Showing posts with label Russia in the World. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Russia in the World. Show all posts

Monday, March 26, 2018

Why a Russia-based Security Firm Fell Victim of US Sanctions

SEC88843513


Last December, Donald Trump signed a decree banning the use of Kaspersky Lab software within US government agencies. This latest iteration of anti-Russian sanctions demanded all individuals employed by Washington to wipe the world-renowned anti-virus s software off their computers within the next 90 days since the moment of signing.


However, as latest IT news show, Kaspersky Lab that received recognition for its achievements in the fight against all sorts of malware was not thrown out of the door for some sort of misbehavior or dubious activities, but as a part of ongoing Russophobic propaganda efforts we’ve been witnessing lately in the West. It’s also clear that Washington couldn’t care less about the efforts that Kaspersky Lab was taking in countering high-profile cyber-espionage and government-sponsored malicious activities in the Internet that American intelligence agencies have been engaged in a long while.


Such conclusions can be made based on the conclusions of the recently held Kaspersky Security Analyst Summit (SAS), where Kaspersky Lab experts blew the lid off about the sophisticated spy-ware program known as Slingshot. It turned out that this malware has been operational since 2012, but it took IT security firms years to spot it. And it was the Russian-based company Kaspersky Lab that exposed this spy-ware of designed by US intelligence agencies to establish total surveillance over the Internet, as it’s been noted by the The Times.


According to this British publication, Kaspersky Lab, which was deprived of the right to sell its products in American markets, uncovered this malicious software, which allows US agencies to access routers to monitor user activity across the web.


Originally, Slingshot was created by the US military to track radical Islamists who would use Internet cafes across the Middle East and North Africa to coordinate their activities. This malware was deployed in Afghanistan, Iraq, Kenya, Sudan, Somalia, Turkey and Yemen and, according to some experts, and over just six years of Slingshot getting operational a great many of both individuals and government agencies suffered across the Middle East and Africa.


This Slingshot spy-ware is similar to the program created by the NSA for establishing total surveillance in the Western segment of the Internet. Experts from CyberScoop, while citing anonymous US intelligence agents (both retired and acting), report that Slingshot is a special operation launched by the Joint Special Operations Command (JSOC), is a component of the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM). Researchers also agree that the algorithms used by Slingshot are similar to those used by such hacker groups as Longhorn and The Lamberts affiliated with the CIA and the NSA, developed with the tools of the two above mentioned groups that were disclosed by WikiLeaks.


CyberScoop experts and their sources believe that Kaspersky Lab couldn’t know for sure, but was suspecting that one of the countries of the Five Eyes intelligence alliance, comprising Australia, Canada, New Zealand, the United Kingdom and the United States was behind developing Slingshot.


According to cyber security experts, Slingshot is an extremely complex platform for attacks that one couldn’t develop without investing huge amount of efforts, time and money. According to those same analysts, the complexity of Slingshot makes even Project Sauron and Regin pale in comparison, which means that government-sponsored hackers could only develop something like this.


According to the statement released by Kaspersky Lab:



While analysing an incident which involved a suspected keylogger, we identified a malicious library able to interact with a virtual file system, which is usually the sign of an advanced APT actor. This turned out to be a malicious loader internally named ‘Slingshot’, part of a new, and highly sophisticated attack platform that rivals Project Sauron and Regin in complexity.


The initial loader replaces the victim´s legitimate Windows library ‘scesrv.dll’ with a malicious one of exactly the same size. Not only that, it interacts with several other modules including a ring-0 loader, kernel-mode network sniffer, own base-independent packer, and virtual filesystem, among others.


While for most victims the infection vector for Slingshot remains unknown, we were able to find several cases where the attackers got access to Mikrotik routers and placed a component downloaded by Winbox Loader, a management suite for Mikrotik routers. In turn, this infected the administrator of the router.



What is clear that this malware is aimed at hijacking all sorts of sensible information information, including network traffic, screenshots and passwords, while monitoring its own invisibility. Re-flashing firmware doesn’t help the user to get rid of this malware, since Slingshot is capable of self-copying and employing all sorts of tricks to stay operational that haven’t been fully explored. To divert the attention of anti-virus software, Slingshot independently initiates security checks, which has been allowing it to mask its presence from 2012 on.


In recent years, Slingshot has been actively used by US intelligence agencies to establish total control over the Internet by spying after US citizens and abroad, including among Washington’s “allies.”


And given that it was Kaspersky Lab that was able to track the elaborated spy-ware that took Washington a long time to develop, it’s no wonder that Trump decided to put an end to the operations of of this Russian-based company in the United States, trying to carry on its lies about “Russian hackers” that nobody has ever seen or tracked, while carrying America’s criminal cyber espionage activities at the highest level.


Vladimir Platov, an expert on the Middle East, exclusively for the online magazine New Eastern Outlook”.

Thursday, March 15, 2018

Kelly-Putin: A Clash of Civilizations

527708


The main takeaway from Megan Kelly’s two-hour long interview with Russian President Vladimir Putin is that with Communism gone, the US and Russia are dealing with a clash of civilizations. Not the barbaric east versus a sophisticated west — or even the lumbering grizzly versus the high-flying eagle — but much more importantly in the age of instant annihilation, cooperation versus ‘gotcha’.


To her credit, Kelly has labored mightily to consign to the ‘dustbin of history’ the image of the dumb blond: maintaining just the right body angle to the camera, blond wavy locks set off with just the right shade of (wine-raspberry) lipstick and delicately contoured green eyes, it’s too bad that her intelligence serves a relentlessly adversarial agenda. (In a short interview with an American colleague, Kelly mentioned that President Putin had ‘tried to be nice off camera, saying how much he cared a bout his grandchildren’, so even before watching the interview we knew that its purpose was not to promote understanding between two nuclear-armed countries but to dot the i’s and cross the t’s on ‘a relationship that could only be adversarial.


Kelly was not interested in finding out how the president of the largest country in the world, whose popularity ratings have been in the eighties for almost two decades, brought Russia back from desperate straights, even less in his worldview, but exclusively in why he developed certain weapons rather than others (trying to show her mastery of complex weapons systems), with respect to disarmament agreements that each side accuses the other of abandoning — the interview coming on the heels of President Putins roll out of new deterrents — and most importantly, whether he sent Russian citizens to disrupt our recent presidential election.


Kelly attacked Putin from all angels on that matter, trying to elicit the disdain for the rule of law that viewers expect from a leader routinely described as a ‘thug’. She faltered, however, however when the president pointed out that he had a law degree, jumping in with “I do too”, instead of pointing out that perhaps the relatively new Russian legal system might still have a few kinks, which would have been a more polite (I hesitate to say ‘friendly’!) approach.


Asked repeatedly, in a tone that implied that this would be the right course, whether his government intended to take legal action against the thirteen Russian individuals and three Russian companies accused by Robert Mueller of ‘meddling’ in our 2016 election, Putin patiently explained that this could not happen unless the accused had violated Russian law. Refusing to extradite them, as Kelly seemed to think would be proper, he repeated: “Send us documents, the prosecutor will look at them”. This was the only point at which the superbly controlled Putin became ever-so-slightly animated, his interlocutor clearly not compre-hending why he should insist on following internationally recognized legal procedure.


Almost two hours of repeated attempts on Kelly’s part to obtain a confession of bad behavior from the Russian president suggested that she harbored not the slightest suspicion that American ‘democracy’ is in reality the most elaborate form of oligarchy the world has ever seen. Or that she recognized it was no match for a gold-plated billionaire with a Bronx accent who prefers deals to war, and whose troops are armed and ready to ‘take their country back’….


Kelly also appeared to have bought the idea that a leader exclusively tagged as a ‘former KGB officer’ would do a ‘gotcha’ in retaliation for Hillary’s backing of 2011 anti-Putin demonstrators. Apparently, it did not cross her mind that instead of indulging in childish tit for tat, any election mischief that may have taken place — hardly comparable to the US’s practice of ‘regime change’ — would have been triggered by NATO’s steady drang nach osten, in flagrant violation of promises made to Mikhail Gorbachev that the western military alliance would not move one inch beyond a reunited Germany’s eastern border.


Surely any responsible head of state would take seriously the threat posed to his country when foreign troops and tanks line its historically vulnerable border? (At one of the many international fora organized by the Russian President last year — and routinely ignored by the US media — he wondered with his hallmark irony whether this massive military ‘exercise’ was Washington’s way of ‘bringing democracy’ to Russia…..)


When Kelly asked him whether he had ‘groomed a successor’ Vladimir Putin responded that one would surely arise when the time came. His hope was that Russia’s new leader would continue the progress he had overseen, whether in terms of agriculture, high tech, education or universal health care. Asked about his much covered but short-lived opponent, Alexei Navalny, the president recognized that in certain cases a conviction for fraud might not prevent someone from running in an election, the problem was that Navalny’s platform had only one plank: beating corruption (which he correctly noted exists to a greater or less extent in all countries). Kelly was smart enough not to mention the other candidate, daughter of Putin’s former boss, Xenia Sobchak, who was invited to the US and featured on television, but showed her lack of political acumen by declaring that if she were to visit Crimea, she would access that part of Russia by way of Ukraine.


Kelly’s interview deliberately steered clear of the fact that Vladimir Putin and China’s Xi Jinping are replacing the so-called ‘rules-based’ international order designed by ‘the center’, with a cooperative order elaborated by ‘the periphery’, where most of the world lives, in a civilizational turning point.


Deena Stryker is an international expert, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years, exlusively for the online journal “New Eastern Outlook”.

Witnessing Vladimir Putin: Emperor of Patience

5112


Russia’s president has marked our time now. No matter what your persuasion, even the die hard liberal world order minion must realize the character of greatness when he or she sees it. V.V. Putin rules modern diplomacy and politics, if for no other reason than his unimpeachable patience and pragmatism. Here’s another salute to Putin and to the ticking moments of humanity, dropping into the hourglass of time.



“Other than John F. Kennedy, Vladimir Putin is the greatest international statesman of our age. – Jeff Rense, legendary alt news radio host



In a recent interview I had with alt news radio legend, Jeff Rense he suggested how Putin stands alone in a tepid sea of forgettable nobodys. Sharp as the proverbial razor, Rense is a good barometer of every other political or strategy analyst now watching Russia’s leader. We all realize the stakes of the game being played out on the world stage. And we all are in agreement, what we’re witnessing as a battle to the death over Mother Russia’s treasures. What’s more, the unprecedented assault on Putin’s Russia just may be that human finale history has hinted at for millennia. Biblical, is the crisis and the desperation, the chaos, the unending friction in between ideas and tradition – the imminent danger looming today is extraordinary.


In the eye of this growing maelstrom we gawk at madmen and seeming psychopaths, “mad dogs” and “ad men” flagellating in their dramatic roles as leaders from Berlin to London, or Montreal or Tokyo. And standing alone at the center, just on the horizon of rationality, an unlikely Napoleon wrestles with the machinations of ignorant and wicked mediocrity. Putin’s Waterloo, if he should meet it, will be to be utterly surrounded by the armies of the lazy and dull-witted elites who’ve sucked our blood for centuries now. But wait, before you turn to another “fake news” story, let me open a window into this tragic comedy.


By now you’ve read the headlines about “Putin’s Doomsday Nukes”. Everybody in America has the seed of fear firmly planted in the brain. “Unstoppable” destruction waits now, if all goes bad. I’ve talked my talk about it, so have CNN and the other elitist controlled news outlets. But somehow the real message is obscured still. Nobody really knows what to think about Putin’s forecast of Armageddon. Almost nobody sees his moves for what they truly are. The western media is obscuring and muffling a plea for peace and for sanity. Everything we understood from childhood is being obfuscated by the evilest people who ever walked the face of this Earth.


I finally realized the human tragedy Vladimir Putin plays the heroic lead in during that interview with a man many accused of being the ultimate conspiracy theorist. But the alternative news man copied by Alex Jones and the rest, he turns out to be a kind of Edgar Cayce of New World Order premonitions now. I mention Jeff Rense here to rivet reality to the inside of my reader’s brain pan. For he is an iconic symbol of how we were “oh so” wrong about many things. My hope is that some reading this will direct their brains to scan the walls of the insides of their heads, to see the billboard pasted there reading “This could be the end!” The interview I speak of is right below.



In our talk, Rense and I talked easily and openly about the weapons Putin has been forced to brandish, and about Putin the man. What began as a “Doomsday Torpedo” broadcast, ended as two Americans making mediating observations of this emerging end game. The stunning reality that struck me after talking to the world’s sharpest conspiracy investigator was a picture window view onto the real and figurative Czar of moderation and patience. And the Rense interview brought forward the most important aspect of this “Putin Era” we’re witnessing. The radio host registered concern over the limits of the Russian leader despite his seeming intangibility. On the relentless policies and strategies aimed at Putin, Rense asked:



“I wonder how close we are to getting near the end of Vladimir Putin’s limits?”



This question brings us to the point of my report here. But a look at the President of Russia web pages really helps illustrate the seriousness of the current situation. In a March interview in between Putin and NBC’s Megan Kelly, who’s the most decidedly brilliant “dumb-question” bimbo in TV history, Russia’s leader pleads with Kelly’s viewers for sanity and reason. His concern and legitimacy is indemnified in the NBC broadcast, as he parries Kelly’s genius level quizzing from the standpoint of the dumbest of American viewer. To illustrate my point, here’s the quid pro quo where the NBC TV star quizzes Putin on the relevance of his unstoppable nukes. Kelly asks for clarification on the effectiveness of new systems and for a definition of them, to which Putin replies:



“Therein lies the entire meaning of this, because any antimissile defense system operates against ballistic missiles. But we have created a set of new strategic weapons that do not follow ballistic trajectories and the antimissile defense systems are powerless against them. This means that the US taxpayers’ money has been wasted.”



As I write the conclusion to this report today, the international order that arrogantly admits its existence, it’s on the offensive once again. Listening to the psychotic politicians in Britain’s parliament yesterday, I thank God Putin is in charge of Russia’s nuclear arsenal instead of me. Prime Minister Theresa May and her kiss-ups poking out their chests and boasting it is “highly likely” the Kremlin was behind the poisoning of yet another British spy – it was sickening to watch. The people of the United Kingdom have managed to put in office the cream of the evil crop of paid puppets. For those unfamiliar with the news, a former MI6 spy named Sergei Skripal and his daughter were supposedly poisoned by a military-grade nerve agent of a type May and her parrots say was developed by Russia. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said Mrs May’s statement was “a circus show in the British parliament”. And this is what the war of ideologies has come to, a deadly clown circus with spotlights on three continents full of mad ringmasters.


Finally, isn’t it miraculous that a new provocation surfaces each time some great potential is the possibility for the Russia people? Putin and Russia spend billions to welcome the world to the most historic Winter Olympics ever – and U.S. Senator John McCain leads a throng of agents overthrowing Ukraine. The Sochi games are attacked by every sports broadcaster from ABC to BBC and the lot. It was unprecedented bad sportsmanship and geo-political skullduggery. Almost immediately, a Russian people emerging as a positive force for tourism, international business, and a fantastic renaissance on the domestic side of that federation – those potentials were shut down by western influences. The EU Putin and his ministers sought integration with, it turned into a new Nazi Reich under Merkel’s German bankers. Britain, the US, and allies set about cutting off money flows into Russia, and gas flows out. Then the doping scandal, led by the Queen Mother’s running idiot Lord Sebastien Coe. The WADA circus led to Russia’s athletes being ruined, and to exclusions from Rio and PyeongChang 2018. I am not astonished that this latest dog and pony act in London comes just before World Cup 2018 in Russia. Are you astonished to discover we are already at war with Russia?


The situation is getting much worse, but it’s all become so predictable from an analyst’s point of view. With no proof shown, using narrative and outright concoctions to fuel flamed of public fear and outrage, the United Kingdom more-or-less declares war on Putin personally. Yes, you read that correctly. The message carries from RT TV to viewers from parliament was crystal clear – several parliamentarians openly said it; “We are targeting Vladimir Putin.” Vladimir Putin is the Czar of patience. If Britain or anybody else warred on America like this, somebody would have already been bombed the shit out of. We invaded Iraq over a vial of baby powder for Christ’s sake! Theresa May clearly missed Mr. Putin’s last message Russia would use those “Assassin Nukes” to relentlessly pursue this liberal world order’s elites, should worse come to worst. Then again, maybe the British Prime Minister and her colleagues are reacting in fear!


Think about it. Where do these scary signals lead? If there truly is no turning back from the edge of Armageddon, I’d suggest staying far, far away from the elite psychopaths when Putin finally loses his patience.


Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Thursday, March 8, 2018

Why the West Cannot Stomach Russians

R956345232


When it comes to Russia or the Soviet Union, reports and historical accounts do get blurry; in the West they do, and consequently in all of its ‘client states’.


Fairytales get intermingled with reality, while fabrications are masterfully injected into sub consciousness of billions of people worldwide. Russia is an enormous country, in fact the largest country on Earth in terms of territory. It is scarcely inhabited. It is deep, and as a classic once wrote: “It is impossible to understand Russia with one’s brain. One could only believe in it.”


The Western mind generally doesn’t like things unknown, spiritual and complex. Since the ‘old days’, especially since the crusades and monstrous colonialist expeditions to all corners of the world, the Westerners were told fables about their own “noble deeds” performed in the plundered lands. Everything had to be clear and simple: “Virtuous Europeans were civilizing savages and spreading Christianity, therefore, in fact, saving those dark poor primitive souls.”


Of course, tens of millions were dying in the process, while further tens of millions were shackled and brought to the “New Worlds” as slaves. Gold, silver, and other loot, as well as slave labor had been (and still are) paying for all those European palaces, railroads, universities and theatres, but that did not matter, as the bloodshed was most of the time something abstract and far away from those over-sensitive eyes of the Western public.


Westerners like simplicity, particularly when it comes to moral definitions of “good and evil”. It matters nothing if the truth gets systematically ‘massaged’, or even if the reality is fully fabricated. What matters is that there is no deep guilt and no soul-searching. Western rulers and their opinion makers know their people – their ‘subjects’ – perfectly well, and most of the time, they give them what they are asking for. The rulers and the reigned are generally living in symbiosis. They keep bitching about each other, but mostly they have similar goals: to live well, to live extremely well, as long as the others are forced to pay for it; with their riches, with their labor and often with their blood.


Culturally, most of the citizens of Europe and North America hate to pay the bill for their highlife; they even detest to admit that their life is extremely ‘high’. They like to feel like victims. They like to feel that they are ‘used’. They like to imagine that they are sacrificing themselves for the rest of the world.


And above all, they hate real victims: those they have been murdering, raping, plundering and insulting, for decades and centuries.


Recent ‘refugee crises’ showed the spite Europeans feel for their prey. People who made them rich and who lost everything in the process are humiliated, despised and insulted. Be they Afghans or Africans, the Middle Easterners or South Asians. Or Russians, although Russians are falling to its own, unique category.


*


Many Russians look white. Most of them eat with knife and fork, they drink alcohol, excel at Western classical music, poetry, literature, science and philosophy.


To Western eyes they look ‘normal’, but actually, they are not.


Russians always want ‘something else’; they refuse to play by Western rules.


They are stubbornly demanding to remain different, and to be left alone.


When confronted, when attacked, they fight.


They rarely strike first, almost never invade.


But when threatened, when assaulted, they fight with tremendous determination and force, and they never lose. Villages and cities get converted into invader’s graves. Millions die while defending their Motherland, but the country survives. And it happens again and again and again, as the Western hordes have been, for centuries, assaulting and burning Russian lands, never learning the lesson and never giving up on their sinister dream of conquering and controlling that proud and determined colossus.


In the West, they don’t like those who defend themselves, who fight against them, and especially those who win.


*


It gets much worse than that.


Russia has this terrible habit… not only it defends itself and its people, but it also fights for the others, protecting colonized and pillaged nations, as well as those that are unjustly assaulted.


It saved the world from Nazism. It did it at a horrific price of 25 million men, women and children, but it did it; courageously, proudly and altruistically. The West never forgave the Soviet Union for this epic victory either, because all that is unselfish and self-sacrificing, is always in direct conflict with its own principles, and therefore ‘extremely dangerous’.


The Russian people had risen; had fought and won in the 1917 Revolution; an event which terrified the West more than anything else in history, as it had attempted to create a fully egalitarian, classless and racially color-blind society. It also gave birth to Internationalism, an occurrence that I recently described in my book The Great October Socialist Revolution: Impact on the World and the Birth of Internationalism.


Soviet Internationalism, right after the victory in WWII, helped greatly, directly and indirectly, dozens of countries on all continents, to stand up and to confront the European colonialism and the North American imperialism. The West and especially Europe never forgave the Soviet people in general and Russians in particular, for helping to liberate its slaves.


That is when the greatest wave of propaganda in human history really began to roll. From London to New York, from Paris to Toronto, an elaborate web of anti-Soviet and covertly anti-Russian hysteria was unleashed with monstrously destructive force. Tens of thousands of ‘journalists’, intelligence officers, psychologists, historians, as well as academics, were employed. Nothing Soviet, nothing Russian (except those glorified and often ‘manufactured’ Russian dissidents) was spared.


The excesses of the Great October Socialist Revolution and the pre-WWII era were systematically fabricated, exaggerated, and then engraved into the Western history textbooks and mass media narrative. In those tales, there was nothing about the vicious invasions and attacks coming from the West, aimed at destroying young Bolshevik state. Naturally, there was no space for mentioning the British, French, U.S., Czech, Polish, Japanese, German and other’s monstrous cruelties.


Soviet and Russian views were hardly ever allowed to penetrate the monolithic and one-sided Western propaganda narrative.


Like obedient sheep, the Western public accepted the disinformation it was fed with. Eventually, many people living in the Western colonies and ‘client states’, did the same. A great number of colonized people were taught how to blame themselves for their misery.


The most absurd but somehow logical occurrence then took place: many men, women and even children living in the USSR, succumbed to Western propaganda. Instead of trying to reform their imperfect but still greatly progressive country, they gave up, became cynical, aggressively ‘disillusioned’, corrupt and naively but staunchly pro-Western.


*


It was the first and most likely the last time in the history, Russia got defeated by the West. It happened through deceit, through shameless lies, through Western propaganda.


What followed could be easily described as genocide.


The Soviet Union was first lulled into Afghanistan, then it was mortally injured by the war there, by an arms race with the United States, and by the final stage of propaganda that was literally flowing like lava from various hostile Western state-sponsored radio stations. Of course, local ‘dissidents’ also played an important role.


Under Gorbachev, a ‘useful idiot’ of the West, things got extremely bizarre. I don’t believe that he was paid to ruin his own country, but he did almost everything to run it into the ground; precisely what Washington wanted him to do. Then, in front of the entire world, a mighty and proud Union of the Soviet Socialist Republics suddenly shook in agony, then uttered a loud cry, and collapsed; died painfully but swiftly.


A new turbo-capitalist, bandit, pro-oligarch and confusedly pro-Western Russia was born. Russia which was governed by an alcoholic Boris Yeltsin; a man loved and supported by Washington, London and other Western centers of power.


It was a totally unnatural, sick Russia – cynical and compassionless, built with someone else’s ideas – Russia of Radio Liberty and Voice of America, of the BBC, of black marketers, of oligarchs and multi-national corporations.


Is the West now daring to say that Russians are ‘interfering’ in something in Washington? Are they out of their minds?


Washington and other Western capitals did not only ‘interfere’, they openly broke the Soviet Union into pieces and then they began kicking Russia which was at that point half-alive. Is it all forgotten, or is Western public again fully ‘unaware’ of what took place during those dark days?


The West kept spitting at the impoverished and injured country, refused to honor international agreements and treaties. It offered no help. Multi-nationals were unleashed, and began ‘privatizing’ Russian state companies, basically stealing what was built by the sweat and blood of Soviet workers, during long decades.


Interference? Let me repeat: it was direct intervention, invasion, a grab of resources, shameless theft! I want to read and write about it, but we don’t hear much about it, anymore, do we?


Now we are told that Russia is paranoid, that its President is paranoid! With straight face, the West is lying; pretending that it has not been trying to murder Russia.


Those years… Those pro-Western years when Russia became a semi-client state of the West, or call it a semi-colony! There was no mercy, no compassion coming from abroad. Many of those idiots – kitchen intellectuals from Moscow and provinces – suddenly woke up but it was too late. Many of them had suddenly nothing to eat. They got what they were told to ask for: their Western ‘freedom and democracy’, and Western-style capitalism or in summary: total collapse.


I remember well how it was ‘then’. I began returning to Russia, horrified, working in Moscow, Tomsk, Novosibirsk, Leningrad. Academics from Akadem Gorodok outside Novosibirsk were selling their libraries in the bitter cold, in dark metro underpasses of Novosibirsk… Runs on the banks… Old retired people dying from hunger and cold behind massive doors of concrete blocks… unpaid salaries and starving miners, teachers…


Russia under the deadly embrace of the West, for the first and hopefully last time! Russia whose life expectancy suddenly dropped to African Sub-Saharan levels. Russia humiliated, wild, in terrible pain.


*


But that nightmare did not last long.


And what happened – those short but horrible years under both Gorbachev and Yeltsin, but above all under the Western diktat – will never be forgotten, not forgiven.


Russians know perfectly well what they do not want, anymore!


Russia stood up again. Huge, indignant and determined to live its own life, its own way. From an impoverished, humiliated and robbed nation, subservient to the West, the country evolved and within a few years, the free and independent Russia once again joined ranks of the most developed and powerful countries on Earth.


And as before Gorbachev, Russia is once again able to help those nations which are under unjust and vicious attacks of the Western empire.


A man who is leading this renaissance, President Vladimir Putin, is tough, but Russia is under great threat and so is the world – this is no time for weaklings.


President Putin is not perfect (who is, really?), but he is a true patriot, and I dare say, an internationalist.


Now the West, once again, hates both Russia and its leader. No wonder; undefeated, strong and free Russia is the worst imaginable foe of Washington and its lieutenants.


That’s how the West feels, not Russia. Despite all that was done to it, despite tens of millions of lost and ruined lives, Russia has always been ready to compromise, even to forgive, if not forget.


*


There is something deeply pathological in the psyche of the West. It cannot accept anything less than full and unconditional submission. It has to control, to be in charge, and on top of everything; it has to feel exceptional. Even when it murders and ruins the entire Planet, it insists on feeling superior to the rest of the world.


This faith in exceptionalism is the true Western religion, much more than even Christianity, which for decades has not really played any important role there. Exceptionalism is fanatical, it is fundamentalist and unquestionable.


It also insists that its narrative is the only one available anywhere in the World. That the West is seen as a moral leader, as a beacon of progress, as the only competent judge and guru.


Lies are piling on top of lies. As in all religions, the more absurd the pseudo-reality is, the more brutal and extreme are the methods used to uphold it. The more laughable the fabrications are, the more powerful the techniques used to suppress the truth are.


Today, hundreds of thousands of ‘academics’, teachers, journalists, artists, psychologists and other highly paid professionals, in all parts of the world, are employed by the Empire, for two goals only – to glorify the Western narrative and to discredit all that is standing in its way; daring to challenge it.


Russia is the most hated adversary of the West, with China, Russia’s close ally being near second.


The propaganda war unleashed by the West is so insane, so intense, that even some of the European and North American citizens are beginning to question tales coming from Washington, London and elsewhere.


Wherever one turns, there is a tremendous medley of lies, of semi-lies, half-truths; a complex and unnavigable swamp of conspiracy theories. Russia is being attacked for interfering in U.S. domestic affairs, for defending Syria, for standing by defenseless and intimidated nations, for having its own powerful media, for doping its athletes, for still being Communist, for not being socialist anymore; in brief: for everything imaginable and unimaginable.


Criticism of the country is so thorough and ludicrous, that one begins to ask very legitimate questions: “what about the past? What about the Western narrative regarding the Soviet past, particularly the post-Revolutionary period, and the period between two world wars?”


The more I analyze this present-day Western anti-Russian and anti-Chinese propaganda, the more determined I am to study and write about the Western narrative regarding Soviet history. I’m definitely planning to investigate these matters in the future, together with my friends – Russian and Ukrainian historians.


*


In the eyes of the West, Russians are ‘traitors’.


Instead of joining the looters, they have been standing by the ‘wretched of the world’, in the past, as well as now. They refused to sell their Motherland, and to enslave their own people. Their government is doing all it can to make Russia self-sufficient, fully independent, prosperous, proud and free.


Remember that ‘freedom’, ‘democracy’ and many other terms, mean totally different things in distinctive parts of the world. What is happening in the West could never be described as ‘freedom’ in Russia or in China, and vice versa.


Frustrated, collapsing, atomized and egotistic societies of Europe and North America do not inspire even their own people, anymore. They are escaping by millions annually, to Asia, Latin America, and even to Africa. Escaping from emptiness, meaninglessness and emotional cold. But it is not Russia’s or China’s business to tell them how to live or not to live!


In the meantime, great cultures like Russia and China do not need, and do not want to be told by the Westerners, what freedom is, and what democracy is.


They do not attack the West, and expect the same in return.


It is truly embarrassing that the countries responsible for hundreds of genocides, for hundreds of millions of murdered people on all continents, still dare to lecture others.


Many victims are too scared to speak.


Russia is not.


It is composed, gracious, but fully determined to defend itself if necessary; itself as well as many other human beings living on this beautiful but deeply scarred Planet.


Russian culture is enormous: from poetry and literature, to music, ballet, philosophy… Russian hearts are soft, they easily melt when approached with love and kindness. But when millions of lives of innocent people are threatened, both the hearts and muscles of Russians quickly turn to stone and steel. During such moments, when only victory could save the world, Russian fists are hard, and the same is true about the Russian armor.


There is no match to Russian courage in the sadistic but cowardly West.


Irreversibly, both hope and future are moving towards the east.


And that is why Russia is desperately hated by the West.


Andre Vltchek is philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He’s a creator of Vltchek’s World in Word and Images, a writer of revolutionary novel Aurora and several other books. He writes especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Wednesday, March 7, 2018

After Syria, Russia Ups the Ante in Yemen Too

R34241123


In making a very significant move, Russia vetoed on last Monday a British-drafted US-led resolution on Yemen that had been designed to project Iran as a financer of ‘terrorism’ in the country that has been largely best by the invasion of Saudi led Arab coalition. While this is certainly not the first time Russia has vetoed the US, a Russian veto on a country and a conflict wherein it isn’t directly involved does mark an unprecedented action, significance of which cannot be denied. On the other hand, its significance increases manifold when we take into account not only the current tension between the US and Russia but also the fact that this move is yet another illustration of a sustained Russian policy to challenge the US-dominated global politics and prevent it from making arbitrary moves, moving countries and regimes like chessboard pawns. Therefore, when seen as an extension of Russia’s Syria policy, where the former has clearly off-set the US objectives and thwarted its ‘regime change’ policy, this move seems to be yet another message to the US and its allies in Europe and elsewhere that they cannot unilaterally dominate and dictate the global system and that Russia will oppose the US hegemony not just because it is allied with Iran but also because it sees this opposition a matter of principle.


The US couldn’t have seen this move but as a threat to their interests, and has accordingly ‘warned’ of using other means to prevent what its officials have repeatedly called ‘Iran’s destabilizing role’ in the region. While the US officials said that Russia was “protecting” Iran, the irony of the matter is that Russia hasn’t been involved in the Yemen conflict ever since its beginning in 2015. On the contrary, it is the US that has been directly involved in the conflict, providing weapons worth billions of dollars to the coalition countries and identifying for them targets to hit indiscriminately using their superior air power.


Ironically enough, while the US Trump administration is now accusing Iran of violating sanctions imposed on Yemen and of providing them with missiles, the Obama administration didn’t believe that the Houthis were Iran’s ‘puppets’ or that there was any ideological alliance between the two. In this context, this resolution didn’t have anything substantial and credible other than that it was simply an extension of the Trump administration’s hostile Iran policy, evident from scrapping the nuclear deal, imposing more sanctions, rolling back Iran’s missile capability and pushing back at Iran’s surge as a regional power.


As such, in a clear rebuff to the US, Russia’s foreign minister Lavrov said that “it is [first] necessary to fully implement the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action. If there is a desire to discuss some other issues concerning Iran [Yemen] in this format or in another format, this should be done with Iran’s voluntary participation and on the basis of consensus rather than through ultimatums” [or sanctions].


What it evidently signifies is that Russia is backing Iran not just in Syria but in other strategic and diplomatic theatres as well. Whereas the veto illustrates this backing in Yemen, Lavrov’s statement marks other areas as well as an entirely different approach from that of the US and its allies—pointers of Russia’s march as global power, capable of exerting influence, also evident from the fact that Russia’s alternative resolution, which didn’t mention Iran, was passed unanimously by the Council.


The anger against Russia is, therefore, extreme, ranging from leveling accusations of “protecting Iran” to calling it one of the biggest threats to the US and its allies’ interests in the region. Thus, while Saudi Arabia’s foreign minister had tried to convince his Russian counterpart just hours before the vote to support the resolution, the outcome of the vote led the Saudi owned newspaper Al-Arabiya to state in one of its pieces that:



Russia has such a strong bias towards Iran that it threatens the security of all the Gulf countries, despite apparent closeness between Gulf and Russia and the series of meetings held between the two sides. However, everyone knows that Iran is fighting us through its proxies, by continuously supplying weapons (especially those made in Russia or Iran) to its agents in Yemen. This means that the war will have no end.



It further stated that:



Russia now stands completely against our interests and our security. We should ask Russia to clarify its position towards us. It sells weapons to us even as it sells weapons through Iran to militias that threaten us. Then it torpedoes a move to prevent it from selling the weapons that threaten us, as if it seeks to benefit at the expense of our security! This is the rationale of a war trader and not of a state that builds international relations on a sound and sustainable premise.



Whereas the list of such accusations is endless, what it ironically proves is that Russia-Iran relations have travelled far beyond the tactical stage of calculated military cooperation, and that Iran’s growing influence doesn’t threaten Russian interests in the Middle East. What is also evident here is, much to the West’s disappointment, that both countries are increasingly locking themselves into a carefully built alliance to counter-balance the US-Saudia hegemonic pursuit, a pursuit that continues to glimpse every now and then a possibility of direct war between Iran and its regional and extra-regional rivals. Russia, as it stands, is positioning itself as the new balancer in the region—something that comes as a replacement for the US, and which is nothing short of a very serious challenge.


Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Tuesday, March 6, 2018

Putin Is Not Rattling Nuclear Sabers – It’s Real

937856345


The annual speech of Russian President Vladimir Putin on March 1 to the Russian Federal Assembly, televised to the nation, contained a section on Russian military cutting edge technologies that NATO-friendly media chose to either downplay as a propaganda ploy or an election campaign stunt. Given the hints of Russian military technology developments unveiled in the Syrian war theater since September 2015, Washington ignores what is clearly a strategic game-breaking development and makes all the hundreds of billions of dollars of so-called US missile defense technology being deployed from South Korea, Japan, Poland and beyond into little more than a Pentagon defense boondoggle.


The military security section of Putin’s two hour speech to the Russian Federal Assembly on March 1 began some two-thirds into his remarks, after extensive discussions of plans to lift the economy, transform health care, improve education.


The keystone of Putin’s security remarks, ignored in mainstream western media coverage, was the Russian response has been to the “unilateral US withdrawal from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and the practical deployment of their missile defense systems both in the US and beyond their national borders.”


The strategic significance of that decision by the Bush-Cheney Administration was not lost on Russian military defense planners. It opened the door for the Pentagon and for NATO to encircle Russia with a ring of ballistic missile defense systems aimed at Russian nuclear missile launch sites. Putin clarified that that 1972 ABM Treaty had made nuclear war unthinkable, the foundation of Mutual and Assured Destruction or MAD: “the ABM Treaty not only created an atmosphere of trust but also prevented either party from recklessly using nuclear weapons, which would have endangered humankind, because the limited number of ballistic missile defense systems made the potential aggressor vulnerable to a response strike.”


When Washington unilaterally pulled out of the ABM Treaty in 2002, the US Government began an aggressive series of moves including bringing NATO to the former Communist countries of Eastern Europe, fomenting a coup and civil war in Ukraine and other provocations that have led to construction of anti-ballistic missile bases in Romania and Poland—both NATO members, as well as in the Russian Far East in Japan and South Korea. Additionally, as Putin noted, “The US global missile defense system also includes five cruisers and 30 destroyers, which, as far as we know, have been deployed to regions in close proximity to Russia’s borders.” This is no minor deployment in Russian eyes.


Trump Nuclear Posture Review


The decision by the Russian leadership now to unveil a daunting array of its cutting-edge military technologies including nuclear-powered hypersonic cruise missiles and underwater drones was no election ploy. It was a clear and direct reply to the January 2018 State of the Union address to Congress of the US President and publication days later of their 2018 Nuclear Posture Review (NPR), and Putin says so.


The Trump 2018 NPR document is a radical shift from previous administrations. It abandons the earlier declarations of “no first use” of nuclear weapons, and boosts nuclear modernization efforts including the intention to bring on “new” nuclear weapons, restoration of submarine-launched cruise missile capability and low-explosive-yield submarine-launched ballistic missile warheads, and to sideline arms control. In one section the new US Nuclear Posture Review declares that, “The United States would only consider the employment of nuclear weapons in extreme circumstances to defend the vital interests of the United States, its allies, and partners. Extreme circumstances could include significant non-nuclear strategic attacks…” (emphasis added-w.e.). No definition of what Washington calls a “significant non-nuclear strategic attack” is made. In brief, as one US nuclear analyst noted, the new US nuclear doctrine is based on competition and confrontation.


After describing repeated Russian efforts with Washington to reinstate the ABM Treaty after the Bush Administration unilaterally abandoned it in 2002, Putin noted, “At one point, I thought that a compromise was possible, but this was not to be. All our proposals, absolutely all of them, were rejected. And then we said that we would have to improve our modern strike systems to protect our security. In reply, the US said that it is not creating a global BMD system against Russia…”


That of course was a calculated strategic lie. Russia concluded, after repeated efforts at negotiation, that Washington, following the destruction of Russia’s military and economy in the 1990s Yeltsin era post-Soviet economic collapse, was determined to “pursue ultimate unilateral military advantage in order to dictate the terms in every sphere in the future.”


Nuclear Primacy


Nuclear First Strike or Nuclear Primacy as it is technically called, is the ultimate unilateral military advantage Pentagon strategists have dreamt of since the 1950’s when the USSR tested its first H-bomb and ICBMs. The primacy is the ability to launch a nuclear first strike against Russia with little fear Russia will be able to counter convincingly because US missile defense arrays have been able to knock out the vast majority of Russian nuclear weapons.


The US missile defense is not at all defensive. It is offensive in the extreme. If the United States were able to shield itself effectively from a potential Russian retaliation for a US nuclear First Strike, then the US would be able to dictate its terms to the entire world, not just to Russia. That would be Nuclear Primacy. As the late Lt. Colonel Robert Bowman, former director of the Reagan US Missile Defense Program expressed it to me some years ago in a private exchange, “Missile defense is the missing link to a First Strike.”


In his latest speech Putin describes the strategic reality Russian military security planners face: “The US is permitting constant, uncontrolled growth of the number of anti-ballistic missiles, improving their quality, and creating new missile launching areas. If we do not do something, eventually this will result in the complete devaluation of Russia’s nuclear potential. Meaning that all of our missiles could simply be intercepted.”


When the stakes involve unleashing a nuclear holocaust, even if it begins with “low yield” nuclear weapons, against a backdrop of virtual new Cold War confrontations with Russia in recent years, it is no surprise that Russia’s military and security council have decided at just this precarious point in a growing East-West confrontation to unveil a sober response.


Blocking Nuclear Primacy: The Russian Response


Putin unveiled for the first time measures the Russian military R&D has pursued quietly since 2002 to counter the ever-more clear US Nuclear Primacy agenda. He noted that Russia has “developed, and works continuously to perfect highly effective but modestly priced systems to overcome missile defense. They are installed on all of our intercontinental ballistic missile complexes.” However, the real new element Putin revealed is a staggering list of new advanced next generation missiles able to evade US or NATO anti-missile defenses.


First he showed a film of the new Sarmat missile. Weighing over 200 tons with a short boost phase, it is very difficult for US missile defense systems to intercept. Sarmat can be equipped with powerful nuclear warheads, including hypersonic, and the most modern means of evading missile defense. It has virtually unlimited range and capable of attack over both North and South poles.


Sarmat was only the first mentioned response to the growing NATO threat. Putin then described the Russian defense industry development of “a small-scale heavy-duty nuclear energy unit that can be installed in a missile like our latest X-101 air-launched missile or the American Tomahawk missile – a similar type but with a range dozens of times longer, dozens, basically an unlimited range. It is a low-flying stealth missile carrying a nuclear warhead, with almost an unlimited range, unpredictable trajectory and ability to bypass interception boundaries. It is invincible against all existing and prospective missile defense and counter-air defense systems.”


Then in terms of new Russian cutting-edge pilotless weapon systems, he revealed the successful development of Russian “unmanned submersible vehicles that can move at great depths (I would say extreme depths) intercontinentally, at a speed multiple times higher than the speed of submarines, cutting-edge torpedoes and all kinds of surface vessels, including some of the fastest. It is really fantastic. They are quiet, highly maneuverable and have hardly any vulnerabilities for the enemy to exploit. There is simply nothing in the world capable of withstanding them.”


Putin added that the new submersibles “can carry either conventional or nuclear warheads, which enables them to engage various targets, including aircraft groups, coastal fortifications and infrastructure.”


So much for the US doctrine of force projection supremacy via its ten aircraft carrier strike groups, which now become so many sitting ducks.


Putin went on to note that the nuclear power unit for the unmanned submersible has been tested over a period of many years, and that it is “a hundred times smaller than the units that power modern submarines, but is still more powerful and can switch into combat mode, that is to say, reach maximum capacity, 200 times faster.”


Kinzahl and Avangard


Additionally Putin unveiled the Russian hypersonic Kinzhal or Dagger system. This is as Putin describes it, “a high-precision hypersonic aircraft missile system… the only one of its kind in the world. Its tests have been successfully completed, and, moreover, on December 1 of last year, these systems began their trial service at the airfields of the Southern Military District.”


In other words it is not hypothetical, rather it is operational. The definition of hypersonic is an aircraft flying 5 or more times the speed of sound. The Kinzhal goes Mach 10 or ten times. As Putin describes it, “The missile flying at a hypersonic speed, 10 times faster than the speed of sound, can also maneuver at all phases of its flight trajectory, which also allows it to overcome all existing and, I think, prospective anti-aircraft and anti-missile defense systems, delivering nuclear and conventional warheads in a range of over 2,000 kilometers.”


Finally, the Russian President revealed development of Avangard, a hypersonic missile that flies at speeds in excess of Mach 20: “In moving to its target, the missile’s gliding cruise bloc engages in intensive maneuvering – both lateral (by several thousand km) and vertical. This is what makes it absolutely invulnerable to any air or missile defense system. The use of new composite materials has made it possible to enable the gliding cruise bloc to make a long-distance guided flight practically in conditions of plasma formation. It flies to its target like a meteorite, like a ball of fire. The temperature on its surface reaches 1,600–2,000 degrees Celsius but the cruise bloc is reliably guided.”


Putin’s remarks conclude with the statement, fully ignored in the West, that, “We have repeatedly told our American and European partners who are NATO members: we will make the necessary efforts to neutralize the threats posed by the deployment of the US global missile defense system.” He makes clear what Russia has warned Washington and NATO of since 2004: “Despite all the problems with the economy, finances and the defense industry, Russia has remained a major nuclear power. No, nobody really wanted to talk to us about the core of the problem, and nobody wanted to listen to us. So listen now.”


One of the most succinct assessments of the Putin military revelations comes from The Saker, one of the most clear and sober commentators on Russian and Western military capabilities. In his blog the day of the Putin speech he remarked, “It is indeed set, match and game over for the Empire: there is no more military option against Russia.”


F. William Engdahl is strategic risk consultant and lecturer, he holds a degree in politics from Princeton University and is a best-selling author on oil and geopolitics, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Are Russia and China Natural Allies and Does it Matter

RC45342342


At a recent meeting of the Australian Institute for International Affairs (AIIA) a prominent Australian analyst and commentator suggested that Russia and China were “not natural allies”. There was therefore a risk, he suggested, of geopolitical instability in the Eurasian region. This analysis is flawed on a number of levels.


The first flaw is a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of the relationship between nation states. That relationship was the best encapsulated in the maxim expanded by the 19th century British statesman Lord Palmerston.


Nations, you said, had neither friends nor enemies, only interests. This maxim has enabled nations throughout the centuries to form relationships with other nations with whom, prima facie, they have no necessary commonality of purpose. At the negative end of the spectrum this is manifest for example in the support of the United States for a wide range of despotic regimes. Nominally, such relationships should be anathema to the given state, considering the huge gap between the professed values of one state and the actual practices of the other state with whom the relationship is developed.


Clearly, the concept of “natural allies” has no utility. The relationship is entered into on pragmatic grounds is serving particular geopolitical needs, such as access to or control of vital resources, meeting some perceived strategic goal, or acting to thwart the geopolitical objectives of a strategic rival. The actions of the United States in a wide sphere of activities over many years in relation to Russia and China are best understood in this light.


The second area in which the “natural allies” analysis is flawed is that it ignores the extent to which geopolitical conditions may change. In the aforementioned meeting of the AIIA the speaker used the example of the Sino-Soviet conflict over the Ussuri River boundary between the two nations.


That conflict occurred in 1969 and involved military clashes resulting in a modest number of combat deaths. Claimed fatalities vary from a total of about 130 to a maximum of 800. The important points about that clash however, are (a) both nations were very different entities then from what they are today; and (b) it was resolved by lengthy negotiation, with a final agreement being signed in October 2004.


What has given enormous impetus to the developing relationship between Russia and China is that they share a number of common security and geopolitical interests. Again that has a number of bases and has manifested itself in a variety of formats.


The first and perhaps major common interest arises from the manifest hostility of the United States toward both nations. This hostility is shown in its simplest form by the establishment of US military bases on or close to the borders of both countries. The overwhelming majority of US bases are clearly intended to form an encirclement. There can be no benign interpretation of this action. They are not necessary for the defence of the continental United States, and there is no rational or objective basis for arguing that they are necessary for the defence of those countries that host the bases.


The intention is clearly hostile. For example the elder Bush President promised then Soviet President Gorbachev that NATO would not advance “one inch eastward.” The US almost immediately broke that promise and has now established bases in nearly all of the former Warsaw Pact nations, in many cases right up to Russia’s borders. Yet the western rhetoric is a constant reiteration of “Russian aggression.”


Even when bases have not been established, as in Ukraine, the US staged one of its many regime change operations to install a puppet regime that is hostile to Russia. Ukraine’s repeated breaches of the Minsk accords are rarely mentioned let alone criticized by the western media and the political leadership. The US continues to arm Ukraine with offensive weapons, all the more alarming in the light of recent legislation passed by the Ukrainian parliament that signals an attention to wage war against the Russian speaking Eastern regions of Ukraine and forcibly take Crimea.


Crimea itself is an excellent illustration of western hypocrisy. Crimea’s historical role as part of Russia (until 1954) and the overwhelming wish of the Crimean people to be reunited with Russia as demonstrated in the referendum result is completely ignored by the western media.


China is subject to the same unrelenting hostility. US warships have continuously staged provocative so called freedom of navigation exercises in waters that are essential to China’s security. The US purports to exercise a right that has in fact never been impeded by China. It is also a right enshrined in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, which China has ratified, and the US has not. The fact that Taiwan makes identical claims to the People’s Republic of China in respect of the South China Sea is never referred to in the western media. Similarly, the construction of fortified artificial islands in the South China Sea by for example, Taiwan and Vietnam is similarly never mentioned in the western media.


More than 70 years after the end of World War II the United States still maintains more than 50 military bases on the island of Okinawa alone, none of which are necessary for Japan’s defence. Those bases are part of a network of more than 400 US bases that form part of the US “containment” of China policy. That any nation could presume to “contain” another nation in the absence of a state of war speaks volumes about the hubris of US foreign policy.


The policy goes beyond one of containment however, as demonstrated by the invasion of Afghanistan, the support for separatist and terrorist elements in countries on China’s borders as well as within Chinese territory, including terrorist activities in Xinjiang, Tibet and elsewhere.


The third reason why “not natural allies” is a less than useful analytical tool is found in what Russia and China have been doing together, and particularly in the 21st century. Ironically, one of the major driving forces of the increasing level of co-operation in a wide range of spheres has been as a reaction to US foreign policy.


Both countries are foundation members of BRICS (founded in 2006), the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) founded in 2001, and are developing a range of financial, security and economic links as part of the huge Chinese project currently known is the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).


Another key organisation in this context is the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) of which Russia is the major member. A number of agreements have been made between the EAEU and the SCO, covering trade, currency and security issues. All members of the EAEU and the SCO are participating in the BRI.


Russian territory provides one of the key transport routes from China to western Europe as part of the BRI. The two nations are also cooperating in providing assistance to Iran (another object of US hostility), which is helping Iran’s key role in the BRI, the SCO (of which it is an associate member), and the north south transportation corridor, which runs from India to Russia via Iran and Azerbaijan.


Russia is a key supplier of natural gas to China, which apart from its energy implications, is also important for environmental reasons. Russia has also recently signed an agreement to provide China with its S400 anti missile system, one that has significantly superior to any Western version.


A further sign of the increasing level of cooperation is the role that both countries are playing in reducing the importance of the US dollar as the principal medium of international trade. It is the dollar’s role that has enabled the US to defy economic logic by running huge internal and external fiscal deficits. It has also allowed the US to bully weaker nations through a variety of financial instruments such as the World Bank, the IMF, and the SWIFT System of international bank settlements.


China has recently opened up the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges to allow domestic and international companies to issue bonds that will be used in turn to finance BRI projects. The Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, the Silk Road Fund, the China Development Bank and the Export-Import Bank of China had hitherto largely financed these projects.


One of the seven foreign companies granted approval by the China Securities Regulatory Commission to issue bonds is the Russian aluminum producer UC Rusal which was the first company granted approval, in the value of 1 billion Yuan.


The Chinese and Russian led charge to an alternative Yuan, Ruble and gold-based system will quite probably prove to be the single most important geopolitical development of 2018.


It does not matter therefore whether or not Russia and China are “natural allies.” It is sufficient that they have a mutual interest in addressing and ultimately replacing the US dominated system there has been the feature of the post-World War II era, and been the cause of so much misery and destruction. In this writer’s view such a development is wholly welcome.


James O’Neill, an Australian-based Barrister at Law, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

Sunday, March 4, 2018

Putin’s Assassin Nuke: A Bad Guy Hunter by Any Other Name

744tg


No U.S. Senate subcommittee has been established to study it. No Stratfor analyst is bleating about it. And no New York Times literary genius has reported it. Regardless of their negligence though, the waking reality of Putin’s unstoppable “Assassin Nuke” is crystal clear. The U.S. backed liberal world order is on notice now, that Putin and Russia will “get you” no matter what! If worse comes to worst, that is. No, Putin did not take aim at Florida residents or Mickey Mouse in his State of the Nation Address to the Russian Federal Assembly. His genius mastermind has instead sought and found a more meaningful target. Putin’s super-secret doomsday weapons are aimed at the world’s deadliest enemies.


Today in America every news outlet is harping about Mr. Putin’s “killer nukes” – weapons systems he says are unstoppable. Interestingly, the Russian president’s most recent strategy seems to come as a surprise. But why? After all, he and Russia have been under siege from western maniacs many long years now. For those who a reeling at figuring out his resolve, Putin’s unflinching missile rhetoric is dead simple. The war of ideologies and energy distribution is not about Russians and American slaughtering one another. This new Cold War is a battle to the death in between Vladimir Putin, his allies, and the normal people of Earth, and a ghastly brotherhood hell bent on enslaving the world. What CNN viewers are witnessing today, it’s a misinterpreted and convoluted idea of the clash of civilizations. As usual, CNN is lying. Here’s the real scoop.


“FLORIDA, how dare he,” the smartphone tapping Millennials at every Orlando Starbuck’s locations exclaim! The CNN watchers in the U.S.A. are, after all, the multitude despite what you hear about ratings. I know my people, and my people love their reality short, sweet, and when it coincides with decades old societal brainwashing. This is why V.V. Putin’s revelation is being misunderstood. The liberal order wants Putin’s message to be about Russians versus Americans. But a Russian nuclear powered missile that can fly forever until it finds an opening to its target, it’s not a missile intended to eradicate innocent Americans. The unlimited flight range and invulnerability to missile and air defense systems this “Assassin Nuke” possesses simply ensures Russia will never, ever, ever be attacked by the west. Surprised, aren’t you? Well, let me quote Putin directly on Russia’s spanking new nuclear fueled nuke:



“A low-flying low-visibility cruise missile armed with a nuclear warhead and possessing a practically unlimited range, unpredictable flight path and the capability to impregnate practically all interception lines is invulnerable to all existing and future anti-missile and air defense weapons.”



Looking at the Russian president’s presentation the other day, and carefully listening to his words, watching his body language – there’s no doubt the Russian Aerospace Defense Forces possess just such a weapon. But those interested should also take note, the visual of Donald Trump’s country club at the Mar-a-Lago resort in Florida carried the most important message. Putin’s cryptic signal to Trump, the Clintons, the Rothschilds, and to the military industrialists was barefaced. “Even if you destroy us, our deadliest weapons will seek you all out indefinitely,” and this Putin showed once again, his genius and indomitability. Win or lose, the bad guys are going to die. Isn’t that beautiful and refreshing?


We needn’t do a capability assessment on the Scramjet Hypersonic Cruise Missile or the deadly Status 6 Nuclear Torpedo. For it is not the viability or destructive capabilities of these weapons that was the point of Putin’s “no bluff” pronouncement. The intended recipients of Vladimir’s warning know full well the implications of exacting Armageddon on your individual enemies. The message for me looks like Putin setting a fully loaded revolver on the table and inviting the western oligarchs to start the game of Russian roulette. Put bluntly, the message reads: “I’m coming after YOU if this shit finally goes south.” Somehow I always knew the message and the strategy would come to this. A few days ago I told Sputnik “the man has no bluff in him” – and here we are witnessing the last straw being set:



“You now have to acknowledge this reality, confirm that everything I said is no bluff – which it isn’t – think for some time, send into retirement the people stuck in the past and incapable of looking into the future, [and] stop rocking the boat that we all ride in and which is called planet Earth.” 



How plain, appropriate, elegant, and brilliant is that? Checkmate Rothschild minions and psychopath arms merchants.


Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Friday, March 2, 2018

Xi’s Elevation and Putin’s Managed Democracy

PX0563534


China has done away with presidential term limits, suggesting that Xi Jin Ping could rule the country until he dies, provoking a backlash among the country’s opposition and taunting in the ‘democratic’ world. But if you think about it dispassionately, it’s amazing that otherwise rational people can believe its better to have a leader who cannot fulfill his promises than one who can prevent special interests from sabotaging the greater good — as long as he is elected! I understand the lure of ‘democracy’ (‘rule by the people’ — in reality in ancient Greece, rule by free, home owning males…). But do most Chinese contest Xi’s agenda of making their country an equal player on the world stage while lifting their great numbers out of poverty to become the decade’s most ubiquitous tourists?


The label ‘authoritarian’ is relatively recent and refers to strong leaders who are elected by universal suffrage but whose ‘authority’ allows them to pursue goals that are in the interests of the majority. In Russia, after some house-cleaning following a disastrous decade under Boris Yeltsin, who literally gave away the store, Vladimir Putin made it clear to those who benefited, known as oligarchs, that they were free to continue business as usual, as long as they didn’t get in the way of his plans to bring his country up to Western living standards while resisting its social agenda.


The American media regularly claims that Putin’s comfortable majority was achieved by a rigged 2011 election, and that his 80+ ratings are faked. It seems more likely, however, that the average Russian recognizes that ‘managed democracy’, Vladimir Putin’s name for what we call ‘authoritarianism’ prevents the popular will from being thwarted by individual interests.


Dictators are perfectly acceptable to the US when they’re our dictators: from Fulgencio Batista in Cuba to the Saudi Royal family, the policy probably played a major role in the 9/11 attack and in Saudi being allowed to use US weapons against tiny Yemen. Yet Trump’s success among less educated American voters suggests that they too would welcome a president who would not be prevented by Congress from fulfilling his electoral promises, whether or not they realize that single payer is more efficient than privately billed healthcare, or that climate change is a major threat. It’s no secret that the US Congress is more likely to reflect big business than society at large, (as currently seen in the standoff with the National Rifle Association, a major election contributor), but few observers draw the obvious conclusion: far from being the most powerful man in the world, the American President is prevented from doing anything that interferes with the pursuit of wealth by the few.


In 1944, against a groundswell of concern for the democratic process, FDR won a fourth presidential term because Americans did not want an untried leader in the midst of two wars. (Unfortunately, Roosevelt died soon after that election, leaving President Truman to formulate the disastrous American policy toward the Soviet Union that brought us Cold Wars I and II.) Today, FDR’s presidency would be considered ‘authoritarian’: he pretended not to see that Japan was preparing to attack Pearl Harbor, so that a shocked nation would finally be willing to declare war on both Japan and Germany. He is famous for packing the Supreme Court, and although they were milder than would have wanted the Progressive Movement, he wrung workers’ rights and protections out of Congress by famously telling his advisors “Make me do it.” He is still revered today, while one of the polities that ranks highest on key governance criteria is Singapore, a tiny, multi-ethnic country that was led by the same man for four decades. 


More recently, after achieving independence from Great Britain, Lee Kuan Yew moved Singapore’s Third World economy to First World affluence in a single generation. According to Wikipedia:


Lee Kuan Yew’s emphasis on rapid economic growth, support for business entrepreneurship, and limitations on internal democracy shaped Singapore’s policies for the next half-century. Freedom House ranks Singapore as “partly free” and The Economist ranks it as a “flawed democracy”, however the ruling party gets 83 of 89 seats with 70% of the popular vote, while in the mid-eighties, Gallup reported Singaporeans’ confidence in the government and judicial system among the highest in the world.


Note Wiki’s admission that “Although Singapore ranks among the top countries for ‘order and security’, ‘absence of corruption’, and ‘effective criminal justice’, gatherings of five or more people require police permits, and protests may legally be held only at the Speakers’ Corner, this multi-lingual (English, Chinese and Hindu), country is among the top internationally in education and government supported health care.”


Although the system is classified as authoritarian, there is absolutely zero chance that a US president will declare that its leader ‘has to go’. And that is because Singapore combines entrepreneurship with socialist citizen protections, as does Europe and as most developing strive to achieve. Only in the US is the social safety net open to debate.


When campaigning for the people’s vote, presidential candidates present a to-do list which, if implemented, would theoretically serve the majority. But in so-called ‘democracies’, even when a president enjoys a congressional majority, the financial rewards to individual representa-tives for supporting private interests guarantee that the people’s business will be relegated to the back burner. How does this square with the popular will?


Considering the ability of Congress to thwart the winner’s program, why does the presidential election dominate the news for more than a year? One reason may be to keep Americans from noticing their government’s aggressive behavior around the world. Surrounded by ‘advisors’, it’s not far-fetched to suggest that the president of the most powerful nation in the world is a figure-head, expected to do as he is told by the financial/industrial/military complex. The media’s job is to chronicle that obeisance, spinning American values into a veritable cocoon around its ‘exceptionalism’, leaving voters no mental space to independently evaluate world events or other leaders.


And yet, polls suggest that if the American electorate were presented with the portrait of a leader anonymously based on the words and actions of the Russian president, they would prefer him/her to any American president of recent memory, as Donald Trump has remarked. American voters will probably never get to participate in that experiment, for the simple reason that Russia is the largest country in the world, with a treasure-trove of resources, in close alliance with a country whose own ‘managed democracy’ has brought the greatest number of people out of poverty in history, and that the US is determined to bring both to heel.


Today, ’authoritarianism’ is applied equally to the Saudi Arabian monarchy, where women have just been given permission to drive, and to China and Russia. Few Americans know that in 2000, when Vladimir Putin was called upon by Boris Yeltsin, America’s ‘man in the Kremlin’, to replace him for health reasons exacerbated by a drinking problem, state employees weren’t getting their paychecks on time — if at all — and virtually nothing had been done to build a fair liberal —or social democratic — system, ten years after the dissolution of the Soviet Union. (When Vladimir Putin declared that this event had been the biggest geo-political catastrophe of the twentieth century, he was not, as the Western press claims, alluding to the demise of Communism, but to the terrible social conditions in which the dissolution of the vast territory left most Russians.)


At forty-eight, thanks to his steadfastness as a KGB officer in the last months of East Germany, then as advisor on international affairs to the mayor of St Petersburg, briefly head of the KGB, then Prime Minister to Boris Yeltsin, Putin had the credentials to win election a few months later. While tagged as simplya former KGB officerin the US, the truth is that the Russian president’s previous-jobs prepared him extremely well for the challenge of reviving the largest country in the world, home to 160 ethnic groups speaking some 100 languages and practicing four different religions, Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism and Islam—(estimates for this latter ranging from 5% – 14%).


The Western media claims that President Putin’s 80%+ ratings reflect a herd mentality, the result of centuries of autocratic rule under the Mongols, the Tsars and the Communist Party. In reality, unbeknownst to most Americans, today’s Russians enjoy vacations abroad and the latest cars, and I can attest that restaurants and cafes do a brisk business, while train stations and airports bustle like any in the West.


The twenty-first century is light years beyond the founders’ agrarian society, whose relatively simple goals could be voted up or down by individuals and their neighbors. ‘Really existing’ democracy has proven ever more difficult to achieve as populations and threats grow larger. Given the finality of both nuclear war and climate change, a managed democracy supported by the majority is a better 21st century choice — if its representatives across the globe cooperate rather than allowing one country to impose its will.


Deena Stryker is an international expert, author and journalist that has been at the forefront of international politics for over thirty years, exlusively for the online journal “New Eastern Outlook”.

Thursday, March 1, 2018

Washington Seeks Ways of Bringing Some “Iraqi Freedom” to Moscow

7534342342


The closer we approach the presidential election in Russia, the more hysterical the Western propaganda machine gets in a desperate bid to somehow to discredit Vladimir Putin and his closest associates, as otherwise Washington is clueless about ways of keeping Russia’s growing influence in check. That is pretty much the sole gole of the investigation that is being led by the US Special Counsel, Robert Mueller, aimed at establishing the degree of the alleged Russian interference in the US presidential election in 2016. Additionally, Washington is planning to introduce new sanctions against specific certain Russian politicians and businesses.


At the same time, Western media sources tend to agree that before indulging in the yet another witch hunt, Washington must honestly admit that the US has been doing exactly what it accuses Russia of for decades in other countries.


Just take a look at the New York Times stating that:



“If you ask an intelligence officer, did the Russians break the rules or do something bizarre, the answer is no, not at all,” said Steven L. Hall, who retired in 2015 after 30 years at the C.I.A., where he was the chief of Russian operations. The United States “absolutely” has carried out such election influence operations historically, he said, “and I hope we keep doing it.”



Furthermore, it would present a statement made by Loch K. Johnson, the dean of American intelligence scholars, who began his career in the 1970s investigating the CIA as a staff member of the Senate’s Church Committee. The dean would add that the alleged Russia’s 2016 operation was simply the cyber-age version of standard United States practice for decades, adding that the CIA has been doing this kind of “thing” to other states since the moment when it was created in 1947.


In the run-up to the presidential election in Russia, one can’t help but notice the striking similarity of Washington’s actions aimed at removing the Russian leader from the political arena with those the CIA and the Pentagon were taking in the course of its Shock and Awe operation in Iraq that would latter be relabled as the Operation Iraqi Freedom. The sole goal of this operation, no matter how it’s now called, was the downing of the Iraqi President Saddam Hussein.


In this regard, it must be recalled that long before the armed invasion of Iraq in 2003, the CIA and the Pentagon would be taking every effort of discrediting of Saddam Hussein himself along with his closest associates.


Among the intitial steps Washington would take against Iraq was the controlled destruction of the Iraqi banking system, triggered via NGO-sponsored opposition forces and a series of acts of sabotage, that would bring Iraqi economy at a screeching halt. struck the country’s economy, the introduction of malicious viruses into vital systems management. Additionally, Western media sources would start bashing Iraqi political and military figures, thus discrediting them.


High-profile cyber attacks against Iraq that started as early as 2002 were accompanied by the use of terror attacks, blackmail, and intimidation aimed at disheartening the Iraqi political and economic elite. By abusing its top-of-line hacking tools, the CIA and the Pentagon would infiltrate Iraqi governmental networks to bombarde the ruling Baath party and the military brass with faxes, e-mails and phone calls, urging them to launch a coup d’état in exchnage for handsome rewards that would be handed out afterwards.


Those who agreed to betray their country wouldn’t be mentioned in the daming Western media reports for a while, while those refusing to assist the would be invaders were subjected to daily provocations, that went as far as to publish anti-Saddam articles in various blogs signed by those who remained loyal to him till the bitter end.


A month after the end of the Iraqi war, the then Commander of the US Central Command, Tommy Ray Franks would reveal in one of his interviews that the anti-Iraqi operation started in 2002, more than a year before the actual invasion, with the CIA and the Pentagon spreading disinformation in Iraq, while bribing its officials, businessmen and military figures. The now retired US General was particularly pleased with the fact that he accumulated a mountain of receipts in which bribed Iraqi officials would proivde written consent to abet the United States.


On top of the bribed Iraqi officials and generals, Washington would pay handsomely to all sorts of liberal thinkers for them to spread calls to “overthrow the tyrant” at local parties and assemblies. Among those who fell victims of American meddling were prominent artists, prominent thinkers, political scientists and leading journalists alike, that were now able to rent condos in Miami and other resorts while enjoying their multimillion dollar accounts in Western banks that they received in exchange for “selling themselves to the rich and influential people. ” The imminent US success was ensured by the unprecedented level of corruption that reached an all-time high in Iraq back in 2002. For sure, this process was facilitated by the corrupt practices that existed in local oil producing countries for decades, which would become an environment which citizens of such states would face on the dialy basis.


What we’re witnessing today is the image of the Operation Iraqi Freedom in Russia, with similar tactics being applied to the local elite, including publications of damning reports about Vladimir Putin’s closest entourage, countless cyber attacks being launched against the Russian banking sector and local companies, accompanied by arrests of foreign accounts of Russian businessmen, columns “and their use in information anti-Russian campaigns. We are witnessing various figures across Russia being bribed into submission, as was the case with the delirious “doping scandal” on the eve of the Winter Olympics.


Additionally, Washington has made sure to announce to various political leaders across the globe that any instance of economic cooperation with Russia may result in US sanctions. The US Department of State acknowledged that American ambassadors around the world were instructed to discourage from cooperating with Russia, as it was revealed by the Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov.


At the same time Washington is engaged in saber-rattling activities along Russia’s borders, while increasing its its “strategic military presence” in the Black Sea, while persuading Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia to join an anti-Russian bloc. It’s no wonder Western think tanks argue there’s a real possibility of military clashes between the US and Russia, as they were instructed to do so.


It’s curious that the apocalyptic prophecies released by Stratfor are no different from predictions made by US official bodies that all seems to agree that the world is doomed to die in a nuclear conflict with Russia.


Therefore, one cannot help but to agree with the course of action taken by the Russian president aimed at ensuring his country’s defense capabilities in the face of ongoing US provocations.


As for the propaganda and cyber attacks aimed at bring Russia down, it is clear to everyone that they are unable to undermine the determination of the absolute majority of Russian citizens to elect a president that would remain faithful to his country and its people, and Vladimir Putin has proven time and time again that he fits the description.


Grete Mautner is an independent researcher and journalist from Germany, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.