Tag Archives: NATO

‘Not a Justification but a Provocation’: Chomsky on the Root Causes of the Russia-Ukraine War, by Ramzy Baroud

If one gets the full story of Ukraine, Russia, and NATO since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, it is not difficult to understand why Russia invaded Ukraine. From Ramzy Baroud at commondreams.org:

Chomsky believes that the main ‘background’ of this war, a factor that is missing in mainstream media coverage, is “NATO expansion.”

One of the reasons that Russian media has been completely blocked in the West, along with the unprecedented control and censorship over the Ukraine war narrative, is the fact that western governments simply do not want their public to know that the world is vastly changing.

Ignorance might be bliss, arguably in some situations, but not in this case. Here, ignorance can be catastrophic as western audiences are denied access to information about a critical situation that is affecting them in profound ways and will most certainly impact the world’s geopolitics for generations to come.

The growing inflation, an imminent global recession, a festering refugee crisis, a deepening food shortage crisis and much more are the kinds of challenges that require open and transparent discussions regarding the situation in Ukraine, the NATO-Russia rivalry and the responsibility of the West in the ongoing war.

To discuss these issues, along with the missing context of the Russia-Ukraine war, we spoke with Professor Noam Chomsky, believed to be the greatest living intellectual of our time.

Chomsky told us that it “should be clear that the (Russian) invasion of Ukraine has no (moral) justification.” He compared it to the US invasion of Iraq, seeing it as an example of “supreme international crime.” With this moral question settled, Chomsky believes that the main ‘background’ of this war, a factor that is missing in mainstream media coverage, is “NATO expansion.”

Continue reading→

SCOTT RITTER: Turkey Rains on NATO’s Parade

Maybe Erdogan sees the downsides of continuing NATO expansion. From Scott Ritter at consortiumnews.com:

In opposing the application of Finland and Sweden, Erdogan has disrupted the military alliance’s effort to further provoke Russia with even more expansion.  

Letters of application to NATO from Finland and Sweden, presented to Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg on May 18. (NATO)

On May 18, the secretary general of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, a Norwegian named Jen Stoltenberg, stood on a stage, flanked by the ambassadors to NATO of Finland and Sweden, Klaus Korhonen and Axel Wernhoff, respectively.

It was one of those made-for-television moments that politicians dream of — a time of high drama, where the ostensible forces of good are faced off against the relentless assault of evil, which necessitates the intervention of like-minded friends and allies to help tip the scales of geopolitical justice toward those who embrace liberty over tyranny.

“This is a good day,” Jen Stoltenberg announced, “at a critical moment for our security.”

Left unsaid was the harsh reality that hundreds of miles to the east the military forces of Russia and Ukraine were locked in deadly combat on Ukrainian soil. Also left unsaid was the role played by NATO in facilitating that conflict.

Continue reading→

Reckoning With Insanity, Part One, by Robert Gore

the-enlargement-of-nato-1949-2018_cropped_3x2

Finland and Sweden have asked to join

The time many people will have to grasp the insanity of the Russian situation may be measured in microseconds.

Part Two

What they fear the most is you, thinking for yourself. Within those three words are two implicit concepts. Thinking is the fundamental essential for human existence. It can be hard work, but nobody will disparage it on that basis. Attacks on thought, and there have been many, tend to be more subtle.

The for yourself is more problematic. For one thing, it sounds selfish. Nowadays you can present yourself as damn near any kind of humanitarian, even when you’re carrying all sorts of obviously hypocritical baggage, and you’ll go unchallenged. State that your first concern is your own welfare, not the common good or the public interest, and most people will mentally consign you to the ninth circle of hell. Sixty-five years after publication, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand’s tribute to the self-interested mind, is still denounced. Soon it will be banned in those jurisdictions that have not already done so.

And who wants to be consigned to the ninth circle of hell? Think for yourself and worse, dare to speak your questions, speculations, hypotheses, and conclusions, and you open yourself to isolation and attack. The killer bees in the hive mind mind are viscous, relentless, and remorseless, inflicting stinging, sometimes deadly, cancellation. Then there’s that part of thinking many don’t like—the hard work. It’s easier to join the hive. Never underestimate laziness as a human motivation.

For those that do think for themselves, dispelling the smokescreen of obfuscation, propaganda, and lies that now constitute communications from politicians, other public officials, their allies, and their string-pullers has become routine, Citizens of totalitarian regimes know well the guiding precept: all such communications are lies unless conclusively demonstrated otherwise.

Continue reading

NATO’s War on Truth, by Declan Hayes

Enemies come and go but truth is the perpetual enemy of those who would wage war and tyrannize their own citizens. From Declan Hayes at strategic-culture.org:

I have a dream. I have a dream that freedom from NATO will ring from the Ural Mountains of Russia to the Bavarian Alps, from every hill and molehill of Ukraine and Poland,” Declan Hayes writes.

Lord Alfred Ponsonby‘s dictum that “When war is declared, truth is the first casualty”, remains as true today as it did when he wrote Falsehood in War-time, Containing an Assortment of Lies Circulated Throughout the Nations During the Great War, his 1928 classic. Although Snake Island, the Ghost of Kiev and a million other NATO lies over Ukraine could be wheeled out to show NATO is a serial liar, NATO has a much greater lie afoot.

That lie is that NATO is only at war with Russia (Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Palestine, Venezuela, Iran etc etc) and not also against all of us. Although Ireland has not yet joined NATO, we too must freeze in the dark, join Nazi mobs vandalizing Russian Embassies, throw our houses open to the unvaccinated wives, mistresses and pet dogs of Azov Nazis and sacrifice our own futures, just to spite “Putin” (and Assad and all of NATO’s many other scapegoats). A surprisingly large number of simpletons, goaded on by NATO’s media, buy into that poppycock.

Continue reading→

Why Would US Give a War Guarantee — to Finland? By Patrick J. Buchanan

Someday the U.S. will be on the hook to fight for every country in the world except Russia, China, and Iran. From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

Seeing Russia invade Ukraine, historically neutral Finland has undergone a late conversion and decided to join NATO immediately.

Why? Because NATO membership means the world’s strongest power, the United States, under Article 5 of NATO, would go to war against Russia, should it cross Finland’s border.

Nervous about Russian President Vladimir Putin’s intentions, Finland wants America legally and morally bound to fight Russia on its behalf, should Putin invade Finland as he invaded Ukraine.

From the Finnish point of view, this is perfectly understandable.

But why would the United States consent to go to war with Russia, the largest nuclear power on earth, for violating Finland’s frontiers?

Finland is not Alaska; it is not Canada; it is 5,000 miles away. And no one ever asserted during the Cold War, or for the decades since, that Finland was a U.S. vital interest.

Why, then, would we consent, in advance, to go to war with Russia over Finland?

Continue reading→

Megalopolis x Russia: Total War, by Pepe Escobar

Russia and China are intent on ending the U.S.’s unipolar hegemony. Or as the U.S. calls it, the rules-based international order (where the U.S. makes all the rules). From Pepe Escobar at thesaker.is:

After careful evaluation, the Kremlin is rearranging the geopolitical chessboard to end the unipolar hegemony of the “indispensable nation”.

But it’s our fate / To have no place to rest, / As suffering mortals / Blindly fall and vanish / From one hour / To the next, / Like water falling / From cliff to cliff, downward / For years to uncertainty.

Holderlin, Hyperion’s Fate Song

Operation Z is the first salvo of a titanic struggle: three decades after the fall of the USSR, and 77 years after the end of WWII, after careful evaluation, the Kremlin is rearranging the geopolitical chessboard to end the unipolar hegemony of the “indispensable nation”. No wonder the Empire of Lies has gone completely berserk, obsessed in completely expelling Russia from the West-centric system.

The U.S. and its NATO puppies cannot possibly come to grips with their perplexity when faced with a staggering loss: no more entitlement allowing exclusive geopolitical use of force to perpetuate “our values”. No more Full Spectrum Dominance.

The micro-picture is also clear. The U.S. Deep State is milking to Kingdom Come its planned Ukraine gambit to cloak a strategic attack on Russia. The “secret” was to force Moscow into an intra-Slav war in Ukraine to break Nord Stream 2 – and thus German reliance on Russian natural resources. That ends – at least for the foreseeable future – the prospect of a Bismarckian Russo-German connection that would ultimately cause the U.S. to lose control of the Eurasian landmass from the English Channel to the Pacific to an emerging China-Russia-Germany pact.

Continue reading→

The Russia-NATO Cyber War Is Escalating Fast, by Nick Corbishley

It’s a whole new battlefield. From Nick Corbishley at nakedcapitalism.com:

Fears are rising that the boundaries of the cyber war between Russia and NATO could soon spread beyond Europe.

Eight cybersecurity authorities from the so-called “Five Eye” nations (United States, United Kingdom, Australia, Canada and New Zealand) released a joint statement on Thursday warning that more malicious cyber activity is on the way as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine continues to undermine geopolitical stability.

Before we look at the statement in any depth, an important five-pronged caveat is needed:

  • Both the US and the UK are among the primary antagonists in NATO’s ongoing war with Russia;
  • They both have significant offensive cyber war capabilities of their own;
  • US intelligence agencies, at Obama’s behest, have drawn up a list of potential overseas targets for cyber attacks;
  • Both countries have surreptitiously conducted vast surveillance programs, targeting not only their own populations but also citizens and government leaders of other countries;
  • The world right now is in the grip of the biggest information war of this century.

Continue reading→

NATO Put Ukraine on the Path to Partition, by David Stockman

You won’t get much in the way of odds betting that Ukraine will look different on a map in five years than it does today. From David Stockman at antiwar.com:

(read part 1)

The gist of our two-part series is this: Unlike Ford automobiles, Ukraine was not “Built to Last!”

The current CIA director, William J Burns, actually recognized the eventual crackup of Ukraine back in 2008, when he served as U.S. ambassador to Russia. After Ukraine’s NATO aspirations were announced at that year’s Bucharest Security Conference, Burns wrote a secret cable (subsequently published by WikiLeaks) entitled, “Nyet Means Nyet: Russia’s NATO Enlargement Redlines.”

The missive to Washington contained a stern warning of trouble to come:

Ukraine and Georgia’s NATO aspirations not only touch a raw nerve in Russia, they engender serious concerns about the consequences for stability in the region. Not only does Russia perceive encirclement, and efforts to undermine Russia’s influence in the region, but it also fears unpredictable and uncontrolled consequences which would seriously affect Russian security interests.

Continue reading→

Should We Commit to Fight Russia — for Finland? By Patrick J. Buchanan

We’re already committed to defend Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania, so does it really matter if we pick up Finland and Sweden? From Patrick J. Buchanan at buchanan.org:

The prime ministers of Sweden and Finland, Magdalena Andersson and Sanna Marin, both signaled Wednesday that they will likely be applying for membership in NATO.

The “prospect” is most “welcome,” says The Washington Post: “Finland and Sweden Should Join NATO.”

The editorial was titled “A Way to Punish Putin.”

Before joining the rejoicing in NATO capitals, we might inspect what NATO membership for these two Nordic nations would mean for the United States.

Finland is a nation the size of Germany, but with a population only 4% of that of Russia and a border with Russia that is 830 miles long.

Should Finland join NATO, the United States, under Article 5 of the NATO treaty, would be obligated to go to war with the world’s largest nuclear power to retrieve Finnish lands that an enraged Russia might grab.

Moscow has already indicated that, should Sweden and Finland join NATO, Russia will introduce new nuclear weapons into the Baltic region.

Continue reading→

TGIF: Joe Biden, What the Hell? By Sheldon Richman

Joe Biden is clearly not fit to serve as president, and the U.S. runs the risk that he says or does something that could wipe out the country. The sooner he’s gone, the better. From Sheldon Richman at libertarianinstitute.org:

What’s going on with Joe Biden? Is he oblivious to the fact that Russia has about as many strategic nuclear weapons as the United States has? Is he taking advice from the neocons, who apparently believe that we should not fear a nuclear holocaust because that’s exactly what Vladimir Putin wants us to do? (I presume Putin also wants us to believe that the earth is round. Should we give that up too?)

How else to explain Biden’s astounding statements in recent days, particularly while meeting with NATO representatives in Brussels and with U.S. troops in Poland? That’s right: 9,000 U.S. troops are now in southeast Poland, not far from the Ukrainian border. Poland of course is a member of NATO, which means that if Poland clashes with Russia, the U.S. government has treaty obligations to its ally. To be clear, here’s Article 5, which embodies the principle that NATO describes as being “at the very heart” of the treaty”:

The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognized by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area. [Emphasis added to indicate ambiguity in the provision that isn’t often acknowledged.]

Continue reading→