NATO

Anti-NATO events in Washington DC

Posted by

0

From Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space
by Bruce Gagnon
July 9, 2024

Bruce Gagnon and Rick Staggenborg in the march on Sunday

Four of us from Maine (MB Sullivan, Lisa Savage, Mark Roman and I) made the 10-hour drive to Washington DC last Friday to join the anti-NATO events planned to protest NATO’s ’75th anniversary celebration’ which begins on July 10. We were joined by former Mainers Melody Shank and Ken Jones  now living in North Carolina. 

Things began with a conference on Saturday morning at a local church attended by about 150 people and organized by a coalition led by World Beyond War. Disappointingly (but not surprising) several of the speakers once again blamed Russia for the war in Ukraine with words like ‘illegal, immoral, provocative’ Russian invasion. Sadly there are still some in the ‘peace movement’ who continue to be reluctant to pin the blame for the proxy war on US-NATO which was particularly uncalled for at an anti-NATO summit. Those that do at some point admit that US-NATO did in fact instigate the ‘tensions’ always seem to say that Russia should not have responded to protect the Donbass. That option was of course unacceptable to Moscow which I fully agree with.

This of course has been going on ever since the 2014 US-NATO orchestrated coup d’etat in Kiev which was led by the Obama-Biden administration under the direction of Victoria Nuland, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden [and John Kerry]. Soon thereafter the US-NATO regime in Kiev (infused with Nazis from Western Ukraine) began attacking the Donbass region of Ukraine where Russian-ethnics predominate and killed more than 15,000 and wounded around 35,000. 

Moscow made repeated attempts to create mechanisms to end the siege on the Donbass including the Minsk 1 & 2 agreements that leaders of Ukraine, France and Germany later admitted they never intended to honor – they just used the agreements to buy time to build up Ukraine’s US-NATO funded, trained, armed and directed army for a final charge against their own citizens whose only crime was they spoke Russian.

By early 2022 Russia knew that the western controlled Ukrainian military would soon launch a full scale attack on the Donbass so Moscow decided to preempt that move and began the slow and deliberate effort to push the Nazi-led forces away from the Donbass which sits on Russia’s border.

Later Saturday around 5:00 pm a larger conference began at another church in Washington. Oh, what a difference it was. This event was led by anti-imperialist organizations that have no doubt the US-NATO were in fact responsible for the war in Ukraine – to be used in a now failed strategy to force ‘regime change’ in Moscow in order for western resource extraction corporations to grab Russia’s vast resource base (among other reasons).

More than 300 (mostly young activists) gathered at this event with powerful speakers talking about a myriad of regions of the world where the US-NATO war machine is trying to regain their settler colonial domination. Good luck with that one.

This multi-ethnic coalition was a stark difference from the smaller event we had attended earlier that day. 

I learned years ago about the US anti-imperialist movement led by Mark Twain during Washington’s war on the Philippines.  At this event an impressive video was shown about the long US occupation of the Philippines that continues today as the Biden administration now floods that island nation with new missiles, warships, war planes and troops aimed at China. All part of NATO’s ‘pivot’ into the Asia-Pacific.

We also heard from young activists speaking about Palestine, Puerto Rico, black liberation movements across the US and much more. The Nicaraguan ambassador to the US also spoke and was roundly received. 

Fascism is growing worldwide in order to protect corporate interests and to suppress the resulting people’s movements for liberation. US-NATO wars in the Middle East have cost 4.5 million lives in the last 25 years. Israel is a ‘partner’ of NATO and takes part in its war games. NATO also trains Middle Eastern reactionary regimes that have served as western puppets for many years – Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, UAE, Jordan and more.

On Sunday we joined a march led by the anti-imperialist/anti-capitalist coalition to the White House. A rally was set up in Lafayette Park next to the White House led by the World Beyond War coalition. When we arrived very few people were at the rally site. Thanks to the 400 in the anti-imperialist march the rally began to look more respectable though I didn’t see any of the anti-imperialist leaders invited to the stage to speak to the largely younger crowd.

Despite the long drive from Maine to DC we all agreed that it was well worth the trip – especially to be with emerging activists. We often hear elder ‘peace movement’ folks wonder where are the ‘young people’? Actually they are out there leading the protests against zionist genocide in Palestine and doing great anti-NATO work against the empire’s ever expanding war machine. Some might call them radicals – but I stand by the definition of radical as those getting to the root of the problems that we face.

The half-stepping reformist peace groups (sometimes linked to the Democratic party and their foundation funders) have a long way to go if they hope to more fully integrate with the next generation of activism.

https://space4peace.blogspot.com/2024/07/anti-nato-events-in-washington-dc.html

NATO War Summit protest in Washington, D.C., July 6-7

Posted by

0

From United National AntiWar Coalition

Join us in Washington, DC!

Saturday, July 6, 2024 – People’s Summits

No to NATO – Alternative Summit, 9:30 am – 5:30 PM
@ St. Mark’s Church, Capitol Hill 3rd St & A St, SE

Resist NATO – People’s Summit, 5 PM – 9 PM
@ New York Ave Presbyterian Church, 13th St, H St., NY Ave. NW

Sunday, July 7, 2024 – March and Rallies

Resist NATO Coalition, 12 PM, McPherson Sq.
@ 15th St & K St. NW,

1:00 PM March to White House @ Lafayette Sq. with No to NATO

Read recent UNAC statement: NATO, Zionism and Imperialism

If you want to attend the D.C. events, register here

Additionally, there will be Anti-NATO events organized by the Anti-Imperialist Platform

Click this link to view their flyer

For more information: UNACpeace(at)gmail.com

ResistUSledWarMovement.com

https://nepajac.org/unac_070124.html

Using Ukraine since 1948

Posted by

0

From Consortium News

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

The United States has for nearly 80 years seen Ukraine as the staging ground for its once covert and increasingly overt war with Russia. 

After years of warnings, and after talk since 2008 of Ukraine joining NATO, Russia fought back two years ago. With neither side backing down, Ukraine is increasingly becoming a flashpoint that could lead to nuclear war. 

The West thinks Russia is bluffing.

But its doctrine states that if Russia feels its existence is threatened it could resort to nuclear arms. Instead of taking these warnings seriously, NATO is recklessly opening corridors for a ground war against Russia in Ukraine; France says it’s putting together a coalition of nations to enter the war, despite Russia saying French or any other NATO force would be fair game. 

In Paris the other day Joe Biden said Russia wants to conquer all of Europe but can’t even take Khariv. It is this kind of inflammatory nonsense, combined with allowing Ukraine to fire NATO weapons into Russian territory, that is imperiling us all. 

The danger started building up many years ago but it is now reaching a climax. 

The U.S. relationship with Ukraine, and its extremists, to undermine Russia began after the Second World War. During the war, units of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN-B) took part in the Holocaust, killing at least 100,000 Jews and Poles. 
https://en%5Bdot%5Dwikipedia%5Bdot%5Dorg/wiki/Massacres_of_Poles_in_Volhynia_and_Eastern_Galicia

Mykola Lebed, a top aide to Stepan Bandera, the leader of the fascist OUN-B, was recruited by the C.I.A. after the war, according to a 2010 study by the U.S. National Archives.  [https://www.archives[dot]gov/files/iwg/reports/hitlers-shadow.pdf]

Lebed was the “foreign minister” of a Banderite government in exile, but he later broke with Bandera for acting as a dictator. The U.S. Army Counterintelligence Corps termed Bandera “extremely dangerous” yet said he was “looked upon as the spiritual and national hero of all Ukrainians….”

Instead of Bandera, the C.I.A. was interested in Lebed, despite his fascist background. They set him up in an office in New York City from which he directed sabotage and propaganda operations on the agency’s behalf inside Ukraine against the Soviet Union. 

The U.S. government study says:

“CIA operations with these Ukrainians began in 1948 under the cryptonym CARTEL, soon changed to AERODYNAMIC. …

Lebed relocated to New York and acquired permanent resident status, then U.S. citizenship. It kept him safe from assassination, allowed him to speak to Ukrainian émigré groups, and permitted him to return to the United States after operational trips to Europe.

Once in the United States, Lebed was the CIA’s chief contact for AERODYNAMIC. CIA handlers pointed to his ‘cunning character,’ his ‘relations with the Gestapo and … Gestapo training,’ [and] the fact that he was ‘a very ruthless operator.’”

The C.I.A. worked with Lebed on sabotage and pro-Ukrainian nationalist propaganda operations inside Ukraine until Ukraine’s independence in 1991.

“Mykola Lebed’s relationship with the CIA lasted the entire length of the Cold War,” the study says. “While most CIA operations involving wartime perpetrators backfired, Lebed’s operations augmented the fundamental instability of the Soviet Union.” 

Continued Until and Beyond Ukrainian Independence

The U.S. thus covertly kept Ukrainian fascist ideas alive inside Ukraine until at least Ukrainian independence was achieved.

Mykola Lebed, Bandera’s wartime chief in Ukraine, died in 1998.

He is buried in New Jersey, and his papers are located at the Ukrainian Research Institute at Harvard University, the U.S. National Archives study says.  

The successor organization to the OUN-B in the United States did not die with him, however.  It had been renamed the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America (UCCA), according to IBT.

“By the mid-1980s, the Reagan administration was honeycombed with UCCA members. Reagan personally welcomed [Yaroslav] Stetsko, the Banderist leader who oversaw the massacre of 7,000 Jews in Lviv, in the White House in 1983,” IBT reported.  “Following the demise of [Viktor] Yanukovich’s regime [in 2014], the UCCA helped organise rallies in cities across the US in support of the EuroMaidan protests,” it reported.
https://www.ibtimes%5Bdot%5Dco%5Bdot%5Duk/america-backing-neo-nazis-euromaidan-1437848
https://www.ibtimes%5Bdot%5Dco%5Bdot%5Duk/ukrainian-parliament-impeaches-president-yanukovich-1437539
http://www.facebook%5Bdot%5Dcom/MaidanUSA

That is a direct link between the U.S.-backed 2014 Maidan coup against a democratically-elected Ukrainian government and WWII-era Ukrainian fascism. 

[See: Ukraine Timeline Tells the Story] 

Since 2014, the U.S. pushed for an attack on the Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine who had rejected the coup, and NATO began training and equipping Ukrainian troops.  Combined with talk since 2008 of Ukraine joining NATO, Russia reacted after years of warning. 

More than two years after Russia’s intervention, with Ukraine clearly losing the war, Western leaders will do just about anything to save their political skins, as they’ve staked too much on winning in Ukraine.   Don’t listen to them.  They need a West in denial of the dangers facing us.

As President John F. Kennedy said in his 1963 American University speech:

“Above all, while defending our own vital interests, nuclear powers must avert those confrontations which bring an adversary to a choice of either a humiliating retreat or a nuclear war. To adopt that kind of course in the nuclear age would be evidence only of the bankruptcy of our policy–or of a collective death-wish for the world.”
https://www.jfklibrary%5Bdot%5Dorg/archives/other-resources/john-f-kennedy-speeches/american-university-19630610

The world may wake up when it’s too late — after nuclear missiles have already started flying.   


Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and other newspapers, including The Montreal Gazette, the London Daily Mail and The Star of Johannesburg. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London, a financial reporter for Bloomberg News and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times. He is the author of two books, A Political Odyssey, with Sen. Mike Gravel, foreword by Daniel Ellsberg; and How I Lost By Hillary Clinton, foreword by Julian Assange.

https://consortiumnews.com/2024/06/10/using-ukraine-since-1948/

Was “No NATO expansion east” more than a promise?

Posted by

0

From the Libertarian Institute

By Ted Snider
July 17, 2023

At the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008, eventual membership in NATO was promised to Ukraine and Georgia with the statement that “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agree today that these countries will become members of NATO.” Russian President Vladimir Putin “flew into a rage,” and, according to a Russian journalist quoted by John Mearsheimer, warned that “if Ukraine joins NATO, it will do so without Crimea and the eastern regions. It will simply fall apart.”

A decade and a half later, Putin sent the message [1] to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “Tell me you’re not joining NATO, I won’t invade.”

Putin is consistently accused in the West of dangerous melodrama and of historical revisionism when he points to NATO’s broken promise that it wouldn’t expand east if the Soviet Union permitted a united Germany to join NATO.

In 2007, Putin complained, “What happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them.” A year later, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev complained that the United States “promised that NATO wouldn’t move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and Eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted.”

Then U.S. Secretary of State James Baker has claimed [2] that the discussion of NATO expansion applied only to East Germany, not to Eastern Europe: “There was never any discussion of anything but the GDR (East Germany].” A 2014 NATO report claimed, “No such pledge was made, and no evidence to back up Russia’s claims has ever been produced.”

But declassified documents [3] now reveal that NATO was lying, and that it is Baker, and not Putin, who was engaging in historical revisionism.

After complaining that no one remembers the West’s assurances, Putin went on to remind his audience what they said: “I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: ‘The fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.’ Where are those guarantees?”

Putin was quoting correctly. He might have added, as we know from the recently declassified documents, that Woerner also “stressed that the NATO Council and he are against the expansion of NATO (13 out of 16 NATO members support this point of view).” The NATO Secretary General also assured the Russians on July 1, 1991 that, in an upcoming meeting with Poland’s Lech Walesa and Romania’s Ion Iliescu, “he will oppose Poland and Romania joining NATO, and earlier this was stated to Hungary and Czechoslovakia.” (Document 30)

As for Baker’s insistence that no such promise was made, he articulated some of the most important statements of that promise. On February 9, 1990, Baker famously offered Gorbachev a choice: “I want to ask you a question, and you need not answer it right now. Supposing unification takes place, what would you prefer: a united Germany outside of NATO, absolutely independent and without American troops; or a united Germany keeping its connections with NATO, but with the guarantee that NATO’s jurisdiction or troops will not spread east of the present boundary?”

Baker has been dismissive of this statement, categorizing it as only a hypothetical question. But Baker’s next statement, not previously included in the quotation, but now placed back in the script by the documentary record, refutes that claim. After Gorbachev answers Baker’s question, saying, “It goes without saying that a broadening of the NATO zone is not acceptable,” Baker replies categorically, “We agree with that.” (Document 6)

There are a number of other declassified statements that now solidify the evidence against Baker’s claim. The most important is Baker’s own interpretation of his question to Gorbachev at the time. At a press conference immediately following this most crucial meeting with Gorbachev, Baker announced that NATO’s “jurisdiction would not be moved eastward.” He added that he had “indicated” to Gorbachev that “there should be no extension of NATO forces eastward.”

And while Baker was meeting with Gorbachev, Deputy National Security Adviser Robert Gates was asking the same question of KGB leader Vladimir Kryuchkov in clearly non-hypothetical terms. He asked Kryuchkov what he thought of the “proposal under which a united Germany would be associated with NATO, but in which NATO troops would move no further east than they now were?” Gates then added, “It seems to us to be a sound proposal.” (Document 7)

On that same busy day, Baker posed the same question to Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs Eduard Shevardnadze. He asked if there “might be an outcome that would guarantee that there would be no NATO forces in the eastern part of Germany. In fact, there could be an absolute ban on that.” How did Baker intend that offer? In Not One Inch, M.E. Sarotte reports that in his own notes, Baker wrote, “End result: Unified Ger. Anchored in a changed (polit.) NATO—whose juris. would not be moved eastward!” According to a now declassified State department memorandum of their conversation, Baker had already in this conversation assured Shevardnadze, “There would, of course, have to be ironclad guarantees that NATO’s jurisdiction or forces would not move eastward.” (Document 4)

And, according to a declassified State Department memorandum of the conversation, on still the same day, Baker told Gorbachev and Shevardnadze, not in the form of a question at all, that, “If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” (Document 5)

Continue reading →

Minsk agreements allowed me to arm Ukraine – Poroshenko

Posted by

0

From RT
6-6-23

Pyotr Poroshenko has said he turned to NATO to prepare for war instead of implementing the peace roadmap

Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has boasted about his role in rebuilding his country’s military under the cover of the Minsk agreements. The documents were ostensibly intended to reconcile Kiev with eastern regions that had not endorsed the 2014 Western-backed coup.

“Do you know how many battalions I had north of Kiev when I became president? Zero. What about the state budget? Below zero. What about working tanks? A pittance,” the former leader said, describing the state of Ukraine nine years ago in an interview with Italy’s Corriere della Sera newspaper published on Monday.

Poroshenko took office in June 2014, as the post-coup Ukrainian government was attempting to quash a rebellion in Donetsk and Lugansk Regions with military force. The two Minsk agreements were adopted with Poroshenko at the helm. They were supposed to de-escalate the conflict and reintegrate the regions into Ukrainian political systems under wide autonomy, but Kiev stonewalled their implementation.

Instead, Poroshenko told the newspaper that his government had opted for a military buildup with the help of foreign sponsors.

“Immediately after the signing, I invited NATO instructors, bought weapons and vehicles. During my presidency we built an army,” he declared.

The former president insisted that this had allowed Ukraine to prepare for the current confrontation with Russia. Moscow cited Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk accords, its continued attacks on Donetsk and Lugansk, as well as NATO’s encroachment into Ukraine as key reasons for the launch of its military operation in February 2022.

Russian officials have claimed that the Minsk agreements, which were mediated by France and Germany, were negotiated in bad faith. Former French President Francois Hollande and ex-German Chancellor Angela Merkel have since confirmed that the deals were intended to buy time for Kiev.

Poroshenko suffered a landslide defeat to Vladimir Zelensky, the current president, in the 2019 election. The comedian-turned-politician promised to reverse his predecessor’s bellicose policies and reconcile with Donbass. However, Zelensky performed a U-turn after coming to power, as extremist nationalist forces objected to any attempts to negotiate.

In the interview, Poroshenko endorsed the opinion of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who argued last week that Minsk and Moscow should have “resolved” the Ukrainian situation in 2014-2015, instead of pursuing diplomacy. Poroshenko implied that his government would have been toppled in that scenario.

https://www.rt.com/russia/577553-poroshenko-minsk-accords-nato/

Russia temporarily suspends its participation in New START treaty

Posted by

0

From Strategic Stability

Report # 207. Presidential Address to Federal Assembly on February, 21

February 22, 2023

1. Moscow has suspended its participation in the New START

“Colleagues, I will talk about one more issue.

In early February [2023], the North Atlantic alliance made a statement with actual demand to Russia, as they put it, to return to the implementation of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty, including admission of inspections to our nuclear defence facilities. I don’t even know what to call this. It is a kind of a theatre of the absurd.

We know that the West is directly involved in the Kiev regime’s attempts to strike at our strategic aviation bases. The drones used for this purpose were equipped and updated with the assistance of NATO specialists. And now they also want to inspect our defence facilities? In the current conditions of confrontation, it simply sounds insane.

I would like to draw your attention specifically to the fact that they are not letting us conduct full-scale inspections under this treaty. Our repeated applications to inspect different facilities remain unanswered or are rejected under formal pretexts, and we cannot verify anything on the other side.

I would like to stress that the United States and NATO are openly saying that their goal is to inflict a strategic defeat on Russia. And what, after such statements they are supposed to tour our defence facilities, including the latest ones, as if nothing happened? A week ago, I signed an executive order putting new land-based strategic systems on combat duty. Are they going to poke their nose there as well? Do they think we will let them go there just because?

Having made this collective statement, NATO actually claimed to be a participant in the Treaty on Strategic Offensive Arms. We agree with this, please go ahead. Moreover, we believe this framing of the issue is long overdue. Let me recall that the US is not the only nuclear power in NATO. Britain and France also have nuclear arsenals. They are developing and upgrading them and these arsenals are also directed against us – they are also directed against Russia. The latest statements by their leaders merely confirm it – listen for yourselves.

We cannot just ignore this and have no right to do so especially now. Nor can we forget that the Soviet Union and the United States initially signed the first Treaty on Strategic Offensive Arms in 1991 in a completely different situation – in conditions of abating tensions and growing mutual trust. Subsequently, our relations reached a level that allowed Russia and the US to say they no longer considered each other enemies. Wonderful, everything was going very well.

The Treaty of 2010 that is in force contains critically important provisions about indivisible security and the direct link between strategic offensive and defensive arms. All of that has long been forgotten. The United States withdrew from the ABM Treaty. It is now a thing of the past. Importantly, our relations have degraded which can be credited entirely to the United States.

After the Soviet Union broke up, they began to revise the outcomes of World War II and to build an American-style world ruled by one master. To do this, they began to rudely destroy the foundations of the international order laid down after WWII in order to cross out the legacy of the Yalta and Potsdam conferences. Step by step, they proceeded to revise the existing international order, to dismantle security and arms control systems, and plotted and carried out a series of wars around the world.

To reiterate, all of that was done for the sole purpose of dismantling the post-WWII architecture of international relations. This is not a figure of speech. This is how it all unfolded in reality. After the Soviet Union collapsed, they sought to perpetuate their global dominance regardless of the interests of modern Russia or other countries for that matter.

Sure enough, the international situation changed after 1945. New centres of growth and influence have been formed and are rapidly expanding. This is a natural and objective process that cannot be ignored. But the United States trying to refashion the international order to suit exclusively its own needs and selfish interests is unacceptable.

Now, they are using NATO to give us signals, which, in fact, is an ultimatum whereby Russia should, no questions asked, implement everything that it agreed to, including the New START Treaty, whereas they will do as they please. As if there is no connection between strategic offensive weapons and, say, the conflict in Ukraine or other hostile Western actions against our country. As if there are no vociferous claims about them seeking to inflict a strategic defeat on us. This is either the height of hypocrisy and cynicism, or the height of stupidity, but they are not idiots. They are not stupid after all. They want to inflict a strategic defeat on us and also to get to our nuclear sites.

In this regard, I am compelled to announce today that Russia is suspending its membership in the New START Treaty. To reiterate, we are not withdrawing from the Treaty, but rather suspending our participation. Before we come back to discussing this issue, we must have a clear idea of what NATO countries such as France or Great Britain have at stake, and how we will account for their strategic arsenals, that is, the Alliance’s combined offensive capabilities.

Their statement comes, in fact, as a request to join this process. Well, come onboard, we do not mind. Just try not to lie to everyone this time and present yourselves as champions of peace and detente. We know the truth. We are aware of the fact that certain types of US nuclear weapons are reaching the end of their service life. In this regard, we know for certain that some politicians in Washington are already pondering live nuclear tests, especially since the United States is developing innovative nuclear weapons. There is information to that effect.

Given these circumstances, the Defence Ministry and Rosatom must make everything ready for Russia to conduct nuclear tests. We will not be the first to proceed with these tests, but if the United States goes ahead with them, we will as well. No one should harbour dangerous illusions that global strategic parity can be disrupted”.

Conclusion

“Today, we are together living through challenging times and overcoming all difficulties together as well. It could not have been otherwise because we have been raised on the example of our great ancestors and must be worthy of their behests that are passed down from generation to generation. We are moving only forward owing to our devotion to our Motherland, our will and our unity.

This cohesion was on display from the first days of the special military operation – hundreds of volunteers, representatives of all ethnicities of our country came to recruitment offices. They decided to stand by the defenders of Donbass, to fight for their native land, for their Fatherland, for the truth and justice. Today, warriors from all regions of our multi-ethnic Motherland are fighting shoulder to shoulder on the frontlines. They pray in different languages, but they all pray for victory, for their fellow soldiers and for the Motherland. (Applause.)

Their difficult military labour, their exploits are finding a powerful response all over Russia. People are supporting our fighters. They don’t want to stay on the sidelines. The front is now passing through the hearts of our people in their millions. They are sending medicine, communication devices, transport, warm clothes and camouflage nets, to name a few – everything that helps protect the lives of our fighters.

I know the comfort letters from children and schoolkids give to our soldiers at the front. They take them into battle as a cherished possession because the sincerity and purity of children’s wishes bring tears to their eyes. They feel more forcefully for whose sake they are fighting and whom they are defending.

Warriors, their families and civilians greatly appreciate the care with which volunteers are surrounding them. They have been acting boldly and decisively from the very start of the special military operation. Under fire and shelling they are leading children, elders and all those in trouble out of basements; they were and still are bringing food, water and clothes to hot spots; they are setting up humanitarian aid centres for refugees and helping doctors in field hospitals and on the combat contact line; they continue to risk their lives to save others.

The Russian Popular Front alone raised over five billion rubles as part of the All for Victory initiative. The flow of donations does not stop. Every contribution is important and this applies to those made by large companies and businesspeople. But especially touching and inspiring are the donations of people with modest incomes, which are contributing part of their savings, salaries and pensions. This coming together to help our warriors, civilians in the zone of hostilities and refugees is worth a lot.

Thank you for this sincere support, cohesion and mutual aid. It is impossible to overstate their importance.

Russia will meet any challenges because we are all one country, a big and united nation. We are confident in ourselves and confident in our strength. The truth is on our side. (Applause.)”

[Note: these are selective parts of the Address that has lasted for nearly two hours; the full text in English can be found at: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/70565%5D

2. Lawmakers approved Putin’s SOA treaty decision

Russia’s Parliament has passed legislation suspending Moscow’s participation in the New START agreement

Both houses of the Federal Assembly – the Russian Parliament – approved a bill on February 22 submitted by President Vladimir Putin, by which Moscow will temporarily suspend its participation in the Strategic Offensive Arms Treaty (New START) – the last existing nuclear accord between Russia and the US.

In an explanatory note attached to the bill, the lawmakers state that the agreement, which was meant to cut in half the number of nuclear weapons deployed around the world, was supposed to allow both parties to carry out inspections in order to ensure compliance. The US, however, “deliberately fails to fulfill its obligations under the treaty in this area of activity,” the note states.

Because of this, and in accordance with federal law, the Russian president has made a proposal to suspend the agreement, the note reads, adding that the decision to resume Russia’s participation in the treaty will also be made by the president.

The bill will enter into force once signed by the president and published.

Why does the collective West wage a direct war against Russia?

Posted by

0

From Strategis Stability
January 31, 2023

Report # 197.

1. NATO and non-NATO countries are waging a multifaceted direct war against Russia

The bellicose and provocative statement made publicly by Annalena Baerbock, German Foreign Minister, at the PACE session on January 24 that “… we are fighting a war against Russia …”, where “we” can be interpreted as the FRG or NATO or Europe, evoked many debates as to what is really happening in Ukraine. No doubt that such countries that regularly supply heavy weapons to ultra-Nazi regime in Kiev may well be characterized as “aggressors” or as countries that are waging a multifaceted direct war against Russia. They include the majority of NATO member-states (29 from 30 in the full list), and nearly 20 that are not considered as NATO participants.

Earlier it was called as ‘undeclared war” against Russia. Since Baerbock’s statement it clearly became as “a declared war’ against Russia.

Why such war is called as a multifaceted direct war?

A) In terms of military-technical and military-political factors:

It is called as such because it is unleashed with the use of heavy NATO-made offensive weapons. It is coordinated by NATO HQ. It is supplied with NATO intelligence, including that of collected by space-based assets. It is financed by NATO money. It is staffed with NATO military men. E.g. all US-made MLRS HIMERS are operated by exclusively the US GIs. The German and the US tanks that are be sent to Ukraine in violation of the OSCE rules will be operated by the FRG and the US servicemen.

B) In terms of other factors, it is called as a multifaceted direct war because it is a religious war against Russia conducted by Ukraine against Orthodox Christianity.

It is also an information war against Russia because it is waged by a huge NATO and the EU propaganda machine using distortions and lies across the globe.

It is a genocide war against Eastern Slav nations – Ukrainians and Russians. Ukrainian and NATO leaders intend to kill more and more Ukrainians and Russians only because they speak Russian language, profess Orthodox Christianity, have their own ethnic culture and traditions, different assessment of historic events in the past, and bravely fought [against] Nazi Germany in 1941-1945.

Vyacheslav Volodin, the speaker of the State Duma, noted “the direct participation of the USA in combat operations in Ukraine.” He argued that the US military instructors and mercenaries are there in order to save the Kiev regime and for fear of losing its colony in Europe.

2. What are the phases of the NATO/non-NATO aggression against Russia?

The first stage began since April 2014 when Kiev decided to attack Donbass, the second took place after the second part of the Minsk Agreement was reached in March 2015, and the third stage started on February 14, 2022.

A proxy war involving Ukraine started since April 2014.

A combined direct Ukrainian-NATO aggression (or war) against Russia began on February 14, 2022, when Zelensky ordered to attack Donbass on a massive scale. On February 18, 2022, millions of Ukrainian refugees rushed into Western Europe and Russia seeking shelter and escaping from Ukrainian attacks.

Russia launched the Special Military Operation (SMO) in response to Ukrainian aggression on February 24, 2022.

3. Can Russian again win Western aggression against it?

Yes, it can, and it will. Offsetting Ukrainian-NATO aggression against Russia became the nation’s major goal. The country is united. All confessions are fighting together against attackers. All political Parties sitting in the Parliament and the rank-and-file citizens are supporting Russian Armed Forces. Mobilization targets were fully reached. Russian defense-industrial complex operates in three shifts during 24 hours.

If one counts a large-scale foreign multilateral armed aggressions against the Russian Empire, the Soviet Union and the Russian Federation since the Napoleonic War in 1812, any person will find out that since that time the country won all five major wars: the Napoleonic War (1812), the Crimean War (1853-1856), the Allied 14 States War (1918), and Nazi War (1941-1945).

The current Ukrainian- NATO war against Russia began initially against Donbass in April 2014 when Ukrainian neo-Nazi and Banderists started attacking two Republics in that region – the DPR and LPR wishing to separate from newly-entrenched ultra-nationalist regime in Kiev due to direct moral, financial and military support of the USA that spent by February 2014 ten billion dollars to engineer a military coup in the capital Kiev, including $ 5.0 billion spent by the US State Department, and the rest – by the CIA – mainly by bribing Ukrainian opposition leaders and by using widely and effectively the local NGOs created with the purpose of making a radical regime change in Ukraine.

Continue reading →

3 February. Montenegro: NATO troops arrived last night on the mountains we’re trying to protect from them — Save Sinjajevina

Posted by

0

By World BEYOND War,
February 3, 2023

The people of Montenegro, led by the Save Sinjajevina campaign, have done everything people can do to prevent atrocities in so-called democracies. They’ve won over public opinion. They’ve elected officials promising to protect their mountains. They’ve lobbied, organized public protests, and made themselves into human shields. They show no signs of planning to give up, much less to believe the UK’s official position that this mountain destruction is environmentalism, while NATO has been threatening to use Sinjajevina for war training in May 2023!

Last night, 250 NATO soldiers arrived in Sinjajevina. They claim that they will do no artillery shooting, just alpinistic exercises.

The Prime Minister of Montenegro Dritan Abazovic had promised on television two weeks ago that there would not be any military activities in Sinjajevina. He’s broken another promise.

Six members of Save Sinjajevina are now in place where they had a large resistance camp in 2020. Despite temperatures of -10ºC they are organizing a nonviolent resistance effort yet again.

The place where the people are gathering is called Margita. They have celebrated the anniversary of their resistance at that spot. They have engraved on a rock there with golden letters a phrase of legend dedicating it to resistance.

For background information, a petition to sign, a form to donate, and more photos and videos, go to https://worldbeyondwar.org/sinjajevina

Photos of the NATO troops are on this page:
https://www.facebook(dot)com/savesinjajevina?fref=nf

Okinawa faces a crisis. Citizens appeal for your support 26 February.

Posted by

0

Posted on Global Network Against Weapons and Nuclear Power in Space

February 11, 2023

To: All you folks who think peace is the better option
From: No More Battle of Okinawa: Nuchi du Takara (Life is a Treasure) People’s Association
Co-representatives: Hiroji Yamashiro; C. Douglas Lummis (and others).
Contact address: Ideaspeddler(at)gmail.com

As you may know, The US and Japanese governments have announced that, in the event of a “Taiwan contingency”, the “Southwest Islands” will become a war zone. “Contingency” is a softer way of saying “war”, and “Southwest Islands” means the Ryukyu Archipelago: Okinawa.

The two governments are not simply predicting that will happen. They are arranging so that it will happen. That is, all along the outer islands of the Ryukyu Archipelago they are building new missile launching sites, targeting China – this in addition to the formidable attack bases already on Okinawa main island. Should any of these missiles actually be fired on the Chinese mainland or against Chinese naval vessels, the Chinese military will have the right, under the international law of war, to return the fire. The Mayor of Naha [Okinawa] has already begun carrying out civil defense drills.

This is not an issue only for in-principle pacifists, who believe all war should be abolished. To fight a war in a neutral country is a violation of the law of war itself. Okinawa is not merely neutral, it is not a party to this war in any way, shape or form. Okinawa has no quarrel with China. Many see this as a replay of the Battle of Okinawa, and are asking, Are we to be the sacrificial pawns (sute-ishi in Japanese) – again?

There is a new movement forming now in Okinawa to point out the grotesque absurdity of fighting this war in Okinawa and to call for a negotiated peace. Please understand: This is a movement that can include people who accept the necessity of some wars, but not this one. (Even dedicated soldiers can, with perfect consistency, call for a negotiated peace.)

A large gathering to voice opposition to Okinawa becoming again a war zone and to demand negotiations is being planned for 26 February, Okinawa time. It would be very encouraging if you could support this action, either as an organization or as individuals – and this either by taking some simple action on the same day, or by sending messages of support.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is image-1.png

Statement from Global Network:

The Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space shares the deep concerns of the people of Okinawa about the possibility of US-NATO war against China that would directly impact your island home.

Recent belligerent words by Pentagon officials signal that Washington is indeed planning such a horrific war.

Already the US-NATO has launched a war against Russia using Ukraine as a proxy.

The US intends to do the same to China using Taiwan as the instrument to justify this war.

It is more than insane for Washington to think it can fight against two nuclear powers at virtually the same time. This is a clear sign of US desperation to remain as ‘king of the hill’.

We declare our solidarity with the people throughout the Ryukyu Archipelago and beyond.

Close US bases on Okinawa!
No war with China!

Bruce K. Gagnon
Coordinator
Global Network Against Weapons & Nuclear Power in Space

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2023/02/okinawa-faces-crisis-this-is-appeal-for.html

SCOTT RITTER: Nuclear High Noon in Europe

Posted by

0

The risk isn’t that Russia would start a pre-emptive nuclear war over Ukraine.

The risk is that America would.

From Consortium News
October 19, 2022

By Scott Ritter
Special to Consortium News

Now is the time for Biden to clarify U.S. nuclear doctrine. But he remains silent.

On Monday, Oct. 17, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization kicked off Operation STEADFAST NOON, its annual exercise of its ability to wage nuclear conflict. Given that NATO’s nuclear umbrella extends exclusively over Europe, the indisputable fact is that STEADFAST NOON is nothing more than NATO training to wage nuclear war against Russia.

Nuclear war against Russia.

The reader should let that sink in for a moment.

Don’t worry, NATO spokesperson Oana Lungscu reassured the rest of the world, the purpose of STEADFAST NOON is to ensure that NATO’s nuclear war-fighting capability “remains safe and effective.” It is a “routine” exercise, not linked to any current world events. Moreover, no “real” nuclear weapons will be used — just “fake” ones.

Nothing to worry about here.

Enter Jens Stoltenberg, NATO secretary general, stage right in the nuclear theater. In a statement to the press on Oct. 11, Stoltenberg declared that, “Russia’s victory in the war against Ukraine will be a defeat of NATO,” before ominously announcing, “This cannot be allowed.”

To that end, Stoltenberg stated, the STEADFAST NOON nuclear drills would continue as scheduled. These drills, Stoltenberg said, were an important deterrence mechanism in the face of Russian “veiled: nuclear threats.”

But they weren’t related to any current world events.

Enter Volodymyr Zelensky, stage left. Speaking to the Lowy Institute, a nonpartisan international policy think tank in Australia, the Ukrainian president called for the international community to undertake “preventative strikes, preventive action” against Russia to deter the potential use of nuclear weapons by Russia against Ukraine.

While many observers interpreted Zelensky’s words to imply a request for NATO to carry out a preemptive nuclear strike against Russia, Zelensky’s aides were quick to try and correct the record, saying he was simply asking for more sanctions.

Enter Joe Biden, center stage. Speaking at a fund raiser on Oct. 6, the president of the United States said that, “For the first time since the Cuban missile crisis, we have a direct threat of the use of a nuclear weapon if in fact things continue down the path they are going.”

Biden went on: “We’ve got a guy I know fairly well. He’s not joking when he talks about potential use of tactical nuclear weapons or biological or chemical weapons because his military is, you might say, significantly underperforming.”

Biden concluded: “I don’t think there’s any such thing as the ability to easily use a tactical nuclear weapon and not end up with Armageddon.”

While it has been made abundantly clear by the White House that Biden’s comments were his personal view, and not based on any new intelligence regarding Russian nuclear posture, the fact that a sitting U.S. president was speaking about the possibility of a nuclear “Armageddon” should send chills down the spine of every sane individual in the world.

No Kremlin Talk of Tactical Nuclear Weapons

First and foremost, there has been zero talk about the employment of tactical nuclear weapons from the Kremlin.

Zero.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has indicated that Russia would use “all the means at its disposal” to protect Russia. He said this most recently on Sept. 21, when in a televised address announcing partial mobilization, he accused the West of engaging in “nuclear blackmail,” citing “statements of some high-ranking representatives of the leading NATO states about the possibility of using nuclear weapons of mass destruction against Russia.”

Continue reading →