims using the spokespersons and publications it hires and pays, taking advantage of the increasing control exercised by its government over them. The US President himself repeated it a few days ago in this room.

Any minimally informed observer would understand the unrealistic and evil intention to portray a relatively small and developing nation like Cuba, with a modest economic performance, as a threat to the biggest nuclear, military, technological and economic power in the planet.

This Organization and its member States have abundant evidence of the fact that we are a peace-loving country; of the efforts of Cuba in favor of international cooperation, understanding and the peaceful settlement of disputes as well as of the active role that we have played in support of the United Nations.

Cuba is not a threat, the blockade is!

Cuba is not a threat; the blockade certainly is!

We have always been and we will continue to be ready to engage in a dialogue with the government of the United States to try to find a solution to bilateral differences, on the basis of responsibility, respect, sovereign equality, the observance of International Law, without any interference in the internal affairs of States and without preconditions.

We are open to trade and business relations with United States companies, just as we are with those of any other country.

We are aware of the immense challenge our country faces in terms of its security, survival, the wellbeing of the people and the destiny of the homeland. We are not facing this challenge passively. We are doing it firmly and with dignity. Based on that, we are moving on in a process of changes that would lead to profound transformations of the economic and social model of the country, based on our historical experience.

On July 30 last, during the Seventh Session of the National People’s Power Assembly, President Miguel Díaz-Canel said: “In view of the complex situation I have described, how can we prevail in the construction of socialism? How could we find the material and financial resources needed to preserve the social achievements attained by the Revolution? As it already happened on former occasions, when we were faced with particularly complex situations -such as the Special Period-; when, under the guidance, first of Commander in Chief, and later of Army General Raúl Castro, the economic model was transformed to adapt it to the challenging foreign circumstances demanded by the times, under the leadership of the Party, in a collective and democratic way, in consultation with the people, without compromising the independence, the national sovereignty or the social achievements of the Revolution”, end of quote.

At that session, the National People’s Power Assembly adopted a new program, with new practices, actors and economic concepts. All of that is being done in accordance with the Constitution in force -. which was adopted through a free and universal referendum- and the conception of our socialist State of law and social justice.

As was pointed out by the leader of the Cuban Revolution, Army General Raúl Castro Ruz, the most important thing will be, and I quote: “the appropriate and timely implementation process, with well-defined priorities and the conscious participation of the people.”

This process relies on the strengths that we have built; the potential of our human resources and the determination to respond to the needs of the people with the greatest possible social justice, without ceasing in our efforts to defend, with utmost vigor and resolve, the sovereignty and the right to self-determination.

We know that we count on the support of the international community and the solidarity of millions, among them, an increasing number of US citizens.

That is reflected in the numerous gestures and statements in support of Cuba and against the abusive aggression. It is reflected in the fraternal material assistance received by our people, seeking to mitigate the huge damage caused to the Cuban economy and society.

That spirit of solidarity and empathy is also expressed with particular special emphasis among Cubans who reside permanently or temporarily outside the national territory and among their descendants, particularly here in the United States.

Mr. President;

We reject the Monroe Doctrine and its Corollaries as much as we refuse every attempt of imperialist militarization, intervention or domination in Latin America and the Caribbean, a region that was proclaimed as a Zone of Peace in 2014, precisely in Havana.

As a Small Island Developing State, we stand in solidarity with our brothers and sisters who share a similar condition and with their warning about the worrying and inexorable advance of climate change.

It is necessary to promote a governance that makes a more intensive use of the new ICTs, particularly the disruptive technologies, such as artificial intelligence.

We reject the implementation of unilateral coercive measures. We express our support to and solidarity with each and every nation which are victim of them.

We ratify our solidarity with the Government of National Reconciliation and Unity of Nicaragua.

We reiterate our support to the inalienable right of the people of Puerto Rico to self-determination and independence.

The sister nations of Africa and the Caribbean deserve a fair and differentiated treatment, as well as the reparations for the horrors of colonialism and the transatlantic slave trade.

We reaffirm our solidarity with the Saharan people and their right to self-determination.

We ratify our support to the “One China” principle.

We strongly believe that the current trend of international relations of disrespect for International Law and the United Nations, the imposition of the unilateral will of the mightiest over other countries by means of intimidation and coercion, is dangerous and unsustainable. The law of the jungle cannot be the future of humanity.

To prevent those practices, in addition of promoting peace and justice, the preceding generations founded the United Nations and for decades developed and tried to enrich its activity. Let us recover its role today, when we are perhaps in time to do so, before the Organization goes down in history as an unrealized dream of great promises.

In the year of the centennial birthday of Fidel Castro Ruz, the historical leader of the Cuban Revolution, let us be confident, as he was, that if we struggle with resolve, a better world will be possible.

Homeland or Death!

We Shall Overcome!

https://news.un%5Bdot%5Dorg/en/story/2026/09/1168458 — video

https://www.facebook%5Bdot%5Dcom/CubaMINREX/posts/-statement-by-he-mr-bruno-rodr%C3%ADguez-parrilla-minister-of-foreign-affairs-of-the-/1538902638275672/

Also
https://www.c-span%5Bdot%5Dorg/program/washington-journal/cuban-deputy-foreign-minister-carlos-fernndez-de-cosso-on-us-cuba-relations/685796
Cuban Deputy Foreign Minister Carlos Fernández de Cossío talked about the Trump administration’s approach to U.S.-Cuba relations, September 27, 2026

U.S. has ‘no doubt’ their villain-of-the-day has banned weapons

Global Research, April 22, 2017
Moon of Alabama 21 April 2017
–

Mattis: ‘No doubt‘ Syrian regime has chemical weapons, April 21, 2017

“There can be no doubt in the international community’s mind that Syria has retained chemical weapons in violation of its agreement and its statement that it had removed them all. There is no longer any doubt,” Mattis told reporters.

Full text of Dick Cheney‘s speech, August 27, 2002

Simply stated, there is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There is no doubt he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our allies, and against us. And there is no doubt that his aggressive regional ambitions will lead him into future confrontations with his neighbors …

 

“Those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat it.”― Edmund Burke

100’s of U.S. tanks, heavy equipment flow into Europe to ‘counter Russian aggression’; not enough Americans are protesting

From RT

January 6, 2017

100’s of US tanks, heavy equipment flow into Europe to counter ‘Russian aggression’

Thousands of US and German troops, along with tanks and equipment, are being sent to Poland and countries bordering Russia, purportedly in “defense against Russian aggression,” author and journalist David Swanson told RT.

Europe is preparing to counter a perceived ‘Russian military threat.’ NATO countries in the East of the continent are awaiting the arrival of thousands of American soldiers as a part of a US-led battle group. The troops will be stationed along the Russian border from Estonia to Bulgaria.

However, ships carrying the first batch of troops were greeted in a German port by signs reading “Army Go Home.”

Scores of protesters marched through Bremerhaven, urging an end to the Alliance’s saber rattling…

In an interview with RT aired January 9, author and journalist David Swanson said

“…members of the Department of so-called Defense in Washington DC are almost openly talking to the media about profit being the motive for stirring up hostility with Russia. But this sending of thousands of troops – US and German – to Poland and countries on Russia’s border along with tanks and equipment – this is being done in the name of “defense against Russian aggression.” So unless you’re [the Pentagon] able to pretend there has been Russian aggression, you’re  not  going to be able to continue this; all this aggression has to be ‘defensive’. If Russia says otherwise, then what Russia is saying must be fake news.”

…you have serious protests in Germany by those who want peace [and are] against sending Germans or Americans from Germany eastward, as they should. There are not enough of us in the US similarly protesting.”
—
Hundreds of American tanks, trucks and other military equipment have arrived at the German port of Bremerhaven to be transferred to Eastern Europe as part of NATO’s buildup near Russia’s borders.

The Resolve cargo ship arrived on Wednesday, while two more vessels – Freedom and Endurance – are expected in Germany on Sunday, Deutsche Welle reported. The unloading of the ships began on Friday, with the heavy equipment to be transported to Poland via rail and road.

The US plans to deliverer a total of 87 Abrams M1A1 tanks, 20 Paladin artillery vehicles and 136 Bradley fighting vehicles to Eastern Europe, according to Reuters.  Four thousand American troops will reportedly be spread across Poland, the Baltic States, Bulgaria and Romania where they’ll remain on rotation basis.

Polish and US troops are scheduled to hold joint “massing” drills in Poland later this month, which NATO says is aimed at reassuring its European allies in the face of what it calls aggressive Russian behavior.

The 10th Combat Aviation Brigade, with 50 Black Hawk helicopters, 10 CH-47 Chinook helicopters and 1,800 personnel, as well as a separate aviation battalion with 400 troops and 24 Apache helicopters are also scheduled for deployment in Eastern Europe.

“The best way to maintain the peace is through preparation,” US Major General Timothy McGuire explained, adding that the deployment is about “just showing the strength and cohesion of the alliance and the US commitment to maintain the peace on the continent.” 

Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania will host troops from Germany, Canada and the UK, with each nation sending up to 1,000 servicemen.

NATO calls it military buildup near Russia’s borders a defensive measure, claiming it is justified after Moscow’s reunion with Crimea in 2014 and its alleged involvement in the Ukrainian crisis. Russia views the military bloc’s actions aggressive and said the massive military is undermining the security balance on the European continent.

READ MORE: ‘No one in Russia plans to attack NATO’ – US envoy to alliance

In November 2016, the Pentagon shipped more than 600 containers of ammunition for Army and Air Force units in Europe, according military.com, marking the largest single shipment of US ammunition in more than two decades, the website reported.

Moscow has responded by stationing its most modern weaponry and armaments on its western borders, including the enclave region of Kaliningrad, and staging large-scale military drills on its own territory.

READ MORE: Russia not on Trump’s list of Pentagon priorities: Leaked memo worries establishment

Washington opted to speed up the deployment of its troops to Eastern Europe after Donald Trump’s win in the presidential election.

Trump, who is to be inaugurated on January 20, has been calling for improved relations with Russia and has voiced skepticism towards NATO, saying European powers would have to contribute a bigger part of the budget if they wanted to continue relying on US protection.

https://www.rt.com/news/372869-us-tanks-germany-nato/

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/373048-nato-us-europe-russia/

‘Beyond a massacre: France deliberately bombed Syrian civilians after Nice attack’

The Dresden bombing during World War II was retaliation. The firebombing of Japanese cities by the United States was to terrorize civilians. The pattern keeps repeating.

From RT

Interview with Marwa Osman
July 20, 2016

Western coalition forces knew they were attacking an area inhabited by civilians and yet they carried out a bombing. How can 30 airstrikes be a mistake? How can they all be a mistake, political commentator Marwa Osman asked RT.

The Syrian Foreign Ministry has written to the UN blaming US and French warplanes for the deaths of more than 100 civilians near the city of Manbij.

The alleged French act of aggression claimed the lives of more than 120 civilians, most of them children, women and elderly. The fate of scores of other civilians still under the debris is unknown. The letter also mentioned the French air strikes came a day after US warplanes conducted a bombing raid, which Damascus claims killed 20 other civilians.

RT: In January, the US-led coalition was reportedly (as claimed by CNN) prepared for up to 50 civilian deaths when it decided to target an ISIS cash vault. Can the risk of so-called collateral damage be justified for the greater good?

Marwa Osman: They blatantly call it ‘collateral damage’ when it is lives of the Syrian people which are being lost here. No one is talking about this, about the grave lives of the people who are living in Syria because of this coalition, because of the support this coalition has been giving to all sorts of groups. We already saw that the same thing in the French bombing, we saw the same thing that happened in a school in Iraq’s Nineveh massacre of 36 children after ISIS claimed responsibility for the Paris attacks. And now after the Nice attack, we see this in Syria. This is beyond unacceptable, this is beyond a massacre. They knew that this is an inhabited area by civilians and yet they did it. How can 30 airstrikes be a mistake? How can they all be a mistake? This is unacceptable…

RT: How is it possible the US claims it doesn’t know anything about this airstrike and that they’re still gathering information?

MO: They’re still gathering information? How come they did an airstrike without the information? I am sorry but we are not idiots. Our minds are not somewhere backwards. We know what is happening. We know that every flight that is being made costs more than $200,000 for a jet to go up in the air. And I am very sure that any state that gets a jet up in the air to bomb someone knows exactly what they are bombing. What they did is a… retaliatory move, a fast move just to breed blood in the streets of Syria just to say to the French and the US public: “Look, we are fighting ISIS.” This is not how they fight ISIS. They fight ISIS by stopping the Turkish state from opening its borders where they infiltrate, by stopping the funding, by stopping the arming and by stopping the so-called moderate rebels who yesterday killed a 12-year-old boy. These are the moderates of the US. The US recognizes the support for this Nour al-Din al-Zenki brigade that killed the boy. And trust me, they know who they are because today they told them: “We are going to stop the funding if you continue doing this.” They have been doing this for the past five years. They know everything that is going on. I surely appreciate what the Syrian government is doing by sending this message to the UN but this is not enough… This is definitely not enough. Syrians are suffering; they are dying by the hundreds. People need to wake up and see what their governments are doing and stop them. Because it is their tax payments that are causing the suffering over the world, especially in Syria and Iraq. I am very sure that they know who they are fighting and bombing, but they just pretend that they don’t know.

View image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on TwitterView image on Twitter

US-led Coalition warplanes have carried out an air-raid on Tokhar village north of killing 10s of civilians

RT: Do you think there will be an independent and transparent investigation of the incident? Will those responsible be held accountable?

MO: The 9/11 didn’t have any sort of a real investigation, do you think any investigation inside of Syria will come up with some sort of solution or conclusion that will give a closure to the people that lost their family members? No, I don’t think that is going to happen any time. They are not even going to pay a dollar to make this investigation happen…

The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.

https://www.rt.com/op-edge/352283-syria-us-france-bombing/

 

 

Conspiracy by NATO leaders to commit acts of aggression against Russia. Warsaw Communiqué

By Christopher Black
Global Research, July 19, 2016
New Eastern Outlook 18 July 2016

I have been a defence lawyer most of my working life and am not used to gathering evidence for a prosecution, but circumstances impelled me to open a file for the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, or perhaps some future citizen’s tribunal, in which is contained the evidence that the NATO leaders are guilty of the gravest crime against mankind, the crime of aggression. I would like to share with you some brief notes of interest from that file, for your consideration.

Article 8bis of the Rome Statute, the governing statue of the International Criminal Court states:

For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation, initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which by its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter on the United Nations.

The NATO communiqué issued from Warsaw on July 9th is direct evidence of such planning and preparation and therefore of a conspiracy by the NATO leaders to commit acts of aggression against Russia, and would be the subject of an indictment of the International Criminal Court against the leaders of the NATO military alliance, if the prosecutor of the ICC was in fact independent, which she is not, and of course, if the articles relating to crimes of aggression were in effect which will not take place until January 1, 2017, if at all, under the articles of the Rome Statute.

Nevertheless, the technical issue of jurisdiction that prevents the issuance of an indictment against the NATO leaders at this time does not legitimate the planning and preparation of acts of aggression as are contained in the NATO communiqué nor reduce the moral weight of the crime of aggression set out in the Statute and the Nuremberg Principles, for the crime of aggression is the supreme crime of war.

On their own words, set out in black and white, in their communiqué of July 9th, the NATO leaders, each and every one, and the entire general staffs of the armed forces of each and every NATO country, are guilty of the crime of aggression. The fact that there is no effective body to which they can be brought for trial is irrelevant to the fact of the crime being committed. They are the enemies of mankind and charged or not, tried or not, they are international outlaws who must be identified as such and called to account by their own peoples.

The evidence of their crimes of course predates this communiqué and consists in years of actions by the NATO powers, since the Soviet Union dissolved itself and the Warsaw Pact, under the agreement with NATO, the 1997 NATO–Russia Founding Act, that NATO would not expand into any of the countries formally members of the Warsaw Pact or the USSR, nor place nuclear weapons there. NATO has broken that agreement continuously since and has, as an organisation, or through groups of its member states, committed acts of aggression against Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Russia (during the Georgian attack on South Ossetia and through support of Chechen terrorist groups inside Russia itself), Ukraine and Syria with each act of aggression supported by massive propaganda campaigns to attempt to justify these crimes as legitimate. The western mass media are all complicit in these crimes by distributing this propaganda to the people they are meant to inform.

The same powers have committed and are committing further acts of aggression against the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, Iran and China and continuously increasing their planning and preparation for aggression against those nations. These plans are also set out in the NATO communiqué but the gravest threat to mankind is the immediate existential threat against Russia, to which the principal part of the communiqué is directed.

The NATO communiqué is in fact a declaration of war against Russia. There is no other way to interpret it.

Many months ago I stated that we can regard the NATO build-up of forces in Eastern Europe, the NATO coup that overthrew the Yanukovich government in Ukraine, the attempt to grab the Russian naval base at Sevastopol, the immediate attacks on Ukrainian civilians in the eastern provinces that refused to accept the NATO coup, the constant propaganda against Russia as “aggressor” and the economic warfare conducted against Russia under the guise of “sanctions,” to be tantamount to a second Operation Barbarossa, the Third Reich’s invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. I was hesitant to so describe it but the facts were there and now others have recognised that the analogy is the correct one. And just as the leaders of the Third Reich were finally held responsible for their crimes at Nuremberg, so should be the leaders of the new Reich that the Americans and their vassal states are planning to impose on the rest of us.

At Paragraph 5 of the communiqué and following, they commit the first part of their crime by setting out supposed “aggressive actions” of Russia, in which, in every instance, they are the real aggressors.

At paragraph 15 they state, after some drivel about “partnership between NATO and Russia,” that,

We regret that despite repeated calls by Allies and the international community since 2014 for Russia to change course, the conditions for that relationship do not currently exist.  The nature of the Alliance’s relations with Russia and aspirations for partnership will be contingent on a clear, constructive change in Russia’s actions that demonstrates compliance with international law and its international obligations and responsibilities.  Until then, we cannot return to “business as usual.

What they mean by Russia “changing course” is, of course, doing what they order, and “compliance with international law” means nothing less than complying with NATO diktats. The world saw what happened to Yugoslavia, when President Milosevic had the guts to tell them to go to hell when Madelaine Albright issued her long list of demands, to him, including the occupation of Yugoslavia by NATO forces and the dismantling of socialism, followed by the choice, comply or be bombed. The Yugoslav government had the right and the courage and so defied them, and so NATO leaders activated the leg-breakers, the enforcers, and the murderers who serve in their armed forces and began the vast destruction of a founding member of the Non-Aligned Movement.

We saw it again with Afghanistan, invaded on a legal pretext of harbouring an alleged criminal, Bin Laden, who has never been charged with a crime and who was working under US Army command in Kosovo in 1998-9, fighting against the Yugoslav government.

We saw it with Iraq, ordered to surrender weapons it never had, and then attacked with “shock and awe” a display of military power meant not just for Iraq, but for the whole world; this I what we will do to you if you don’t play ball.

We saw it with President Aristide in Haiti in 2004 when American and Canadian soldiers arrested him at gunpoint and exiled him in chains to Africa, while the world looked away. We saw it in 2010 when President Laurent Gbagbo was arrested by the French and thrown into the morass of the International Criminal Court. We saw it in 2011 when NATO destroyed socialist Libya and we see it now as they try the same against Syria and Iraq, Iran, North Korea, China and most importantly, Russia.

Paragraph 15 is nothing less than a diktat, “obey us or we cannot return to business as usual,” meaning, ultimately, war.

There then follows a long series of paragraphs of lies and distortions about events with everything blamed on Russia. They know these are lies and distortions of course but the point is that these communiqués are generated in Washington as propaganda devices to be quoted over and over again in the western media and referred to by their diplomats and politicians in every speech.

At paragraph 35 and following they refer to their plans for their new Operation Barbarossa, the build-up of NATO forces in Eastern Europe. They call it the Readiness Action Plan. In other words, all those paragraphs set out their plans for preparing the logistical and strategic capacity to attack Russia. That they intend to do so is now clear with the placement of anti-missile systems in Poland and Romania and soon on Russia’s southeast flank in Korea, that are intended to ensure the success of a nuclear first strike on Russia by NATO nuclear forces. The anti-missile systems are meant to intercept any retaliatory missiles launched by survivors in Russia. But, as President Putin pointed out, they can also be used directly in an offensive capacity.

They then emphasize that nuclear weapons are an important part of their strategy and in paragraph 53 state,

“NATO’s nuclear deterrence posture also relies, in part, on United States’ nuclear weapons forward-deployed in Europe and on capabilities and infrastructure provided by Allies concerned.” The fear is that with recent exercises in Poland and in the Arctic in which the use of air strikes to launch nuclear weapons such as nuclear tipped cruise missiles against Russia played a prominent part, the United States and its NATO allies are planning for and preparing for a nuclear attack on Russia. This is the only conclusion possible since it is clear that Russia has no intention of attacking any country in Eastern Europe nor anywhere else and so the excuse given that the presence of nuclear weapons in Europe is a deterrent against Russian “aggression” is established as a lie and therefore their presence can have only one purpose-to be used in attack.

The evidence is before us, the dossier complete. It sits on a desk, gathering dust, of no use to anyone, except the court of public opinion, and what is that worth these days? But perhaps some one out there will take it, develop it and give it to a tribunal, perhaps one of the people, for the people, set up by the people, to try those who plan to destroy the people, that can act quickly, before the final crime of aggression is committed against Russia; against us all.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto, he is a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and he is known for a number of high-profile cases involving human rights and war crimes, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

The original source of this article is New Eastern Outlook

Copyright © Christopher Black, New Eastern Outlook, 2016

http://www.globalresearch.ca/conspiracy-by-nato-leaders-to-commit-acts-of-aggression-against-russia-warsaw-communique/5536471

Underfunded, unready’: John McCain wants $17 billion more for “defense”, including for Ukraine

From Sputnik

Underfunded, Unready’: John McCain Wants $17 Billion More for US Defense
May 25, 2016

Senate Armed Services Chairman John McCain is expected to ask for an additional $17 billion in defense funding, via an amendment to the $602 billion 2017 National Defense Authorization Act that arrives on the Senate floor this week.

Democratic members of the Senate have demanded that each dollar spent on defense be matched in domestic spending, which may make the Republican’s amendment much more difficult to pass.

“I don’t know whether or not this amendment will succeed, but the Senate must have this debate and senators must choose a side,” McCain said at an event at the Brookings’ Center.

In a six-page letter to the Senate by McCain on May 20, he requested additional funding for the Afghan Security Forces Fund, increased spending to fight Daesh and the Taliban, as well as money for Ukraine, in addition to what is already being spent on new fighter jets and ship building.

McCain also called for a freeze on the drawdown of the Army and Marines.

“By the end of the next fiscal year, the Army will be cut down to 450,000 Active-Duty personnel soldiers, down from a wartime peak of 570,000. This budget-driven reduction was made before Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the rise of ISIL,” he states in the letter, reiterating ungrounded accusations US Republicans often use to justify more military expenditures. “Given the current threats facing the Army and the demands they impose upon our soldiers, the Senate should stop the planned reduction of 15,000 Active-Duty soldiers and 10,000 reserve component soldiers in fiscal year 2017.”

He argued that the military is being left “underfunded, undersized, and unready to meet current and future threats.”

“My instinct that Sen. McCain’s amendment would just be about increasing defense spending in the NDAA, and that kind of dollar-for-dollar increase on other issues wouldn’t be germane there, so you have a vote for the first time, in recent memory at least, on whether we should increase defense spending or not, without the ancillary issues,” Justin Johnson, a senior defense policy analyst at The Heritage Foundation, told Defense News.

The White House issued a statement saying it will veto any legislation that includes these changes.

http://sputniknews.com/us/20160524/1040191295/mccain-defense-budget-ndaa.html

Leonid Ivashov: Russia won’t liberate the Europeans again

From Fort Russ

Leonid Ivashov

Pravda.ru, May 20, 2016

Translated from Russian by Tom Winter

World
In recent years, the geopolitical situation and the military-strategic balance of forces in the world is of ever growing concern. It increasingly sounds like the situation of 1939. There’s a smell in the air of a great war.

In the 90s, many representatives of the Russian ruling circles had the impression that the confrontation with the West was finally over. There was even talk about Russia’s accession into NATO, “the end of history” and so on. However, all that was just so long as the elite overseas powers felt that the destructive processes generated by the collapse of the Soviet Union, would be irreversible for Russia. Do not forget that the policy of destroying Russia still continued, but was veiled in the sweet voice of friendship and cooperation.

Vladimir Putin’s 2007 Munich speech was the first signal to the West to debunk the illusion of a weak Russia, the illusion it generated on its own through inertia beginning in 1991. The conflict in South Ossetia a year later came as a shock, after which Western powers took military confrontation “in a serious way.”

Today we see how disturbed the parity of forces in Europe has gotten in connection with the deployment of missile defense systems in Romania and Poland: in a few years Russia will not be able to launch a retaliatory nuclear strike.

What should be the asymmetric response of Russia to the new threats and challenges of the modern world? The president of the International Center for Geopolitical Analysis, Doctor of Historical Sciences, Colonel-General, ex-chairman of the “Union of Russian People,” Leonid Ivashov spoke to Pravda.Ru on these subjects.

“You have to understand that in the situation in Europe, that Europe is militarily colonized by the Americans. The Americans have advanced pro-American regimes in the Western European countries and have completely subjugated Eastern Europe. And there, with a base in Eastern Europe there is pressure on Germany, France, as well as, to a lesser extent, Britain. On the other side, the Turks are working on a flank against Europe; they, in concert with the Americans started this process with migrants of Muslim origin. And so Europe today is the victim of US policy, of transnational corporations, the Rothschilds, the Rockefellers. That is what is happening in Europe today.

Europe needs the threat of a bogeyman. And here they’ve made one up, Russia. And besides that, they lie so shamelessly, without paying the slightest attention to the balance of power. How could a country threaten NATO, that has several times less military capability? Especially in the western strategic direction. And in size of defense forces, and on the composition of military equipment, we are disadvantaged three or four times over, as well as in overall military equipment. Therefore, we can only be on the defensive, defend ourselves somehow, but as for offensive and striking groups, we have virtually none. But anything else is just false information and propaganda.

Our attempts to create something in the image of the Warsaw Pact have nothing to work on. We have no such countries in Eastern Europe ready to go to close military and military-technical cooperation. The Americans hold them all by the throat. But we have no need for allies like Poland, the Baltic States and Romania. It’s better they will be enemies.

Screen capture from video at site. Text at top: “Only a new Warsaw Pact could stop NATO aggression” Not the view of Ivashov: “We have no need for allies like Poland…”

What we need to do in this area?

“First: strengthen our military power, to bring it to the required level of defense.

“Second: become closer friends with Belarus and, of course, create a single defense space with Belarus. In addition, there must be political and diplomatic work. It is needful to discuss with Europeans what awaits them. We are not going to free them any more from their occupation, with any military support, not from the migrants, nor from the States, nor from the Turks, they shouldn’t expect it. And, of course, work actively with the Serbs, continue to work with the Bulgarians. Throughout the Balkans we should work actively through political, diplomatic, and economic means.

“Third: it is necessary to understand that it’s the Americans who are behind the whole process, the anti-Russian hysteria, and the process of increasing the power of NATO. So we need to create a military group that is capable to work on the territory of United States. The States are actively developing the missile defense system to neutralize our intercontinental ballistic missiles. So you need to create a bundle of high-precision tools. Cruise missiles to be based within reach of the United States. So it becomes possible to neutralize the US missile defense. We need a real threat to the United States, the foundation of all these processes. 

“When Americans feel threatened, as in 1962, then they themselves will be send invitations to the negotiating table and begin to negotiate.”

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/05/we-need-real-threat-to-united-states.html

Editor: This partially explains the soft coups underway in Ecuador, Brazil, Venezuela, and the overtures to Cuba. The US government wants to put these countries under its control so there is no possibility of Russian bases or weapons a la NATO.

A weapon that also must be used is simply the truth about all the West has done and is doing — US, Great Britain, France, Netherlands, etc. Name the names, expose the deeds. Showing the Western soldiers who and what they are really fighting for may encourage them to stand down and stop this insanity. It may be that many soldiers want to be warriors for truth, freedom, and goodness.

Germany’s “brainless compliance” with US military build-up in Eastern Europe — interview with Dr. Alexander Neu

From Fort Russ

“For this you need obedient vassals in Europe – and they have them” — Alexander Neu

Sputnik Germany, March 31, 2016

Translated from German by Tom Winter, May 2, 2016. 

News items based on this interview are showing up on the web. We found the original. Marcel Joppa, for Sputnik.de, interviews Dr. Alexander Neu, Bundestag member from Die Linke.

The US wants to strengthen its presence in Eastern Europe with soldiers, tanks and heavy military equipment. The federal government is silent officially, but many government politicians are openly standing behind Washington. “CDU, SPD and Greens go along with brainless compliance,” criticizes Dr. Alexander Neu, who represents the Left Party Defense Committee.

MJ: Dr. Neu, the USA is locating an entire brigade of its soldiers in the east of Europe. They are supposed to rotate between different States. How do you rate this project?

AN: According to media reports the transfer is supposed to take place in early 2017 to 2018. That is, if Russia is so provocative as the Americans claim, it rather surprises me that they can let it go till February 2017. Given such a big Russian threat, as suggested by the Americans, I would have thought that it would have to be more immediate. That shows me that Russian aggression is not the basis, but that they are propounding a risk that isn’t there. They are trying to generate Russophobia in Europe.
In a statement by the Defense Department in Washington, this redeployment was a reaction to the “aggressive course Russia is on.” That sounds like an argument straight out of the Cold War.

I do not see where the aggressiveness of Russia is. One can of course argue about the Crimea, as you can create different assessments of international law. I have my own assessment, in light of the destruction of Yugoslavia by the West and the recognition of the Yugoslav states and Kosovo. After all, one can not argue one way in Crimea and another way in Yugoslavia. 

The West has created this precedent itself. Also in the eastern Ukraine one has to admit: The coup did not come out of Russia, but from the West – as the elected government of Yanukovych did not want to sign the EU Association Agreement. So I do not see that the Baltic states, Romania, Bulgaria, Poland are territorially harassed or threatened in any way. So this is a very abstract and fictitious threat. One has the feeling that certain Eastern European countries and their elites, and American elites, are all of them sowing and fertilizing threat scenarios. And thus, a Russian policy of aggression Russia is suggested, but has no material basis.

MJ: The planned US troop redeployment is to include 4200 soldiers, 250 tanks and other military equipment. The upgrade in Eastern Europe will begin in early 2017. President Obama has also announced an increase in US defense spending for Europe. Where is United States foreign policy headed?

AN: The Americans obviously want to keep their anti-Russian brew simmering in Eastern Europe and Central Europe. Somehow, it is believed that you have to keep Russia at bay, because Russia will not submit itself to Western ideas. They consider that they have to keep Russia in a period of conflict, under a military conflict. For this you need obedient vassals in Europe – and they have them.

With Poland and the Baltic states, one could of course, argue that they have their own history which has shaped their views. But this justification is no longer true at the present time. And with Bulgaria and Romania it doesn’t hold at all. Those who will suffer alongside the Russians include – and Russia will naturally react militarily – will be the Bulgarian, Romanian, or even the Polish taxpayers.

MJ: The whole thing is in any case a step against disarmament in Europe. There has not been an official response of the federal government. But can you imagine how the reaction will turn out?

AN: It will not be negative. The federal government is on board in the escalation policy of US-led NATO, always. And the federal government with its Bundeswehr are an essential element of NATO’s spearhead in Eastern Europe. Here is where an escalation takes place, which Europe does not need, that also Eastern Europe de facto does not need, that Russia does not need – but that obviously our “big brother” on the other side of the pond needs.

MJ: You yourself are a member of the Defence Committee of the German Bundestag. How do they look upon the development of US foreign policy? Are they completely in agreement, or there is some concern behind closed doors?

AN: So within the other parties – the SPD plus the CDU and the Greens – I see no objections. Even amog the Greens, I see no vociferous concerns. In the CDU and the SPD they think it’s all good, what the US says. This is a transatlanticist-grouping within the policy in Berlin, and only those with a strong transatlanticist bent, can sit in the Defense and the Foreign Affairs Committee. That leaves the Left as the only party, the only fraction that represents an entirely different view. But all the other parties go there somehow with mindless conformity.

http://www.fort-russ.com/2016/05/germanys-brainless-compliance-with-us.html

The Paris meeting of conspirators in support of Syria’s “moderate terrorists”: talks filled with sinful crime.

Global Research, January 24, 2016
New Eastern Outlook 24 January 2016

On January 20th a cabal of dependencies of the United States of America, Australia, Netherlands, Germany, France, and Italy, met in Paris to discuss war on Syria. One of a series of such meetings with a changing list of participants, it included the defence ministers of the countries supporting various proxy forces attacking Syria, either posing as “rebels” or allied with the American created and supported force ISIS. It was in fact a meeting of conspirators planning a war of aggression. There is no other way to put it. This was a criminal act under international law and another dramatic repudiation of the United Nations and everything the United Nations Charter stands for.

One nation that was not invited was Canada, a snub that has caused consternation among the war party in Canada, but is likely the result of the new prime minister’s pledge to withdraw Canadian forces from action in Syria and Iraq. The new Canadian government has not in fact withdrawn its small forces as promised but no doubt the Americans are doubtful of the new government’s reliability as a partner in crime and wanted to slap down the new government for daring to make even a mild move towards peace in our time.

The Canadian government’s pledge to withdraw its forces was a result of campaign promises made during the October elections in Canada where these military adventures are unpopular with large sections of the population which sees them as wasting their tax money fighting wars for American interests and domination of the world. The fact that such operations are not only illegal under international law but also under Canadian law as set out in the National Defence Act, and, therefore, should never have been conducted in the first place, is, inexplicably, never mentioned by any Canadian government figure, major political party or any of the tightly controlled and coordinated media, because, of course, law means nothing to criminals.

343422323

The Paris meeting was a criminal act, a war crime in fact, since the only international body that has the right to determine if, when and how military forces is to be applied in any situation is the United Nations Security Council. Any military action taken outside the mandate of the Security Council is prohibited and the Rome Statute, the statute that governs the International Criminal Court, defines such a meeting as a conspiracy to commit aggression, the worst of all war crimes, because it leads to all other war crimes that necessarily follow an act of aggression.

But the Paris meeting is not the first step in furthering this conspiracy to commit acts of aggression, war crimes and crimes against humanity in Syria. The first act was the attack made on Syria by the United States in 2011 after it and its co-conspirators attacked and destroyed Libya using the same proxy forces, the same techniques, and the same propaganda to mislead the public. Many of the same mercenaries, and thugs that they used against Libya were quickly reassigned and sent into Syria through Turkey, and Jordan where they soon linked up with armed groups from Iraq now known as ISIS. The United States, Turkey, Britain, France, and Saudi Arabia, brag about their open support for these groups, and have confessed that they have sent in their own special forces to “train” them. This act of aggression against Syria continues to escalate and came close to succeeding until Russia, at the request of the besieged government of Syria, decided to deploy its air forces in Syria in order to crush these American and allied proxy forces.

The reaction here in the west since September when the Russians began their very effective air operations has been a seething anger from Washington, to London, from Paris to Berlin, from Riyadh to Istanbul. The failure of the American attempt to conquer Syria will mean the failure of the American plan to kick Russia out of the Mediterranean, a failure to control the land routes from there to Iran for an eventual attack on Iran itself, an operation that cannot be mounted from the Persian Gulf, and a failure to place its forces on the southern flank of Russia in preparation for a pincer thrust into Russia from the south and the western plains of Poland and Ukraine. Others cite gas pipelines and war profits as reasons, but these are secondary to the principal strategy of the domination of Eurasia by the United States and those hoping to be thrown some scraps from the spoils, like the jackals they are.

None of these countries have any legal or moral right to attack Syria under the guise of going after ISIS, or Islamic State as they now call it. To obtain that right they would first have to be asked by the Syrian government for their assistance. The Syrian government does not want their “assistance”. They do not want their war. But these criminal nations refuse to talk to the Syrian government and insist on its overthrow and they refuse to take their case before the Security Council because they know they have no case and Russia and China will oppose their criminal plans. So they evade the United Nations and once again, create ad hoc “coalitions” of the criminal minded, who have no respect for international law, their own laws, the sovereign rights of the Syrian nation, or their own platitudes about peace and “human rights.”

The criminal nature and intent of the meeting was openly declared in the press conference after the meeting by the US Defense Secretary Carter who called for more forces to be gathered to “eject jihadist fighters from their headquarters in Raqqa, Syria and Mosul, Iraq and to maintain that planned defeat.” The latter phrase must be interpreted as meaning a permanent occupation of the region by American and allied forces. To back this up the America Army’s 101st Airborne Division has been assigned the role of re-entering Iraq. It seems Iraq will have no choice in the matter as the Americans continue their drive to establish a new protectorate out of western Iraq and eastern Syria which they can then use to control the region and attack Iran. Further meetings are to be held in Brussels in a few weeks.

In the meantime Russia continues to try to achieve a negotiated resolution of the war in compliance with international law and a further meeting of the Russian and American foreign ministers will be held in Geneva to discuss it but there is little hope of those talks going anywhere since the two countries approach the problem from completely opposite positions; the Russians on the basis of the national sovereignty of Syria and the recognition of the existing government as the only legitimate government, the Americans on the basis that might makes right and Syria must submit to its will. For them, international law and national sovereignty are phrases empty of all meaning.

And once again, the prosecutor of the International Criminal Court remains in her office in The Hague, completely inert as nations that are within her jurisdiction plan these crimes. She has charged several African leaders for much less but then those prosecutions serve the interests of the same powers she should be prosecuting. She doesn’t even hold a press conference condemning these meetings, actions and plans for more war and insisting that these criminals adhere to international law. Nothing is said. Nothing is done. The ICC is shown to be as useless as the Security Council.

It is the Americans and their allies who are responsible for all the dead and dying in Syria, and it is they who “brought forth the monstrous mass of earthly slime, puft up with empty wind and filled with sinful crime” that is ISIS and it is clear that they will continue to use this monster of their creation as a device to escalate the war against Syria and increase their crimes but who, aside from the Syrian people, Russia and Iran can stop them? And so, the war will continue, the misery it brings will continue, and those responsible will continue to meet in beautiful settings, enjoying the fine things their crimes bring, bragging that they are saving the people from the very “terrorists” they created and control.

Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto, he is a member of the Law Society of Upper Canada and he is known for a number of high-profile cases involving human rights and war crimes, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Russian navy holds drills to ‘repel strikes’ on Crimea

From Strategic Culture Foundation
Press TV
10-27-15

Russian military forces have staged a navy exercise off the coast of the city of Sevastopol in the Black Sea Crimean peninsula to “thwart any possible aggression by the West.”

“Today and tomorrow ships… will practice the organization of repelling strikes by the enemy from the air in the Black Sea fleet’s naval range near the Crimean coast,” fleet spokesman Nikolai Voskresensky was quoted by Russian news agencies as saying on Monday.

Russian navy’s guided missile hovercraft, Samum, as well as several smaller ships, in addition to Su-24 bombers, will take part in drills for preparing Russian navy forces to “repel strikes” on Crimea, he said.

The spokesman added that the naval exercise will be wrapped up by launching a cruise missile strike.

Russia military forces were deployed in military bases across Crimea after the region separated from Ukraine in March last year and re-joined Moscow in a referendum.

The Ukrainian crisis last year and Crimea’s reunion with Russia has plunged Kremlin’s relations with the West to their lowest point since the Cold War.

This as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) forces have escalated their military maneuvers along the Russian border, in the Baltic States and Eastern Europe.

Russia and the West are also at loggerheads over the conflict in Syria.

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/10/27/russian-navy-holds-drills-to-repel-strikes-on-crimea.html