“No matter who tries
to stand in our way… they must know that
Russia will respond immediately, and the
consequences will be such as you have never
seen in your entire history…. I hope that my
words will be heard.” Vladimir Putin issues
warning to any country that tries to stop
Russia’s “Special Operation” in Ukraine
March 03, 2022:
Information Clearing House
- In a move that
can only be regarded as a major escalation, NATO
officials announced on Friday that they would
deploy troops from its Combat-Ready Response
Force to support the Ukrainian regime [from
Poland and the Baltic States]in its war with
Russia. The Alliance will also send additional
weapons which will be used to blunt the Russian
offensive that has already seized large parts of
the country and obliterated most of Ukraine’s
defensive capability. It is impossible
to overstate the gravity of NATO’s action which
assigns such importance to preserving its ‘junta
regime’ in Kiev that they would willingly pit
NATO against a nuclear-armed Russia in what
could become a much broader regional war.
Clearly, the strategic objectives of this murky
conflict go far beyond the mere control of an
ethnically-divided, failed state situated
between Europe and Asia. Ukraine is no longer
just a geopolitical trophy for western elites,
but a last-gasp effort for Washington to prove
it still controls the levers of global power.
Here’s the story from Reuters:
“NATO Secretary-General Jens
Stoltenberg said on Friday the alliance was
deploying parts of its combat-ready response
force and would continue to send weapons to
Ukraine, including air defences, while
saying that Russia was trying to topple the
Ukrainian government.
“We see rhetoric, the messages, which is
strongly indicating that the aim is to
remove the democratically elected government
in Kyiv,” he told a news conference
following a virtual meeting of NATO leaders.
(“NATO
allies to provide more weapons to Ukraine,
Stoltenberg says”, Reuters)
Stoltenberg’s decision
gives Russian president Vladimir Putin no choice
but to locate and destroy whatever weapons or
troops enter the country that could be used to
kill or injure Russian servicemen. Naturally,
the killing of NATO personnel could be used to
further escalate the conflict plunging the
region into a much wider and more violent
conflagration. Here’s more from
Stoltenberg’s press conference on Friday:
“Yesterday, NATO Allies activated our
defense plans… on land, at sea, and in the
air…. The United States, Canada and European
Allies have deployed thousands more troops
to the eastern part of the Alliance… We now
have over 100 jets at high alert operating
in over 30 different locations… and over 120
ships from the High North to the
Mediterranean… including three strike
carrier groups….
We have many planes operating in the
eastern part of the Alliance (and) several
Allies have partly already assigned troops
and forces to the NATO Response Force.” Weapon
support also includes “air defence systems…” (which
could be used to enforce a no-fly zone.)
This is the most serious security
crisis we have faced in Europe for
decades….... It is about how Russia
is actually challenging core values for
security, and demanding that NATO should
withdraw all forces and infrastructure from
almost half of our members. And they have
stated that if we don’t meet their demands,
there will be “military-technical
consequences.” So, we have to take
this seriously. And that’s exactly why we
are now deploying the NATO Response Force,
for the first time in a collective defence
context.” (NATO’s
Virtual Summit, Feb 25, 2022)
Stoltenberg is right, Russia is
challenging NATO’s core values on security, and
demanding that Alliance roll back its forces and
infrastructure from Russia’s doorstep. What
Stoltenberg fails to mention is that NATO
expansion poses an existential threat to Russia
by placing missile sites, military bases and
combat troops on its border. He also fails to
mention that NATO expansion violates agreements
(to which all of the NATO members are
signatores) stipulating that all parties to the
agreement will refrain from any action that
could affect the security interests of the other
members. In Istanbul (1999) and in
Astana (2010), the US and the other 56 countries
in the Organization for Security and
Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) signed documents
“that contained interrelated principles to
ensure the indivisibility of security.”
What that means in
practical terms, is that nations cannot put
military bases and missile sites in locations
that pose a threat to other members. It
means that parties must refrain from using their
respective territories to carry out or assist
armed aggression against other members. It means
that parties are prohibited from acting in a
manner that runs counter to the principles laid
out in the treaty. It means that Ukraine
cannot become a member of NATO if its membership
poses a threat to Russian security.
So, yes, Russia is challenging
NATO’s approach to security, mainly because
NATO’s approach is built on the rubble of
treaties that the member states already signed
and approved but now refuse to honor because it
doesn’t advance their geopolitical objectives.
Stoltenberg would like us all to
believe that joining NATO should simply be a
matter of personal choice (“Every nation has the
right to choose its own security arrangements”)
like choosing which flavor of ice cream one
wants to eat. But that is not how leaders
protect their countries from potential threats.
Those threats can only be mitigated when
other nations agree that they “will NOT
strengthen their own security at the expense of
the security of others.” That’s the
bottom line and that is never going to change.
National security is every leader’s highest
priority and it always will be. Stoltenberg
rejects this fundamental tenet of global
security, and his rejection has paved the way to
war. If you want to know who’s
responsible for the war in Ukraine: Blame NATO. Here’s
how Putin summed it up:
“Over the past 30 years we have been
patiently trying to come to an agreement
with the leading NATO countries regarding
the principles of equal and indivisible
security in Europe. In response to our
proposals, we invariably faced either
cynical deception and lies or attempts at
pressure and blackmail, while the
North Atlantic alliance continued to expand
despite our protests and concerns. Its
military machine is moving and, as I said,
is approaching our very border.
Why is this happening? Where did this
insolent manner of talking down from the
height of their exceptionalism,
infallibility and all-permissiveness come
from? What is the explanation for
this contemptuous and disdainful attitude to
our interests and absolutely legitimate
demands?”
“For the United States and its allies, it
is a policy of containing Russia, with
obvious geopolitical dividends. For
our country, it is a matter of life and
death, a matter of our historical future as
a nation. This is not an exaggeration; this
is a fact. It is not only a very real threat
to our interests but to the very existence
of our state and to its sovereignty. It is
the red line which we have spoken about on
numerous occasions. They have crossed it.” (“Address
by the President of the Russian Federation“,
Kremlin, RU)
It’s worth noting, that
Stoltenberg has been chosen to become Norway’s
next Central Bank chief which illustrates the
cozy relationship between the Big Money and the
geopolitical machinations that invariably end in
war. We can only wonder whether this
risky gambit in Ukraine is actually an attempt
to preserve a western financial system that is
so thoroughly-marinated in corruption that its
markets require monthly infusions of billions of
dollars in digital cash to prevent a system-wide
meltdown followed by a precipitous decline in
the value of the dollar. By keeping
Russia down, Stoltenberg’s backers might be
hoping they can breathe new life into the
rotting corpse of the imperial system. But
whatever the reason may be, the deploying of
NATO Combat-Ready Response Force greatly
increases the chances of a miscalculation that
could lead to disaster. Check out this short
blurb from an article by Ulrich Kühn who points
out the risks of current strategy:
“President Biden and other Western
leaders have made it clear repeatedly that
they would not send forces to Ukraine.
….That does not mean, however, that unintended
actions by Russia… or by individual NATO
member states could not spark a larger
conflict that no one planned. During
the next hours, days, and weeks, the
risk of what strategists call “inadvertent
escalation” will increase….
Another possible scenario for
inadvertent escalation is linked to western
calls for arming Ukrainian forces. A
day before the Russian assault, British
Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced, “the
UK will shortly be providing a further
package of military support to Ukraine. This
will include lethal aid in the form of
defensive weapons and non-lethal aid.” As
morally justified such calls might sound in
the current environment, the question
remains: How will weapons be transferred to
Ukraine, now that Russia has established air
dominance over the country? They would
almost certainly not be flown in but would
have to be provided using land or sea
routes. It would thus be in the interest of
the Russian military to gain quick control
over Ukraine’s western borders with NATO
allies. Possible efforts by
individual NATO member states to send
additional military equipment via the
Ukrainian land borders could be met with
fierce Russian resistance and may lead to
skirmishes between Russian and NATO
personnel.” (The
pathways of inadvertent escalation: Is a
NATO-Russia war (now) possible?”
Bulletin of Atomic Scientists)
So, what does this excerpt tell
us?
It tells us that the foreign
policy establishment has already “gamed-out” the
developments we now see unfolding. NATO would
like to lure Putin into attacking their
supply-lines, so the action could be used to
justify greater involvement in the conflict. In
other words, what we’re seeing is a calculated
effort to (incrementally) increase the
probability of a war between Russia and NATO. There’s
nothing that would please Uncle Sam more than to
see Russia bogged down in bloody quagmire that
further isolates Moscow from Europe and prevents
the type of economic integration needed to draw
the continents together into the world’s largest
free trade zone. Washington wants to avoid that
scenario at all cost. Check out this
quote from Russian economist Sergie Glaziev:
“To maintain their world
dominance, the (US) is provoking another war
in Europe. A war is always good for America. They
even call the Second World War which killed
50 million people in Europe and Russia, a
good war. It was good for America because
the US emerged from this war as the world’s
leading power. The Cold War which ended with
the collapse of the Soviet Union was also
good for them. Now the US again
wants to maintain its leadership at the
expense of Europe. US leadership is being
threatened by a rapidly rising China. The
world today is shifting to yet another
cycle, this time political. This cycle lasts
centuries and is associated with the global
institutions of regulatory economics.
We are now moving from the
American cycle of capital accumulation to an
Asian cycle. This is another crisis that is
challenging US hegemony. To
maintain their leading position in the face
of competition with a rising China and other
Asian countries Americans are starting a war
in Europe. They want to weaken
Europe, break up Russia, and subjugate the
entire Eurasian continent. That is,
instead of a development zone from Lisbon to
Vladivostok, which is proposed by President
Putin, the US wants to start a
chaotic war on this territory, embroil all
Europe in a war, devalue to European
capital, write off its public debt, under
the burden of which the US is already
falling apart, write off what they owe to
Europe and Russia, subjugate our economic
space and establish control over resources
of the giant Eurasian continent. They
believe that this is the only way they can
maintain their hegemony and beat China….
Russia and Ukraine are the victims of
this war which is being fomented by the
Americans. But Europe is also a victim
because the war aims to target European
welfare and to destabilize Europe. Americans
expect the European capital and brain drain
to America will continue. That’s why they
are setting all of Europe on fire. It’s very
strange that European leaders are going
along with them.” (Watch this
extraordinary 2014 Interview
with Russian intellectual Sergei Glaziev that
was posted at The Saker website nearly 10
years ago)
The deployment of NATO’s
Combat-Ready Response Force provides more
evidence that the Alliance is an aggressive and
war-mongering organization which undermines
European security and puts the entire world at
risk. As America’s cat’s-paw on the continent,
NATO invariably acts in Washington’s interests.
With that is mind, we should expect to see a
steady intensification of hostilities directed
at Russia, all of which are designed to further
divide the continents while tightening
Washington’s grip on power.
The
deployment of NATO’s Combat-Ready Response Force
provides more evidence that the Alliance is an
aggressive and war-mongering organization which
undermines European security and puts the entire
world at risk. As America’s cat’s-paw on the
continent, NATO invariably acts in Washington’s
interests. With that is mind, we should expect
to see a steady intensification of hostilities
directed at Russia, all of which are designed to
further divide the continents while tightening
Washington’s grip on power.
(Correction: NATO troops will not operate within
Ukraine but exclusively in NATO member states.
This was not clear from NATO’s original
communique. The question remains, however, is
the providing of heavy weapons an act of war? In
my opinion, it would be quite easy for NATO to
end the fighting by simply agreeing to make
Ukraine permanently neutral, implementing the
Minsk Protocol, and abandoning all plans to
deploy nuclear missiles to Poland and Romania.
Putin’s only demand is that NATO seriously
address Russia’s legitimate security concerns.)
Mike lives
in Washington state. He can be reached at fergiewhitney@msn.com.
The views expressed in this article are
solely those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect the opinions of Information Clearing House.