Categories
ColdWar Conflicts Conflicts Europe European Union Foreign policy NATO Propaganda & Disinformation US foreign policy War World

So I’m not the only one who saw it for some time…

(In Nederlands)

So I am not the only one who has seen it and pointed it out and warned about it for some time, including especially for and in the direction of the EU. Also astute, very well informed and skilled British and German journalists like then Guardian Ian Traynor (RIP) and then Die Zeit Mária Huber, already saw the large and decisive American influence and steering campaigns in 2004 at the Orange Revolution in Ukraine and later Euromaidan (with ao “Fuck the EU” Nuland, again participating these days). and violent developments there in 2014. Which drastically worsened the simmering conflict with Russia with the Russian seizure and annexation of Crimea and the (failed) similar operation in Eastern Ukraine.

And the extensive but often indirectly financed American influence strategy used for this. Especially via international aid departments and institutes, think tanks and local (especially student) organisations that were/are used for this. Huber, now a professor and expert on the subject, later explained this in more detail. Under the pretence of wanting to bring democracy and freedom in particular, but in fact to further contain and weaken Russia and thus to expand the American sphere of influence in Europe (also as part of the Bush doctrine at the time!!). And what concerns me as an advocate for a stronger and autonomous EU especially here … also “the aim of the USA is to expand NATO and weaken the EU in this way.”.

Also with the Orange Revolution, by the way, the striking role of the Ukrainian intelligence and security services already. Probably again, as I already suspected, decisive during the coup and regime change in 2014.



Categories
ColdWar Conflicts Europe Defence vision EU European Union Foreign policy NATO Propaganda & Disinformation Security policy EUrope Super Power China US foreign policy War World

China is looking on and calmly waiting…

Latest update: 13-04-2022

(In Nederlands)

China has no reason to do anything now. Russia is not asking for, nor does it need, help yet. Nor is there any question of an alliance in this. It also strengthens China’s own negotiating position against Russia if it soon has to look for other customers for its gas and oil that it cannot sell in other parts of Europe.

Xi and regime now watch calmly. The China-fearing Putin’s EU-Russia vision… which Merkel supported, but the ‘block on Biden’s leg’ wasn’t half away or this Pax Europaea vision was torpedoed by the US, UK, NATO and their anti-EU sceptical supporters here in the EU. Gullible loyal EU now again obediently divided and controlled within Biden’s Pax Americana 2.0… and will further weaken and disintegrate. Will not stopped by the US, rather encourage it, just like with Brexit.

Also because of that Russian fear for neighbour China so no alliance and many Russian troops in Siberia. And thus Putin’s vision in 2010 (but repeated many times before) and visibly bitter frustration now that it has been torpedoed by the US, UK, NATO, supporters and thus supported by the loyal naive EU. Russia now even more firmly in China’s sphere of influence and thus a Siberian conflict on the horizon. Because the Chinese regime is looking for ‘lebensraum’. And if the American containment and anti-China strategy resembles that against Russia, this search will only become more intense and important…and the vast north beckons then more than ever…

While the geopolitical-economic strategic interests of Russia and the EU in this turbulent and stormy world were so clearly converging, and therefore many interests are/were shared and there was a reason to start cooperating. Also considering the effects of the growing superpower China and her revanchist regime. Not all good effects. Putin pointed out those benefits together in his vision and elsewhere, so did his ministers and more objective experts like me in this field… As also warning for China…

The French president Macron saw it too, I think, and made an attempt at an inclusive pan-European solution. But without Merkel, he was already in a weak position and decided to run for his money…because of the upcoming presidential elections, which he would like to win again and where American and British revanchism is not really helping…when Merkel’s successor Chancellor Scholz succumbed to pressure from the US and NATO and coalition member!!! Then the EU took the wrong turn!!! End thus of the EU-European dream!!! EU and Europe now ‘almost’ checkmate!!!

And Chinese regime looks on smiling and satisfied… their golden age is dawning…


I still have a tiny bit of hope for an undivided Europe by 2045! Despite many setbacks, I am an optimist and combative. But it looks very bad now and may come later…or not at all. For me, that means a failed mission for now… Unfortunately!! Many have apparently already forgotten the painfully acquired lessons from our European history or (consciously) misuse them and even more have not yet learned the more recent lessons. And those who do not want to hear, unfortunately, have to feel. There is no other way… that’s how life was then… and so is life now and tomorrow…


Unfortunately, much needed in these times… Disclaimer EN



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!!