Categories
Conflicts Conflicts Europe Disclaimer European Union Foreign policy Nationalism NATO Propaganda & Disinformation Radicalisation Srebrenica US foreign policy War World

‘Intermediate score’ proxy war in Ukraine

(In Nederlands)

Just a few comments on this tragic proxy war that could have been prevented if too many had not gullibly and foolishly bought it…again…
Besides the again very active collaborators…again …

Yes…war is terrible and dirty and intense and traumatic. Except for psychopaths it is enjoyable for very few, despite the smiles and cheers on some videos and photos. And yes, war crimes are committed…far too many. By these psychopaths, but also by ordinary soldiers and armed civilians who go crazy in these intense circumstances. No excuses, but the image of a frische fröhliche Krieg is only propaganda by and for gullible people.

No, Russia did not want to conquer Kiev or kidnap President Zelensky with the first attack. It could not do so with the number of troops deployed. The aim with this quick in-depth attack and attacks on the border and from ‘Donbass’ was to force a quick peace settlement…of course under conditions favourable to Russia…and thus prevent further warfare. It seemed to work for a while, but the Ukrainian government Zelensky allowed itself…just like the governments during the civil wars in the former Yugoslavia and especially Bosnia…to be seduced by especially the American promises to reject that and to continue fighting. The Russians persisted for a while…promised and threatened some more…but eventually withdrew again. Russia, Putin and team visibly disappointed and deeply frustrated…especially by American-British subversion again and EU docility in this…again. Which was of course propagandistically exploited to the maximum being a painful Russian defeat. Unfortunately also by too many of my colleagues (for many of them after all ‘he who pays the piper calls the tune’). More critical comments were mostly absent.

The strategy that Putin’s Russia subsequently chose is, in many respects and according to the circumstances that they have to reckon with and that they still hope for and want to achieve, logical and ‘smart’. With all the mistakes, misdeeds and failures that come with it. And how long this proxy war is going to last as a result. With adverse consequences again…such as Finland and Sweden’s foolish NATO membership. And as far as you can speak of ‘smart’ in a nasty deadly proxy war like this. A conflict and proxy war with…just like Afghanistan and especially Iraq…again destructive and disastrous consequences for involved country(s), region and also the world. But I already explained that the real instigators of also this project, larger conflict against Russia…and against the EU(!!)…and this proxy war in Ukraine, the US and the UK and collaborating and gullible other governments and supporters, were and are not really bothered by it.

So, I can explain and set out why this Russian strategy is now logical and ‘smart’. But in doing so, I am playing into the hands of the real instigators and their loyal collaborators and gullible believers here. And although I…see my disclaimer…am not a fanboy of Putin’s Russia or dictatorships in general, I also do not wish to help these egocentric malicious nationalist instigators of this…again…destructive and disastrous war…which has shattered the European dream and is rendering the EU brain death…to succeed in their project and malicious intent. The sooner they…as in Afghanistan and Iraq…lose again the ‘less bad’ for us Europe and the world. So I keep this analysis to myself and will at most share it with those who I trust and who share my critical view and opinion in this matter. And I watch with a mix of sadness, pain, disappointment but also cynical gloating and bewilderment at so much gullibility and stupidity how this tragic conflict develops. It took 20 years with Srebrenica and Afghanistan before my (unfortunately!!) right was proved…I hope that this time it will be much sooner. Better for the (still to come) victims, for the world, better for us Europeans…

And the these days so needed disclaimer



Categories
Defence vision EU European Union NATO Propaganda & Disinformation Propaganda en desinformatie Security policy EUrope US foreign policy War on Terror

Disinformation by NATO & EU vs Disinfo – Myths vs Facts Threat and defensive NATO?

NATO and EU vs Disinfo like to brag about their ability to distinguish between ❌MYTH and ✅FACT and thus to be able to unmask a lot of disinformation, especially from Russia, their obsession. But they regularly make mistakes themselves, with probably their own deliberate propaganda and disinformation. Two examples.

NATO is not encircling and trying to contain Russia

and..

NATO is a defensive organisation


NATO is not encircling and trying to contain Russia

People who have no knowledge and understanding of this aspect will say…right!!! And yes, in factual it is correct.. in terms of only boundaries on land. But anyone who has knowledge and understanding of this aspect and war fighting and does not allow themselves to be tricked or consciously participate in this form of NATO’s and EU’s own propaganda and disinformation knows that the overall proposition of NATO and EU vs Disinfo is nonsense. And the Russians are simply right in this matter.

First the map shown. Probably deliberately in 2D. Not in 3D and as a globe!! Which already makes the image quite different!! Especially if you know that modern warfare is of course much more than just only over land. Also by sea, air, digital and also space.

Already a different picture!! But it still leaves much of the Russian claim of NATO “encirclement” open. Therefore it is important to look at the capacities and bases of the NATO member states themselves. Because in the event of a conflict or even war, operations will, of course, not only be carried out from the European part of NATO territory. Especially the capacities of the still undisputed and dominant NATO leader USA come into the picture. It is not for nothing that Russia focuses on America in its accusations in this matter.

And that also changes the “innocent” picture painted by NATO and EU vs Disinfo. The US has bases all over the world. Including large bases with strategic bombers. In the Middle East and the Indian Ocean and also in Asia… so on the Asian side of Russia. Before the withdrawal and collapse of the Afghanistan mission, the US was also able to position and deploy air forces there. Also think of the multiple operational carrier strike groups (10 total) with entire air forces on board. Which can operate from any position at sea around Russia. And the Marines units and air assets on several operational large amphibious ready groups (10 total). Also large US Marines bases and very mobile units and their huge amphibious ships in Japan and South Korea. Besides very capable and well supported Airborne divisions with huge air transport capabilities. Russia also has not forgotten the use of American troops and landings in Siberia, among other places, during the Russian revolution, in support of the White Army’s.

So we can now conclude that what the Russians claim looks more like a ✅FACT and what NATO and EU vs Disinfo claim is the ❌MYTH

But very adept at also using propaganda and disinformation…even if looks like a belief almost…one really seems to believe it oneself…both will argue that NATO is a defensive organisation and therefore no danger to Russia!!


The next ❌MYTH vs ✅FACT..part 2..

NATO is a defensive organisation…

Yes, fundamentally and according to its treaty text and mission, NATO is a defensive organisation. But we already saw another side of NATO in the Kosovo War as well as the intervention in the civil wars in Bosnia and Libya. An obviously offensive side..

And another aspect is less obvious but very relevant in this case. In 2001 and 2003, the US and its allies UK, Australia and in 2003 also Poland, decided to proceed with, in the first instance, illegal forced regime changes and invasion and occupation of Afghanistan (2001) and Iraq (2003). This choice came from the newly introduced neocons nationalist Bush Doctrine in 2000 when President GW Bush took office.

The horrific attack on 9/11 did prompt action against Afghanistan and Al Qaeda bases there, but a forced regime change and occupation was only an option, not a foregone conclusion!! So criticism of these steps was widespread and sharp, especially case of the attack on Iraq in 2003. What the Bush administration was already so almost obsessed about in 2001 that they did not take the serious warnings of a major terror attack in America seriously and mostly ignored them. An important reason why they covered up their part in the investigations into 9/11 afterwards..which in turn fuelled the conspiracy theories.

Back to the NATO role. What happened in both Afghanistan and Iraq was that after the invasion, forced regime change and occupation, NATO took over some of the main tasks and operations of the multinational military occupation forces. An in itself defensive organisation (already weakened by Bosnia, Kosovo and Libya) thus became an extension and justifier of the flawed offensive operations by its leader US and member state UK and other NATO Member States.

This was followed by .. both Bush Doctrine projects and missions turned out to have disastrous consequences for both countries Afghanistan and Iraq, their populations (massive death, wounded, destruction, refugees flows), the region (incl. huge refugee flows, civil wars Libya and Syria, rise of IS, nuclear weapons program Iran) and other parts of the world (refugees flows, migration stress, terror attacks, lose of own credibility by support and things like Guantanamo bay, huge and expensive but highly disputed security programs, etc. ).. NATO still actively participating in the fight against the emerged Islamic State.

So it is clear that there are some critical comments to be made about NATO’s defensive nature. And that the statement of NATO and EU vs disinfo that NATO is a defensive organisation so not threat to Russia is much more ❌MYTH than ✅FACT.

But why, besides Iran and North Korea and other countries that fear the wrath of the US, is Russia so concerned about it, about NATO’s as threat? Because there is another important, but often forgotten, project of the Bush Doctrine. Containing and weakening the power competitors of the US as the world leader and only real superpower, of its Pax Americana. A sentiment widely shared in both the Democratic and Republican Party. Where the normally already strong patriotism with the challenges in America itself, society..poverty..radicalism..poor infrastructure..and also effect 9/11..and in the world after the end of the Cold War is increasingly turning into nationalism. Already during the Clinton administration after an internal clash of doctrines (with negative effects on the Bosnian War!!), certainly under that of neocons GW Bush and “America First” Trump, but also that of “Made in America” Obama and now Biden. Who speak grand, together and unctuous, but think more nationalistically and in power politics then most think here in EUrope.

So part of that other Bush Doctrine project was to further contain and weaken former (but still seen by many in Washington as) enemy Russia. Already started during the Clinton administration towards Russian interests in the Balkans (Serbia, Kosovo war). Which was for President Yeltsin and his later Prime Minister Putin already cause for anger and growing mistrust towards US and allies. With the GW Bush administration focus on the important passage for Russia to the Near and Middle East. In Eastern Europe (large NATO expansion and active influencing politics and developments in Ukraine). And towards (highly) strategic interests and bases of Russia in other parts of the world (Libya, Syria, Africa, Asia, South America). Consciously looking for and crossing red lines of then Putin’s Russia.

Another component was to cost Russia through a restarted arms race and thus be able to spend less on domestic needs and projects. And consciously helping to stir up any unrest among the peoples and population in the Russian states and provinces. In the hope that they would also secede from Russia and thus Russia itself would further disintegrate and weaken… as a competitor of the US. Then pro-Western new countries of former Russia, which recognise the US as leader, can become part of Pax Americana and the EU. Putin or no Putin, democracy or no democracy in today’s united Russia therefore makes no difference at all to the conflict now!!

This within a broader strategy that was..and still is(!!)..also aimed at an ally, but also an important power and economic competitor of the US, the EU. Where the US still had and has direct control via NATO over EU’s security and military structures and policies, and thus its possibilities in its foreign economic policy. To offer security guarantees to its allies or to protect and enforce the EU’s possessions and strategic interests in other parts of the world, like in the Indo-Pacific. Almost unthinkable in today’s geopolitical times. An economic superpower like the EU that cannot protect its own interests but leaves that to an important competitor!! As if Apple has its buildings guarded by Samsung, although they often work together. This dominance of the US over EU had to be maintained…something that both Republicans and Democrats agreed and agree on, yes, even Trump…

And that was threatened by the rapidly expanding EU-Russia relationship and trade in the 1990s. With both Russian President Putin and his EU colleagues already and even later on projecting visions of even more close cooperation and integration between EU and Russia. Putin’s proposed and by Merkel later also offered free trade area from Lisbon to Vladivostok. Probably developing into a even larger EU one day. This would make the EU increasingly autonomous of the US, also militarily…and…in a sense let Russia win the Cold War in the end…politicians and military thought in Washington.

So..not to elaborate too much..to sum up. NATO is certainly, through its leader USA, circling Russia and the US and allies threatening and have a goal to weakening Russia. From their strategic reasons or naive credulity. And keep Russia in the camp of dictatorial superpower China..create a simple good vs bad bipolair world order. While Russia is in reality fearing China and the threat China is to her sparsely populated but rich in land and resources Siberia. Especially now that, due to climate change, unusable land is quickly becoming usable. In absence of enough of this, the Chinese regime is looking for “lebensraum” for its huge population, who demands more welfare and welbeing. Where do we recognise that term as Europeans?! That is why Putin is appeasing the revanchist communist/maoist one party Chinese regime but also still so eager to belong to the West and rejoin the EU…and even NATO.

Something that also plays a role today in the conflict with Russia over Ukraine, for the reasons I described earlier, deliberately stirred up by the US, UK, NATO and their allies..but in fact is about much more..

And in that context NATO is not a defensive organization either. Although there are important member states that are more defensive than others. And dampen overly offensive NATO operations, something the US and UK would like to see happen and encourage. Merkel was particularly strong in this. But it just left. So it’s no surprise that her successor Scholz was immediately put to the test by the US and UK around Russia and Ukraine.

In conclusion, and in view of current events, my appeal to Europeans to go above all for an inclusive, undivided EUrope towards 2045. When we celebrate and commemorate that the horrific Second World War ended. Unfortunately, many politicians, soldiers, journalists and think-tanks have apparently already forgotten the lessons from that war.

And…to return to the focus op this topic, a reformed, refocused, enlarged and slightly renamed NATO. Ready for the threats and challenges of tomorrow and the day after tomorrow!!

The EU and the USA, Pax EUropaea and Pax Americana Stronger Together!!