Topics

61

For Your Information / Kiev's International Legion: Former elite soldiers from NATO countries

« on: March 03, 2022, 11:21:17 AM »

   Kiev's International Legion: Former elite soldiers from NATO countries – including Germany – participate in the war against Russia in Ukraine. This is considered a substitute for regular NATO deployment.
German Foreign Policy

Mar 2, 0222

   BERLIN/WASHINGTON/KIEV (Own report) – Former NATO special forces – including Germans – are in combat in Russia's war of aggression against Ukraine on Ukraine's side. This was reported by a US news portal. According to this information, over the weekend several western ex-elite soldiers experienced in close combat and counterterrorism are preparing to leave from Poland to join the war in Ukraine. Numerous others are reported to be standing by. The government in Kiev has meanwhile created the legal prerequisites by establishing an "international legion," to ensure that soldiers of foreign nationalities entering the country will have regular combatant status. Observers consider that the voluntary engagement of former soldiers from the West will substitute, to a certain extent, for the deployment of regular NATO troops, which the military alliance does not want to send, to avoid an official engagement in a war with the nuclear power Russia. These methods are known, for example, from the 1980s Afghanistan war, also involving Bundeswehr soldiers. The "Georgian Legion" is currently a point of contact in Ukraine.

The Georgian Legion

The Georgian Legion was originally one of the various irregular militias formed in the course of 2014, to fight in eastern Ukraine against the pro-Russian People's Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk. They had seceded from Ukraine following the coup in Kiev, of course, without being internationally recognized as full-fledged nations. In the militias, many irregulars from other countries of the former Soviet Union were fighting alongside Ukrainians. For example, one militia was comprised of exiled Chechens, who were continuing their fight in Ukraine, after their own uprising had been defeated (the "Dzhokhar Dudayev" Battalion).[1] Another unit formed in 2014, is the Georgian Legion, with a strong presence of former soldiers from Georgia's military, including veterans of the Russia-Georgian war of August 2008. In 2017, the unit made international headlines, when three Georgians testified to Italian TV journalists that they had been recruited in Tbilisi in January 2014, for a mission in Kiev on the side of the Maidan opposition and, on February 20, 2014, took part in firing the fatal shots at the Maidan. They testified that they had been recruited and commanded by the Georgian Mamuka Mamulashvilli, today's commander of the Georgian Legion.[2]

"To Foster Exchange"

The Georgian Legion had caught the attention of observers already years ago, because the US citizen Craig Lang had been one of its members, for a short period. Lang, a veteran of the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, had gone to Ukraine as an irregular, in 2015. He had been under investigation by judicial authorities in the USA, suspected of having committed war crimes in eastern Ukraine. After having returned to the USA, he, along with another former irregular, had committed a murder and robbery, to raise money for his trip to Venezuela, where he sought to join the struggle against the government of President Nicolas Maduro. He was able to flee, however, he landed in jail in Kiev pending extradition.[3] In eastern Ukraine, Lang had mainly fought in the Right Sector militia, which along with the Asov Battalion, is one of the best-known extreme right-wing militias in Ukraine. Recent research indicates that extreme right-wing Ukrainians, who feel close to the Asov Battalion, but aspire to a career in the armed forces, have participated in training programs abroad – according to research, even in Germany. For example, a Ukrainian soldier, with extreme right-wing views, is said to have attended the "30th International Week" of the Army Officers Academy (OSH) in Dresden. This event is deemed to foster not only an "exchange among military personnel" but "partnerships" as well. [4]

"We are recruiting professionals"

As was reported by the US portal BuzzFeed News, the Georgian Legion has integrated more than 300 western irregulars since 2014, giving them the possibility of participating in the civil war raging in eastern Ukraine. Over the past few weeks, it has been accelerating its efforts to recruit more foreign volunteers from the West. Already at the end of January, Mamulashvilli reported that his unit had received "more than 30 requests" – most from the United States and Great Britain, but also "one from Germany."[5] "We are recruiting professionals," explained Mamulashvilli, to BuzzFeed News, noting that the Georgian Legion makes military capabilities a condition for joining, and added, in late January, "We have the green light." Following publication of that article, the US online portal reported having received emails from "dozens of men in the USA, the United Kingdom and countries in the European Union," saying they were interested in fighting in Ukraine against Russian units, if they should really invade the country. On Sunday, BuzzFeed News announced that ten elite soldiers experienced in close combat and counterterrorism are preparing to cross the Polish border to Ukraine, to go to war. The group is composed of six US citizens, three Brits, and a German.[6]

In the Chain of Command

Kiev has now established the legal prerequisites for the militias' combat volunteers to be treated not as irregular combatants, but as regular soldiers, enjoying the full protection of humanitarian international law. As Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky announced on the weekend, the armed forces have now created an "International Legion," allowing citizens of foreign countries to join. Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba confirmed that now these people have the "legal framework, to fight under the chain of command of the armed forces of Ukraine," without being a Ukrainian citizen.[7] The chain of command also includes the Georgian Legion which, in 2016, had been integrated into the armed forces. On the side of the West, Britain's Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, gave the "green light," when she declared on Sunday that she "definitely" supports British nationals who might go to Ukraine to fight against Russia. As official policy, the latter is new. In 2014, the British Crown Prosecution Service explicitly warned, British citizens, traveling to Syria, to join the war, would be committing a crime, if they joined the Syrian insurgents, seeking to overthrow President Bashar al Assad. Overthrowing Assad was one of the British government's political objectives, at the time. Like Afghanistan

There is an obvious parallel between the participation of non-active-duty soldiers from western armed forces entering combat against the Russian Army in Afghanistan during the 1980s and today's war in Ukraine. Back then, West German soldiers, and others, were officially granted a leave of absence to go fight at the Hindu Kush.[8] In addition, like today, the uprising against Soviet troops was supported with weaponry. The most prominent parallel is, that back then, like today, western countries provided portable "Stinger" air defense missiles. In Afghanistan, these proved also decisive for the Soviet defeat.[9]

NOTES [1] Mark MacKinnon: Chechens and Georgians in Ukraine preparing to continue fight against Putin on a new front. theglobeandmail.com 13.02.2022. [2] Guerra in Ucraina, le verità nascoste. Canale 5, 15.11.2017. Gian Micalessin: La versione dei cecchini sulla strage di Kiev: "Ordini dall'opposizione". ilgiornale.it 15.11.2017. S. auch Chaos säen (II). [3] Christopher Miller: NATO Won't Put Troops Into Ukraine, But Western Foreigners Are Volunteering To Join The Fight Against Russia. buzzfeednews.com 28.01.2022. [4] Nicholas Potter: Wie rechtsextreme Soldaten in der Ukraine vom Westen ausgebildet werden. belltower.news 19.01.2022. [5] Christopher Miller: NATO Won't Put Troops Into Ukraine, But Western Foreigners Are Volunteering To Join The Fight Against Russia. buzzfeednews.com 28.01.2022. [6] Christopher Miller: A Team Of American And British Special Forces Veterans Are Preparing To Join Ukraine's Fight Against Russia. buzzfeednews.com 27.02.2022. Briten und Amerikaner schicken Spezialkommandos in die Ukraine. berliner-zeitung.de 28.02.2022. [7] Tom Sables: Ukraine invites foreign volunteers to combat invading Russian forces. forces.net 27.02.2022. [8] S. dazu Der Krieg kehrt heim (II). [9] S. dazu Die Zeitenwende.

62

For Your Information / What the Russian, Ukrainian delegations agreed on and Moldova rejects NATO

« on: March 02, 2022, 03:32:10 PM »

   What the Russian, Ukrainian delegations agreed on and Moldova rejects NATO
TASS

Mar 1, 2022


   On February 28, in Gomel, Belarus, Ukrainian and Russian delegations held their first round of talks on a ceasefire in Ukraine and agreed upon a new meeting. According to Adviser to the Ukrainian President's Chief of Staff Mikhail Podolyak, "the parties determined a number of priority subjects with certain solutions mapped out." In order for "the solutions to have any opportunities to be implemented, the sides left for their capitals for consultations." The next meeting will be held in the near future, according to Russian Presidential Aide Vladimir Medinsky who led the Russian delegation.

The talks started around 14:00 Moscow time and lasted over five hours. Ukraine was represented by head of Ukraine's ruling party's parliamentary faction David Arakhamia, Defense Minister Alexey Reznikov and Podolyak. The Russian side was headed by Medinsky and included Deputy Foreign Minister Andrey Rudenko and Deputy Defense Minister Alexander Fomin.

The main result of the talks is that the parties are ready to continue them, according to Director of the Fund for Assistance to 21st Century Technologies Ivan Konovalov. That said, it is possible to presume that the discussion touched mostly on political issues, such as the status of Ukraine, rather than the situation "on the ground," the expert thinks. Since the sides agreed to continue consultations, it seems that they found some foothold to begin dialogue, however, it is absolutely not clear what concession on the part of Ukraine may be discussed, according to Coordinator of the European Dialogue Expert Group in Ukraine Georgy Chizhov. He suggested that the sides may have discussed the status of Russian language as Ukraine's second official one.

63

For Your Information / All Out to Oppose Warmongering, Lies and Disinformation

« on: March 02, 2022, 09:39:23 AM »

All Out to Oppose Warmongering, Lies and Disinformation

TML Monthly
https://cpcml.ca/Tmlm2022/MS5203.HTM#3

What Is Pertinent and What Is Not in Considering Unfolding Events in Ukraine

This supplement of TML is published to provide our readers with important information and context for what is taking place in Ukraine today. This includes some of the history of current developments, including the U.S.-organized coup in 2014; the effort by the people of Donetsk and Luhansk to establish the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and the Luhansk People's Republic (LPR); the bombardments by the Ukraine government in the Donbass that have killed an estimated 15,000 people, and other relevant developments.

The aim of publishing this information from knowledgeable sources is to assist those seeking to verify the facts behind the conflict in Ukraine and demand solutions which settle the matter peacefully, beginning with opposing what the U.S. and NATO, including Canada, are doing.

The warmongering of the U.S., Canada and other NATO countries and their supporters is increasing in volume and intensity. It reeks of chauvinism and revanchism as it presents the U.S. and NATO countries as champions of freedom, democracy and peace while those who do not join them are portrayed as enemies, authoritarian, anti-people and the like. The first principle of any anti-war movement worthy of the name is to serve the cause of the peoples of the world, not pit one section against another in the name of high ideals. It is to favour solutions which will guarantee the peace, not foment the destruction of one country to serve the interests of others.

The jingoist war propaganda does not even make mention of the wars of aggression and occupation and crimes committed against the peoples of so many countries by the U.S. and NATO. This history shows without any shadow of doubt what the U.S. and NATO represent. It shows that their aims in Ukraine are not to defend freedom, democracy and peace. Their claim that this is a dangerous war because it is in Europe, covers up their crimes in Europe itself, as well as Asia, Africa, Latin America and the Caribbean and within the United States itself so that excuses are made for what they are doing today.


Minneapolis, February 24, 2022.
Evidence shows that in today's situation, the U.S./NATO aims are to use Ukraine to destroy Russia, also a European nation, whose independent existence and right to be the U.S. and NATO countries will not accept. Their chauvinist mania about European values is such that they choose who is legitimate and who is not on the basis of who agrees with what they call peace, freedom and democracy, all evidence to the contrary be damned. Who they are and what they stand for is to be ignored. Also missing from the equation is the fact that it is the peoples of the world who are fighting against the so-called values the U.S. and NATO countries represent with their very lives; every day they oppose their exploitation, oppression and humiliation.

The propagandists for the U.S. and its aggressive NATO alliance say this is the first war in Europe since World War II, conveniently forgetting to mention that they themselves bombed Yugoslavia to depose then President Slobodan Milosevic and dismember that country. Their 78-day bombardment killed thousands, caused terrible trauma, destroyed infrastructure, cultural patrimony of humanity, and gave status to drug traffickers and criminal elements as freedom fighters, subsequently used as private contractors in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria and other countries.

In the name of the imperialist doctrine "responsibility to protect," they instigated civil wars in Yugoslavia, blamed this or that religious or ethnic peoples and caused the first massive refugee crisis under their so-called New World Order which they also blamed on those resisting the U.S. and NATO dictate. In that war they claimed to be the liberators of Kosovars, just as today they claim to be the liberators of a self-servingly defined Ukranian people.

According to their chauvinist warmongering what is happening in Ukraine is unique because Ukraine is European and thus somehow worth more than if such a thing takes place in Asia, Africa, Latin America or the Caribbean. Attempts to portray the U.S., NATO and its "coalitions of the willing" as liberators will not erase the facts of what they are doing today or what they have done and continue to do in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and what is being done by them in Yemen, Syria and many other places. It will not erase the memory of the freedom-loving Europeans who grew up in the shadow of crimes committed against them during World War II, despite the takeover of their countries by self-serving private interests who have usurped the decision-making powers to seek their fortunes in wars of destruction and the sales of arms and munitions.

Canadians have to seriously ask themselves pertinent questions of which there are many. Why does the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine, which makes up one-third of the population, not count in the eyes of the U.S. and NATO, including Canada? Why are they not defended as an integral part of the Ukrainian people but isolated and attacked in the name of high ideals? Why does Russia also not fight for the entire Ukrainian people but just identify those who it says make up its own kith and kin? Why is Russia isolated, not treated with respect but made the target of personalist anti-Putin defamation as if the use of police powers by his regime is substantially any different to what is taking place in the U.S., Canada and NATO countries? Why is Russia not treated as a European country -- not only the country with the largest landmass in Europe but in the entire world, the country which suffered 27 million losses during World War II whose peoples deserve respect? Why is converting Ukraine into a forward base to isolate Russia seen as heroic? It does not honour the heroic people of Ukraine who stood second to none in World War II and made the supreme sacrifice, as one with the Soviet Red Army, to liberate their country and all of Europe from the Nazi fascists.

Remember the history of the anti-war movement since the bombing of Yugoslavia. At each war, the movement had to oppose disinformation which sought to make sure the peoples of the world would not have a say in determining the outcome. Milosevic was demonized to get the peoples of Europe and the world to remain passive and not oppose the NATO bombing. They were accused of being supporters of Milosevic to cover up the aims of the U.S., the contradictions between the big powers of Europe and to keep the peoples of Europe out of the equation. The anti-war movement stood its ground and prevailed. What Milosevic was or was not doing was spun to justify the takeover and dismemberment of Yugoslavia, to divert attention from what the U.S., France, Germany and NATO were doing there. So too, when Iraq was invaded not only was Saddam Hussein, the erstwhile friend of the U.S., British and others demonized, but lies were piled up on lies to justify the invasion and heinous crimes there. The same applies to all the other cases of U.S. and NATO operations and those of their so-called coalitions of the willing.

In the name of all those victims of U.S. and NATO aggression and war, in the name of all the victims of sanctions and the heinous crimes the U.S. has committed and seeks to justify, and in the name of all those who are victims of the use of force today, let us demand that the U.S. withdraw its troops and weapons from Europe. Let us demand that NATO be dismantled, that the security of Russia and other countries being destabilized by the U.S., British, Canadian and NATO warships and provocations be guaranteed and that the cause of peace prevail by resolving conflicts without resorting to the use of force.

Pitting military might against military might can only escalate an already dangerous situation. It is necessary to draw warranted conclusions about what is going on in Ukraine so as to effectively organize the peoples of the world as a force for peace, democracy and freedom. The need to strengthen the anti-war movement must necessarily oppose warmongering, lies and disinformation on an ongoing basis. This task is as great today as ever, if not more so because of the grand-scale presentation of NATO and the U.S. as liberators.

All out to mobilize the people to get Canada out of NATO, dismantle NATO and make Canada a zone for peace. Canadians need an anti-war government, not a government that engages in wars to establish U.S. as "the indispensable nation" at the expense of the legitimate concerns of all other countries and peoples.

64

For Your Information / Thoughts on the Present Crisis in Ukraine

« on: March 02, 2022, 09:34:29 AM »

Thoughts on the Present Crisis in Ukraine
– Joe Lombardo –

Photo: Fascist rally in Odessa

Joe Lombardo is a well respected anti-war activist from Albany, New York.

The propaganda of the U.S. government and its media always looks at what is happening now and does not give us the whole picture. So, if the U.S. and its allies bully a country until it can take it no more and strikes back, you only hear about them striking back not what came before. It is especially important with the present crisis in Ukraine to look at what came before.

In 2013, the president of Ukraine was Viktor Yanukovych. He was a leader of the largest party in Ukraine called the Party of Regions, which generally wanted better relations with Russia. The U.S. and its European allies did not want Ukraine to have good relations with Russia and the U.S. poured $5 billion into Ukraine to support hundreds of NGOs to move the country more towards the U.S. and the West. Ukraine had been in a terrible economic crisis. The country, which once had about 53 million people shrank to about 41 million as people left to go mostly to European Union countries and to Russia to try and get a better life.

In 2014, Yanukovych was negotiating with both Russia and the EU for loans. The loan package from Russia seemed to be the best for Ukraine and he was leaning towards accepting it. The U.S. and the EU were opposed to Ukraine accepting the loan package from Russia.

In 2014 protesters took over Maidan Square in the center of Kiev to protest government corruption and the general circumstances of life in Ukraine.

Ukraine had been divided with a portion of the population having strong nationalist and right-wing, neo-Nazi politics. The right-wing was mainly organized into the Svoboda Party and the extreme right-wing Right Sector. People from these organizations came to Kiev from around the country and joined the protesters in Maidan Square. Many were armed and violent. The U.S. encouraged this. We may remember U.S. Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland coming to Maidan Square and offering the protesters treats. Also, Senator John McCain came to Maidan and spoke to the protesters encouraging them on. Imagine if Russian or Chinese officials came to Occupy Wall Street with treats and encourage us in our protests. The U.S. would have called this interfering in U.S. internal affairs and taken strong action.

Soon, the Maidan protest turned violent. The U.S. and its Western allies claimed it was caused by the police shooting at the demonstrators. The Ukrainian government and the police claimed they did not fire on the protesters. When I was in Kiev in 2019, I was escorted around by people who had opposed the Maidan protests. We went to Maidan Square, and they pointed out that the trees around Maidan Square were all newly planted.They told us all the trees were taken down in 2014 and an investigation of the violence was never carried out. They said the trees were taken down because they showed that the bullets were fired from a different angle than the U.S. and the protesters claimed, and that the bullets were not police bullets, but ones fired from high-powered rifles that the police did not have. Our Kiev hosts sent us videos that seemed to prove that the people were shot by snipers brought in from the country of Georgia. Most of those videos were eventually taken off of YouTube but this one has survived: click here.


Photo: Maidan protesters take over Kiev City Hall and put up racist and fascist flags
.
The Maidan protesters attacked government buildings and Yanukovych, fearing for his life, fled to Russia. The democratically elected government of Viktor Yanukovych was overthrown in a right-wing coup supported by the U.S. The question then arose of who would take his place. We may remember the hacked call between Victoria Nuland and the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine. In that call she named the person the U.S. chose to replace Yanukovych. It was Arseniy Yatsenyuk, a hard right member of Fatherland, which was a right-wing, ultra-nationalist, anti-Russian formation. It appeared that the Europeans, especially the Germans, wanted a more moderate figure to head Ukraine. They favoured Vitaly Klitschko, a boxer turned politician with more moderate views than Yatsenyuk. During the hacked call, we heard Nuland say, "F--- the EU," and, of course, the U.S. pick, Yatsenyuk became the first Prime Minister of Ukraine after the coup. The new finance minister in the coup government was Natalie Jeresko, from the U.S. and Joe Biden's son took a position on the board of the largest natural gas company in the country earning a salary of $50,000 per month.

At the time of this coup, UNAC [United National Antiwar Committee] wrote in a statement, "What are [the U.S.] objectives and why is Russia so alarmed? Could it be the U.S.-NATO campaign to militarily surround Russia and bring neighboring countries into the western military and financial orbit? It is clear that Russia will not passively sit by while the Western-backed coup, led by violent fascist forces ...overthrows a democratically elected government and installs a puppet regime on its border."

On the first day of the new coup government, they passed the Language Law. Although Russian had been one of the official languages in Ukraine and the primary language of about a third of the people in Ukraine, it was removed as an official language. So now, schools would be taught only in Ukrainian, street signs and all official documents would be in Ukrainian, even in the Russian speaking area. The Party of Regions, which had been the largest party in Ukraine, was banned along with what some believe to be the second largest party, the Communist Party. This is the "democracy" that the U.S. helped create.

Of course, Ukraine was not the first country that surrounds Russia that the U.S. and its NATO allies have moved into. Despite an agreement made by Secretary of State James Baker as the Soviet Union was dissolving that NATO would not move to any of the countries east of Germany, it is now in 14 of those countries. It has placed nuclear capable missiles near the Russian border (the Cuban missile crisis in reverse) and has held "war games" in these countries right at the Russian border. Now they want to move NATO into Ukraine, the country with the largest border with Russia of any of the other European countries. This will further surround Russia.

But it is not just that NATO will further surround Russia if Ukraine becomes part of NATO. It is also the fact that Ukraine has a vibrant neo-Nazi movement that is also part of the government. During World War II, there had been a Nazi movement in Ukraine. One of its central leaders was Stepan Bandera who was a leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and a Nazi collaborator. The OUN was accredited with supporting and organizing massacres of Ukrainian Jews during WWII. Today, Bandera has been named a "hero of Ukraine." Groups such as the Svoboda Party and the Right Sector claim to be the heirs of Stepan Bandera.

The ultra-nationalist and neo-Nazi movements are alive and well in Ukraine and in the Ukraine military. The Azov Brigade of the Ukrainian military openly uses fascist symbols like swastikas and uses fascist salutes. The Soviet Union including Russia lost more than 20 million people defeating the Nazis during World War II and are not happy to see fascism on their doorstep.

Members of the Azov Brigade showing their Nazi sympathies along side NATO banner.
Many areas in Ukraine did not go along with the 2014 coup and opposed it. This was especially true in the Eastern and Southern areas of the country where many of the Russian speakers live. In the city of Odessa, a largely Russian speaking city, people protested the Kiev coup and set up an on-going protest camp outside of the House of Trade Unions in the city. This was a big threat to the Kiev government. Not only was Odessa one of the largest cities in the country but it was their main port, located on the Black Sea. On May 2, 2014 there was a football game in Odessa that brought people from throughout the country to the city. The fascists mobilized for this football game. Before the game was over, the fascists got messages on their phones to leave the stadium and march to the House of Trade Unions to attack the anti-Maidan protesters there.

A huge crowd of fascists attacked the anti-Maidan protesters, beat them and shot at them. Many ran into the building for protection. The fascist mob used Molotov cocktails and set the building on fire -- some were killed by smoke and some jumped from windows to be beaten to death on the ground. The police stood by and did nothing. Though the fire station was only blocks away, the fire trucks did not arrive until an hour after the House of Trade Unions was burning. Forty-eight people were killed, and hundreds injured. Although there are many cell phone videos of the entire event, some even showing the people firing guns, and making and throwing Molotov cocktails, none were arrested. But several of the victims were arrested. The next morning when people saw what had happened at the House of Trade Unions and heard that the victims had been arrested, 30,000 Odessans marched to the police station and set them free.

Each year on May 2, the people of Odessa hold a memorial to the people who were killed. Each year on that date the fascist groups mobilize and come to Odessa to try and stop the memorial. So, the people of Odessa ask for international observers as protection. UNAC has sent delegations there on two occasions. I went to Odessa to be an observer in May, 2019. There, we witnessed thousands come to the burnt-out House of Trade Unions building to lay flowers and commemorate those killed by the fascist mob. Groups of fascists, some wearing swastikas and other fascist symbols came to try and intimidate the crowd. During the middle of the afternoon, the families of those killed arrived and tried to address the crowd. But the police would not allow them to use their sound equipment. That night hundreds of fascists marched through the streets of Odessa and held a torch-light rally in the center of the city. The police allowed them to use their sound equipment. As they marched, they chanted "hang the communists from the trees."

Additionally, our host, a woman who arranged for our visit had her name put on a fascist web site just as we arrived and had to leave the country out of fear that she would be beaten or killed.

Crowds come to memorialize those murdered at the House of Trade Unions. Fascists come to intimidate.
For video of fascist rally in the centre of Odessa click here.

Protests of the coup in Kiev also occurred in many places in the country including Crimea and in the Donbass regions in the eastern part of the country. These are areas where there are predominantly Russian speaking people. In these regions there are many families that have members on both sides of the border with Russia. Crimea had actually been part of Russia for hundreds of years but in 1954, when Ukraine and Russia were both part of the Soviet Union, Khrushchev, the Soviet Premier at the time, gave Crimea to Ukraine, since it was close to both countries. When the Soviet Union dissolved, Crimea was part of the independent Ukraine. After the coup the people of Crimea protested and called for a vote in which more than 95 per cent voted to return to Russia. In the U.S. news media, you will hear that Russia invaded Crimea and took it back. This did not happen. There was no invasion. There was a Russian military base in Crimea that had been there when it was part of the Soviet Union and remained there with the agreement of Ukraine. This was the only Russian warm water navy base and strategically important for the Russian military. These Russian military personnel were in Crimea, but there where fewer of them than their contract with Ukraine allowed. There was no invasion and no interference by the Russian military stationed there.

In the Donbass region there were protests against the Kiev coup especially in the cities of Donetsk and Luhansk where the protesters took over government buildings. When the Ukrainian military came to stop them, they confronted the military. In most cases the military refused to fire on the people. Eventually, the People of Donetsk set up their own government called the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR) and the people of Luhansk set up the Luhansk People's Republic (LPR). These regions created militias to defend themselves from the Ukraine military and fighting persisted in the region. Russia, the Ukraine government and the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) with mediation from France and Germany set up the Minsk Protocols, which were then signed by the DPR, the LPR and the Ukraine government. This was supposed to stop the fighting in the Donbass, but the agreement was continually broken by the Ukraine military and 14,000 people have been killed in the fighting in Donbass.

Over the past month or so we have heard that the Russians have been massing troops on their border with Donbass. But we have not heard that during this period the Ukrainian army had been massing troops in the area and had 150,000 troops there. The shelling of the independent regions in Donbass had greatly increased in the past month and on the day before the Russian troops entered Ukraine, it had reached an intolerable level and the leaders of these two independent republics asked Russia for help.

We hear in the U.S. media that there are civilians ready to fight the advancing Russian military, that many are leaving the country and perhaps there are civilian deaths in the hundreds. We have not heard the voices of people from Donbass, Crimea or the many who opposed the 2014 coup. We heard President Biden proclaim, "Who in god's name gave Putin the right to invade Ukraine?" The hypocrisy is amazing. Who gave the U.S. the right to invade Vietnam? Yugoslavia, Iraq? Afghanistan? Libya? Syria?[...] or support the Saudi invasion of Yemen or Israel's attacks on Palestine? Who gave them the right to sanction over 40 countries and create coups in one country after the next? The USA has its military all over the world. It has 20 times the number of foreign military bases as all other countries combined. The country with the second most foreign military bases is its NATO ally Britain and the country with the third most foreign bases is its NATO ally France. What about the 4 million Vietnamese who died or the million who died in Iraq or the 14,000 in Donbass? Who gave the U.S. or NATO the right to kill all these people?

The war in Ukraine may have been avoided simply if the U.S. had agreed to not admit Ukraine into NATO. But they refused to do this. The U.S. recognizes no legitimate security concerns of Russia.

The world is changing. The U.S. hegemony in political, economic, and military spheres is being challenged, mainly by China. Yet the U.S. refuses to recognize this and continues to bully the rest of the world. As the crisis in Ukraine is unfolding, the U.S. provocatively sent a warship through the Taiwan Strait near China. On the first day of the war in Ukraine, there was also a U.S. airstrike in Somalia, an Israeli airstrike in Damascus and 37 Saudi airstrikes in Yemen, but because the U.S. supports these, we hear nothing in our corporate media.

The only way to end the fighting and perhaps future conflicts is for the U.S. and its NATO allies to respect the legitimate security concerns of all countries; to respect the right of self determination of all people including those in Donbass and Crimea; to close U.S. foreign military bases and to bring the troops home and to end NATO.

(February 27, 2022)

65

For Your Information / Keir Starmer’s cynical embrace of Nato is a sad sight indeed

« on: February 12, 2022, 08:57:42 AM »

Keir Starmer’s cynical embrace of Nato is a sad sight indeed
Lindsey German
The Labour leader has directed his ire at anti-war campaigners, even though he knows we’ve been proved right again and again

Lindsey German is convenor of the Stop the War coalition
US troops line up to meet the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, at the military airbase of Mihail Kogalniceanu, Romania, 11 February 2022.
‘A war in Ukraine would be devastating.’ US troops line up to meet the Nato secretary general, Jens Stoltenberg, at the military airbase of Mihail Kogalniceanu, Romania, 11 February 2022. Photograph: Robert Ghement/EPA
Fri 11 Feb 2022 16.27 GMT

What has happened to Keir Starmer, the seasoned anti-war protester?

The Labour leader and I both marched on the Stop the War demonstration against the Iraq war in 2003. I remember reading with interest his Guardian article “Sorry, Mr Blair, but [UN resolution] 1441 does not authorise force”, questioning the legality of that war. Only two years ago, when he wanted to appear to be on the left of Labour as he sought election, I was happy to see him promise to bring forward a Prevention of Military Intervention Act.

Starmer’s recent outburst about the Stop the War coalition – he claimed that we were effectively on the side of Vladimir Putin for opposing the march towards war over Ukraine – seems to be a critique of his former self. Does he now think he was not a “benign voice for peace” but “at best naive; at worst actively giving succour to authoritarian leaders”? Partly it is sad because he in all likelihood believed what he said then but has now joined the ranks of those politicians who will say anything, no matter how flatly it contradicts their previous statements, if it serves their current ambitions.

Advertisement

However, everything we and Starmer thought at the time has been proved correct by events, and every criticism he makes of the anti-war movement now has been made before – and revealed as false.

We were told more than 20 years ago that opposition to war in Afghanistan was the same as supporting the Taliban; then that we were aiding Saddam Hussein when we demonstrated against war with Iraq in 2003. When we opposed the Nato bombing of Libya in 2011, we were accused of backing Muammar Gaddafi.

It was a lie then, and it is now. We opposed those wars because we believed they would worsen the situation – increase not decrease terrorism, cause greater instability, and leave millions suffering from the consequences. On all those questions we have been proved decisively correct. Our opposition to war in Ukraine is not based on any support for Putin – he has his own record of militarism and war – but because we recognise that such a war would be devastating and that a peaceful resolution can be found.

The argument that we oppose war because we support the governments of those countries suggests that there can be no good reason for people to oppose war other than being beholden to another power. This is an insult to all those campaigning for peace, including in Russia, where no doubt pro-war elements claim their opponents are supporting Nato or the US.

In order to justify his argument, Starmer has to argue that Nato is purely defensive. “There is no equivalence between a defensive alliance that has never provoked conflict and those who would inflict the appalling cost of war on to others,” he writes.

Tell that to the people of Afghanistan and Libya, who have suffered so much as a result of the Nato wars. Stating that the organisation is a defensive alliance does not make it true. It has moved a very long way geographically from the North Atlantic, which was its original remit. Its origins were in the cold war; its role since the end of that war, in 1989, has been expansionist and interventionist, and it is now playing an active role in manoeuvres and arms provision in eastern Europe. It is increasingly looking towards the Indo-Pacific as another theatre of conflict.

This military organisation is also putting huge pressure on member states to increase their spending on “defence”. Nato demands at least 2% of GDP from each country, which encourages further militarism and conflict. Meanwhile, in Britain millions of people are facing a serious cost of living crisis, an NHS in permanent emergency mode and record levels of inequality.

The Boris Johnson government – whose foreign minister does not appear to know which provinces are in Russia and which in Ukraine – has been the most belligerent in its talk about war with Russia. No doubt this is a tactic to deflect from the prime minister’s own domestic crisis, but it could also lead to an extremely dangerous situation for people in Britain, as well as in Ukraine and Russia.

Starmer should be opposing this government, not trying to bang the drum for war even harder. His invocation of the Attlee government in his defence ignores the foreign policy record of that government, which supported wars in Korea and Malaya and introduced the nuclear bomb with “a bloody Union Jack on top of it”, in the words of Starmer’s hero, Ernest Bevin. Starmer sees Nato and the NHS as twinned achievements of Attlee’s government, but a much closer and more meaningful comparison with the creation of the health service is the founding of the United Nations in 1945, rather than the cold war military creation he celebrates.

Stop the War has been proved right over the previous wars, while those who mistakenly supported them seem to have learned no lessons from the terrible consequences of their errors. War over Ukraine, involving nuclear powers, could have much more damaging consequences. Diplomacy could lead to a way out, we believe, as even the French and German governments are trying to establish, in contrast to Starmer.

We have become all too familiar with Labour politicians promoting wars. Stop the War will continue its campaigning against this threat and the British government’s connivance in it – with Labour acquiescence. Our message is simple: don’t get fooled again.

Lindsey German is convenor of the Stop the War coalition
You've read 15 articles in the last year

66

For Your Information / Donbass – Arrival of Ukrainian neo-Nazis and Polish mercenaries on the frontline

« on: February 10, 2022, 07:10:03 PM »

Filename: 20210D21
Word count: 497


   Donbass – Arrival of Ukrainian neo-Nazis and Polish mercenaries on the frontline
Donbass Insider

Feb 7, 2022


   On 7 February 2022, the DPR (Donetsk People's Republic) People's Militia announced that as part of Ukrainian preparations for aggression against the Donbass republics, Ukraine had sent its neo-Nazis, as well as Polish mercenaries, to the frontline.

According to information obtained by DPR intelligence, two units of Ukrainian neo-Nazis from Right Sector, of 70-80 men each, have been sent to the front line on the stretch of front facing Donetsk (to the west and north), filling in units of the 54th and 56th brigades of the AFU (Armed Forces of Ukraine). All of these soldiers have combat experience and have been trained by British instructors.

Other assault groups of ideologically motivated neo-Nazis and nationalists are being formed and trained to fight in urban areas. Polish mercenaries have also arrived in the Ukrainian-controlled Donbass.

"The presence of two armed groups of up to 20 persons in mixed tactical uniforms was observed near the village of Popasnaya. During the reconnaissance, it was established that the specified persons speak Polish and have arrived to perform tasks in the area of responsibility of the 24th Mechanized Brigade. Their mission is to carry out, together with units of the Ukrainian special operations forces, one-off sabotage and terrorist actions aimed at disabling vital facilities and social infrastructure and intimidating the local population.

We believe that before the Ukrainian army's offensive begins, the mercenaries will try to inflict the greatest damage on civilian infrastructure in order to force us to retaliate, which the Ukrainian side, justifying itself in the eyes of the international community, will try to use as a pretext for launching hostilities.

The Poles arrived in Ukraine under the guise of instructors sent to take part in a training mission for Ukrainian soldiers," said DPR People's Militia spokesman Eduard Basurin.

The DPR People's Militia has also learned that the Ukrainian General Staff Commission that inspected the readiness of the AFU to conduct an offensive in the Donbass suddenly replaced the commander of the Vostok Battle Group, General Tarnavsky, with General Sodol, who was the commander of the AFU Marine Corps, and who is more ideologically loyal to the Kiev authorities.

The DPR People's Militia also pointed out the cynical actions of the Polish government, which, when holding the OSCE chairmanship, declared that Poland would do everything necessary for peace and security in Europe.

A month later, Poland openly declares its intention to transfer ammunition, Grom portable anti-aircraft systems and drones to Ukraine, which, by the way, will equip not only the AFU, but also Ukrainian nationalist and neo-Nazi organisations.

These Polish statements do not contribute to peace and stability, but rather escalate the situation, pushing Ukraine to continue its warmongering towards the Donbass.

And while these preparations continue, the situation on the front line remains tense. On 6 February, a Ukrainian sniper from the 25th brigade of the AFU killed a DPR soldier near Verkhnetoretskoye.

67

South Tyneside Stop the War / Bipolar attitude around the future "Russian invasion of Ukraine" between Western

« on: January 30, 2022, 11:43:45 AM »

   Bipolar attitude around the future "Russian invasion of Ukraine" between Western hysteria and apparent calm in Kiev
Donbas Insider

Jan 26, 2022


   As more and more countries begin to evacuate their diplomatic staff and families from Ukraine, fuelling hysteria over the threat of an (imaginary) Russian invasion of the country, Ukrainian authorities are calling for calm, saying that there is no indication that such a scenario is imminent. This radically different attitude between Kiev and its Western bosses is surprising, and begs the question: is Russian invasion of Ukraine just a fairy tale invented by the West, or is Kiev playing a bad remake of the famous song "Everything is fine, Madame la Marquise"?

After the United States, the United Kingdom and Australia, it is now the turn of Canada, the Netherlands and Germany to propose the families of their diplomats to leave Ukraine if they so wish, and to recommend that their nationals do not go there. Japan has also recommended that its citizens leave the country "as long as there are commercial flights" and is considering evacuating them. France, for its part, is just calling on its citizens to avoid travelling to Ukraine, unless absolutely necessary.

At the same time, the airline Lufthansa has changed its flight schedule to Ukraine, officially for operational reasons, and according to the Ukrainian media, this is to avoid its flight crew being forced to sleep on site (with the risk of being stranded there in the event of a sudden escalation in the situation).

In the face of these chain reactions from Western countries, the speech calling for calm and saying that there is no imminent invasion of Ukraine by Russia, made last night by the Ukrainian authorities, is likely to cause cognitive dissonance.

Indeed, on 24 January 2022, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky convened an extraordinary meeting of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, at the end of which many expected important statements.

But instead, after the meeting, Ukrainian Defence Minister Alexey Reznikov called for no panic, and said that the information available to the Ukrainian authorities does not indicate that Russia is preparing an invasion of Ukraine in the immediate future.

"I do not attach much importance to such a scenario. Our armed forces, our command and staff have all the options in hand and know how to act. To date, the facts observed by our intelligence services and those of the partner countries (suggest) that no strike force has been created by the Russian Federation indicating that it will launch an offensive tomorrow. There is no such threat. So I ask you not to create panic," he said.

Faced with this reassuring statement, many commentators wondered why Zelensky had called an emergency meeting of Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council if "everything is fine, Madame la Marquise".

The answer may lie in the statement made by the Ukrainian Prime Minister, Denis Shmygal, after the same meeting.

"The key message is not to panic, not to make unfounded accusations. It's very important today, from an economic point of view, to stay calm, to be firmly committed to our work," he said.

These two statements calling for no panic, when last week the Ukrainian Ministry of Culture began distributing brochures with instructions in case of war to businesses in Kiev, and the Ukrainian army is stockpiling everything it needs for an offensive in the Donbass, ring somewhat hollow.

The Ukrainian authorities may have made a new turn in rhetoric, by withdrawing the controversial draft law on the transition period (which totally violates the Minsk agreements, see my article of 2021 on this subject), by saying they are ready to negotiate (from Reznikov who says he is ready to discuss with Sergey Shoygu, the Russian Defence Minister, to the Ukrainian delegation in the contact group that pretended to want to discuss the decentralisation of Ukraine before changing its mind), or by swearing that Kiev will not attack anyone, the reality on the ground tells a different story.

Indeed, confirming information provided recently by the DPR (Donetsk People's Republic) people's militia, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defence press agency, ArmyInform, announced that British instructors are training Ukrainian soldiers in the use of NLAW anti-tank rocket launchers, which London recently delivered to Ukraine in large quantities.

British instructors have also trained the five Ukrainian sabotage-recognition groups that have just arrived in the Lisichansk region, opposite the LPR (Lugansk People's Republic). According to information from the LPR's people's militia, the groups' mission is to carry out acts of sabotage on vital civilian infrastructure, including the western filtering station, which supplies part of the Republic's drinking water.

And the deployment of Ukrainian soldiers is sometimes at the expense of the civilian population, as in the village of Lopaskino, where the soldiers of the 79th brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces (FAU) evicted the inhabitants of Karl Marx Street from their homes to accommodate the personnel of the 3rd battalion.

The LPR People's Militia also reported a sharp increase in radio communications on AFU networks, that Kiev is preparing additional places in military hospitals to receive the sick and wounded, and that two mobile crematoria have been spotted in Kramatorsk.

At the same time, Kiev is creating and training territorial defence units, and it is not only in the Donbass that the Ukrainian army is accumulating troops and equipment. For example, the head of the Crimean parliament, Vladimir Konstantinov, has said that the Ukrainian army has stepped up its activities near the border with the peninsula.

"Ukrainian soldiers have swarmed over the areas closest to Crimea, and the actor playing the president says they "will not forget" our peninsula. This means that we have to prepare for a new manifestation of Ukrainian ‘love' for us," he told a meeting of the parliamentary presidium.

If Ukraine seems to be continuing its preparations for an offensive in the Donbass (or even a provocation against Crimea), why then pretend that everything is fine? Firstly, to deflect the accusation that it has provoked the escalation and resumption of the conflict, by making it appear that it has no warlike plans and is merely the victim of the evil Russia.

Secondly, because Western hysteria is having a deleterious effect on the Ukrainian economy, as revealed by the slip of the tongue of the Ukrainian Prime Minister. Announcements of the departure of diplomats' families and the beginning of the evacuation of staff from some Western embassies have caused the hryvnia to fall, made investors nervous, caused the stock market value of major Ukrainian companies to fall, and caused foreigners to sell their real estate in Ukraine.

Moreover, who would lend money to a country about to be invaded? No one would. As a result, Ukraine may find it difficult to get new loans to pay back previous ones, and risks defaulting.

This is why Ukraine is trying to calm things down publicly: to stop the financial losses the country is suffering, while no military action has yet been taken in either direction. It is also possible that these financial losses due to Western media hysteria are a means (deliberately created by Washington) to force Zelensky to launch his country into a war that he knows he will lose.

The Ukrainian President is now caught between Scylla and Charybdis. Between defaulting and the total collapse of the country, or the resumption of the war in the Donbass, the defeat of his army, and potentially the loss of new territories. Two options that will earn him the enmity of the Ukrainian people.

It remains to be seen whether a third option will emerge (by a miracle) from the meeting to be held tomorrow in Paris between the political advisors of the Normandy Format.

68

South Tyneside Stop the War / To this day I can’t sleep . Moazzam Begg, tortured in Bagram and Gitmo

« on: September 04, 2021, 12:08:58 PM »

To this day I can’t sleep . Moazzam Begg, tortured in Bagram and Gitmo, talks to RT after 20-year US war in Afghanistan ends
2 Sep, 2021 19:15
RT
Tortured by the US in Afghanistan’s Bagram prison and Guantanamo Bay, British-Pakistani author Moazzam Begg told RT of his ordeal and the vindictive, futile US ‘War on Terror’ that he says “destroyed” American soldiers too.
Begg spoke with RT for the ‘Ghosts of War,’ a special project looking at the fallout of the US invasion and 20-year occupation of Afghanistan, which officially ended on Monday.

I was begging to go to Guantanamo because what I had seen and witnessed in Bagram was so destructive, to this day I can’t sleep.

Born in the UK to Pakistani parents, Begg had moved to Taliban-run Afghanistan with his family in July 2001. After the US invasion, they sought shelter in Pakistan. In February 2002, Pakistani authorities arrested him and turned him over to the US troops, “without any legal process at all.” For the next year, he was held in Bagram, a notorious prison camp next to the now-abandoned airbase.

During his year-long detention in Bagram, Begg says he saw two people “beaten to death” by US soldiers. A subsequent US military inquiry found that the cause of death of the two men, identified as Dilawar and Habibullah, was indeed homicide.

“For me this place epitomized what the US was doing in Afghanistan,” he told RT. “They were bringing people to this torture site – Afghans, ordinary Afghans – and abusing them outside the rule of law, and then allowing some of them to go back home. And they would go home and tell people ‘this is what the Americans did’.”

In February 2003, Begg was sent to Guantanamo Bay, a US-controlled enclave in Cuba where a camp had been built for 'enemy combatants' captured in the so-called Global War on Terror.

“We were stripped, we were beaten, we were spat upon, we were humiliated, photographs of us [were] taken,” he told RT. His captors also played sounds from the next room suggesting his wife was being tortured there, and showed him photos of his children. “What they wanted me to do was to sign a confession that I was a member of Al-Qaeda, which I was not,” he said.

Among his fellow inmates were several Taliban members, who he says are now senior figures in the new Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, proclaimed after the US-backed government collapsed in mid-August. The Taliban takeover prompted a frantic scramble by Westerners and Afghans who worked with them to flee the country, which officially came to an end on Monday when the last US military flight departed Kabul.

At one point in his Guantanamo captivity, Begg says he stopped thinking of himself as a human being and started calling himself 588, the number he was assigned. He showed RT a hand-made calendar he kept and the letters from his children, redacted by US censors.

My children were growing up without me, and every day without them was a stab in the heart.

Begg was released in January 2005 and sent to the UK. The US never charged him with any crime. “The War on Terror was not a police operation, it was a military operation,” he told RT.

While in Guantanamo, some of the American guards treated him with compassion, talking to him, giving him chocolate, and sometimes letting him watch movies on a smuggled DVD player. Begg called those “little acts of humanity that I’ve never forgotten to this day.”

“I left Guantanamo not hating America because of those soldiers,” he told RT.

Begg added that some US troops have written to him afterward, saying that the war “destroyed” them and that they can’t sleep at night. While some 15,000 US troops and contractors died in the ‘War on Terror,’ twice that number have committed suicide, according to the Costs of War project.

“This is a defeat, it’s a military defeat, however you want to look at it,” Begg says of the US and NATO withdrawal from Afghanistan, which left the Taliban in possession of all the military equipment and infrastructure built up for the US-backed regime.

He thinks “imperial hubris” won’t allow the West to come to terms with this outcome and move forward.

69

Newcastle Stop the War / LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, THE GAME IS OVER

« on: September 04, 2021, 12:06:42 PM »

LIBERAL INTERVENTIONISM, THE GAME IS OVER
Lindsey German
As the last US soldier left Kabul on Monday night, Joe Biden acknowledged the defeat not just of the war and occupation there but of the whole policy of liberal interventionism. ‘This decision about Afghanistan is not just about Afghanistan. It’s about ending an era of major military operations to remake other countries’.

The wars started by George Bush – ably abetted by Tony Blair – have come to an ignominious end. Those of us who argued 20 years ago that this war should never happen, that it would worsen terrorism worldwide and worsen the lives of millions, have been proved right. There were many who saw that the war and intervention launched then would not succeed in its aims. We were ignored by politicians, media and military who launched a propaganda war to cheer the real one.

They have a lot to answer for. The wars in Afghanistan, Iraq, then Libya and Syria have seen more than a million dead, many more have become refugees, and whole countries have been devastated by their consequences. The human costs have been immense – in the countries wrecked by war but also in those launching the wars. Biden acknowledged in his speech that 18 veterans in the US commit suicide every day. The loss felt by families of those killed never goes away. The future costs of medical care and disability for those who served in the wars runs into billions.

The US has spent $300 million a day on the Afghan war alone, at the expense of health care, education and much else. It has left Afghanistan one of the poorest and least developed countries in the world. For all the talk of making Afghanistan free from terrorism ISIS-K has grown as a force under the occupation, just as it did in Iraq. The Taliban, defeated very rapidly in 2001, have been able to seize back a country governed by corrupt pro-US politicians and unable to deliver for most of its citizens.

The whole idea that the world’s largest imperialist nation could ‘remake’ a country was itself a conceit born of overweening power and military might. The vast bulk of Western resources in Afghanistan went into military and related expenditure, as it was always going to. The war and its successors were about regime change and asserting Western imperialism’s role, not championing human rights.

Those who argue for continued ‘humanitarian intervention’ are spreading the illusion that this was ever on offer. It was not. It is therefore right for the troops to leave and for the Afghan people to decide their own future. The west should help through reparations and accepting refugees as equal citizens, not as the pariahs they are treated by Western governments.

Despite the bluster of the British government, the withdrawal has shown its weakness. There is no independent military operation (or even evacuation) without the US.

There is little sign of government or media here facing up to the reality of the past 20 years’ failure. Instead, the very military and politicians who caused such a catastrophe are asked for their opinions on a daily basis while those who predicted this outcome are ignored.

Yet the impact of anti-war movements on public opinion and on shifting perception of wars has been profound and it continues. It’s why Biden still talks about ending the ‘forever wars’. And it’s why, as tensions grow with Iran, Russia and China – all of whom will be playing a role in Afghanistan – we need to keep campaigning.

70

For Your Information / Afghan Aftermath Europe Braces for Another U.S.-Induced Migration Crisis

« on: September 03, 2021, 04:36:41 PM »

Afghan Aftermath Europe Braces for Another U.S.-Induced Migration Crisis
Finian Cunningham, Information Clearing House

Aug 23, 2021


   "Information Clearing House" - "SCF" -- President Joe Biden vowed "America is back" when he took office, meaning that Washington would realign with and respect European allies under its global leadership after the years of Trump discord.

The European political establishment swooned and cooed like dutiful debutantes apparently having Uncle Sam's affections and patronage again.

How quickly indeed has that supposedly rosy relation between the U.S. and the Europeans been ruptured with bitter recriminations following the disastrous collapse in Afghanistan. The EU is scrambling to cope with the potential fallout of mass migration from the Central Asian country after the return to power of the Taliban.

This is the militant group that Washington and its NATO allies spent two decades fighting at the cost of hundreds of thousands of lives and trillions of dollars – only for the militants to seize power amid a total collapse of a U.S.-backed regime in Kabul.

Yeah, America is back alright. Causing mayhem and political headaches for its supposed European partners.

The U.S.-led military interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria have already shaken the European Union to the core with political crisis from the destabilizing influx of migrants from war zones. That crisis came to a head in 2015-2016 when an estimated one million refugees made their way into EU member states. Then German Chancellor Angela Merkel responded with an open-door policy of accepting asylum seekers. But that policy rebounded in explosive tensions within and between member states owing to European nations perceiving an overwhelming challenge to their social systems.

That, in turn, led to EU states closing their borders in violation of the whole concept of a seamless bloc. There was also much open bickering between member countries accusing each other of not sharing the burden of accommodating foreign migrants.

The crisis also fed into the rise of anti-EU populism since the Brussels bureaucracy was perceived as overriding national consent about accepting the influx of non-Europeans.

Let's recapitulate: much of the strain from the migration pressure on the EU stemmed from Washington's illegal wars in Asia, the Middle East and North Africa. Wars, admittedly, that the European NATO allies assisted in prosecuting.

Having said that, however, it was the minor American partners who seemed to be loaded disproportionately with the repercussions in terms of dealing with the migration from the war zones – not the United States.

The same baleful phenomenon looks like repeating. This week European Union foreign ministers held an emergency summit to assess the aftermath of the Afghanistan debacle.

"We have to ensure that the new political situation created in Afghanistan by the return of the Taliban does not lead to a large-scale migratory movement towards Europe," said Josep Borrell, the EU's foreign policy chief.

German foreign minister Heiko Maas said the EU is concerned about "the stability of the region", adding that "neighboring countries will certainly be confronted with further refugee movements."

As the Washington Post reported: "[European Union] officials offered rare criticism of Washington for risking a flood of refugees to their borders and the return of a platform for terrorism in Central Asia."

It is estimated that nearly 570,000 Afghan nationals have applied to the European Union for political asylum over the past six years. Even before the dramatic seizing of power last week by the Taliban, there was a sharp increase in Afghans fleeing to the EU.

The European governments are caught in a public relations nightmare. Earlier this month, six EU member states – Austria, Belgium, Germany, Denmark, Netherlands and Greece – were pushing for the "forced return" of Afghans who had been refused asylum. Now, that initiative is being suspended because of the politically damaging look of EU states callously sending people back to the Taliban regime, which doesn't exactly share "European values" (whatever that means).

Meanwhile, Germany's Merkel made a veiled swipe at the Biden administration saying she believed the U.S. decision to press ahead with the withdrawal was taken for "domestic political reasons" and was to blame for the ensuing chaos in Afghanistan. The leader of her party, Armin Laschet, went further, calling the entire Afghanistan operation a failure and the withdrawal "the biggest debacle that NATO has suffered since its founding" 72 years ago.

Austria and other EU members are striving to set up deportation centers in Pakistan, Turkey, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan to keep the refugees at bay. But it is far from certain that such a scheme would work.

In that case, the European Union is set to incur another massive migration wave from Afghanistan. With a population of 38 million and an estimated five million internally displaced, the numbers of Afghans seeking to make their way across EU borders could surpass the waves of refugees previously seen from Syria, Iraq, and Libya as well as Afghanistan during the past six years.

The Biden administration is being criticized by other NATO members for hastily pulling out of Afghanistan thereby triggering the implosion of an already shaky puppet regime in Kabul.

America's European allies are in particular facing immense political pressure over the resultant humanitarian crisis and the inevitable flow of refugees clamoring for a safe haven. This will shake the EU to the core again and with that the transatlantic alliance.

Regarding the Biden administration and its unctuous professions of transatlantic unity, the European governments must be wondering with friends like that who needs enemies?

Finian Cunningham has written extensively on international affairs, with articles published in several languages. He is a Master's graduate in Agricultural Chemistry and worked as a scientific editor for the Royal Society of Chemistry, Cambridge, England, before pursuing a career in newspaper journalism. He is also a musician and songwriter. For nearly 20 years, he worked as an editor and writer in major news media organisations, including The Mirror, Irish Times and Independent.

71

South Tyneside Stop the War / UK gunboat diplomacy fires blanks at China

« on: September 03, 2021, 04:34:42 PM »

UK gunboat diplomacy fires blanks at China
Asia Times , By ANDREW SALMON

AUGUST 31, 2021


   HMS Queen Elizabeth carrier strike group has given areas that could provoke China a wide berth while in the region

SEOUL – The visit of the UK's HMS Queen Elizabeth carrier strike group (CSG) to the Korean peninsula has got underway with less of a bang and more of a whimper.

At a time when China is acting as a global economic engine for the world's stuttering recovery from Covid-19 and casting an ever-longer shadow across East Asia, the UK's gunboat diplomacy in East Asian waters has been considerably more prudent than it was during the Mediterranean and Black Sea phases of its deployment.

Both London and Seoul appear more reluctant to irk Beijing than is their joint ally, Washington, which last week sent two ships through the strategic Taiwan Strait to Beijing's displeasure.

Against this backdrop, Covid-19 may have provided a face-saving solution for both parties. A planned port call by the CSG to South Korea has been called off and the ongoing drills are low-key.

More unusually, neither US units embedded with the CSG nor those based in South Korea are taking part in the exercises.

Brexit Britannia flexes new muscle The high-profile voyage of the Queen Elizabeth, which left her home base in May, has been hailed in the UK as a showcase of the world-ranging muscle behind a new, post-Brexit "global Britain."

"The presence of the UK Carrier Strike Group in the Indo-Pacific is a powerful demonstration of the UK's commitment to deepening diplomatic, economic and security-based ties in the region," the British government said.

In the region, the CSG has undertaken exercises with the navies of Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand and the US and has also visited Guam. However, the voyage of the British-led multinational flotilla has been overshadowed by a massive humiliation for Western militaries: The fall of Kabul to the Taliban after a 20-year conflict.

The CSG comprises nine ships, 32 aircraft and one submarine and is manned by 3,700 sailors, aviators and marines. US and Dutch warships are in the carrier's escort group, and the bulk of the F35s on her deck have US pilots.

The subordination of US assets to British command suggests both US political approval and close tactical interoperability.

The 65,000 tonne, conventionally powered Queen Elizabeth is not quite as big, butch and hairy as the 100,000 tonne nuclear-powered Gerald Ford-class US Navy carriers. Still, as the crown jewel of the Royal Navy, the GBP3 billion man-of-war showcases cutting-edge air and sea power-projection capabilities.

And she certainly filled a gap in the cash-strapped British forces. Prior to her 2021 cruise, the Royal Navy had been without operational aircraft carriers – the ultimate admirals' toy – since 2014.

Poking the bear, evading the dragon In the Mediterranean, the CSG conducted airstrikes against Islamic State in Iraq and Syria.

In the Black Sea, a British destroyer from the group conducted a freedom of navigation exercise, or FONOP – sailing within 12 nautical miles of a disputed territory – off the coast of Russia-held Crimea.

The CSG has behaved with greater circumspection in East Asian waters. Given Chinese capabilities – Beijing controls weaponized islands in the South China Sea, and deploys two aircraft carriers with a third under construction – that looks sensible.

Just after the CSG entered the South China Sea, state-run tabloid Global Times – a media known for its kinetic editorial stance – warned:

"We advise US allies to be particularly cautious .they must be bluntly told that if their warships rampantly behave as the US military does in the South China Sea, they will more likely become an example of China defending its sovereignty and territorial integrity – just as a popular Chinese phrase indicates: ‘To execute one as a warning to a hundred.'"

Neither the Queen Elizabeth nor its sub-units conducted FONOPs off China's weaponized islands in the flashpoint South China Sea. Nor has it traversed the Strait of Taiwan, which Beijing sees as particularly sensitive.

USS America conducted a historic bilateral fueling-at-sea with British Royal Navy destroyer HMS Defender while operating with elements of the HMS Queen Elizabeth Carrier Strike Group in the Philippine Sea on August 24. Photo: AFP / EyePress News

According to Hong Kong media, the Chinese military was "satisfied" with the British-led CSG's activities in the South China Sea.

For Whitehall mandarins, both push and pull factors are at work.

On the one hand, China has been behaving with increasing assertiveness across the world, is powering up its armed forces, and has appalled the UK with its stance on Hong Kong. On the other, post-Brexit Britain is seeking to upgrade trade with partners beyond the EU.

For all these reasons, Whitehall may have decided that despite the bravado surrounding the carrier, which carries two squadrons of top-tier F35s stealth fighters, "poking the Chinese dragon" was not in Britain's best national interests.

Apparent British circumspection toward a country that is both a regional hegemon and an economic superpower is reflected, indeed greatly amplified, in the nation the CSG is operating off today.

Circumspect cruise South Korea – having suffered heavy economic retaliation from China after it permitted the deployment of US anti-missile systems on its soil in 2017 – has already learned to be extremely careful around Beijing's strategic touchiness.

In this vein, Asia Times understands that there had been friction between the Ministry of National Defense and the presidential Blue House in the run-up to the CSG visit.

While military officials have been keen to see the new carrier up close via a port call, and there were hopes of marine drills on land, the Blue House, ever wary of triggering China, has been lukewarm.

In the event, Covid-19 looks convenient.

South Korea is struggling to contain the Delta variant and is under its strictest ever social distancing guidelines. There are reported Covid infections – but no hospitalizations – aboard the visiting flotilla. As a result, a port call to Korea's second city, Busan, was called off on August 24.

Even so, naval exercises started on Monday and are due to continue off Busan on the southeast of the peninsula through Wednesday. The location of the drills appears shrewd.

Exercises in the Yellow Sea, off the western coast port of Pyeongtaek, home to a massive US base, would be sensitive for China and possibly for North Korea.

Likewise, exercises off South Korea's Jeju island, home to a domestic naval base, would also risk peeving China. Jeju is perfectly situated to monitor the egress of naval units from the Yellow Sea, home to key Chinese ports, bases and naval dockyards.

"This part of the world is very sensitive, everybody lives pretty close by, and when you have that kind of proximity, you want to respect personal space," Chun In-bum, a retired South Korean general, told Asia Times. "Unfortunately, sometimes the biggest neighbor forgets to do that – but that is the neighborhood Korea lives in."

Unusually on Monday, Seoul's Ministry of National Defense spokesperson told reporters that no US assets would take part in the joint exercises.

"That caught me off guard," admitted Chun, who said he had no information on the surprise announcement.

Chun assumed that the drills would be based on humanitarian and anti-piracy scenarios, rather than kinetic naval operations.

"We can respect China's concerns, and at the same time achieve our purposes of building standard operational procedures, gaining experience, enhance mutual understanding," said Chun. "All these things are benign in nature but can be used in contingencies."

Distant friends The fact that the CSG's first operational cruise is to the Far East – its ultimate destination is Japan – is a sign of increasing British interest in a part of the world that is strategic in both economic and security terms.

But while post-Brexit London may wish to extend its influence eastward at a time when key ally the US is also encouraging stronger ties between democracies in Western Europe and East Asia, South Korea-UK defense ties remain distant.

The UK dispatched the second largest contingent to the UN Command, the US-led force that fought for South Korea in the 1950-53 Korean War. That conflict, with China as the key combatant against the UN Command, remains the bloodiest London has fought since World War II.

Despite this, and despite London's ongoing membership in the UN Command, South Korea and the UK are not bound by any formal alliance; the obligations of all UN Command "sending states" to South Korea in the even of renewed hostilities are vague.

Moreover, the UN Command – which offers the US eyes on the crossing points of the Demilitarized Zone, and, moreover, maintains depot arrangements in Japan – has not been popular during the Moon Jae-in administration. Some non-US troops assigned to the unit have even faced administrative obstacles from Seoul officialdom.

Even so, since the drawdown of British involvement in wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, British units have been traveling to South Korea to scope out the ground and to get a closer look at a large, conscript military that dwarfs the professional UK force.

British Army battalion battlegroup staffs have traveled to South Korea to join US and local forces in annual spring military drills. Those visits were halted by the agreement between Donald Trump and Kim Jong Il to suspend the drills in 2018, and subsequently by Covid.

It is unclear when, or if, they will resume.

Visits by British units to the country to commemorate key anniversaries of the Korean War in 2020 and 2021 were put on hold for the same reason, as has a tour of the country by the British Staff College.

The main military-military cooperation is naval, in the anti-submarine helicopter space. The South Korean Navy operates British Wildcat helicopters, and there is close cooperation between related units.

Multiple models of the latest British naval helicopters are aboard the Queen Elizabeth, and in July, visiting British Minister of Defense Ben Wallace said that the Royal and South Korean navies are in talks to share experience in operating aircraft carriers.

There are widespread rumors in South Korea about the acquisition of an F35 aircraft carrier. A source at the Ministry of National Defense told Asia Times that no acquisition plan has been confirmed, nor has the type or size of the vessel.

One solution would be the conversion of existing helicopter landing ships, a model pioneered and pursued by Japan's Maritime Self Defense Force.

But there are more ambitious ideas. In June, the world's biggest shipbuilder, Hyundai Heavy Industries made public a design for a dual-island aircraft carrier with a take-off ramp – the type pioneered by the Queen Elizabeth class.

"Our navies operate similar complements of F-35 aircraft and Wildcat helicopters, as well as many other platforms," said Brigadier Mike Murdoch, the UK defense attache in Seoul, in a statement sent to foreign reporters.

"There is thus already a solid infrastructural basis for our partnership, and in the coming years the Royal Navy plans to maintain a regular deployment to the region."

All this suggests the possibility of defense consulting and sales as well as interoperability between the two mid-sized powers.

A regional footprint? The CSG's next port of call is Japan's China-facing port of Sasebo. Units will subsequently join "Exercise Bersama Gold," which marks the 50th anniversary of the Five Powers Defence Arrangement, alongside Australia, Malaysia, Singapore and New Zealand.

However, despite erroneous reporting in some British media, the CSG will not be permanently stationed in East Asian waters.

Indeed, the Royal Navy, which is particularly short of frigates and destroyers, has no permanent patrol presence in East Asia waters. Although it has sent a number of surface ships on ad hoc deployments in recent years, there was no permanent patrol presence.

That changed in July, when Whitehall announced that two small Royal Naval offshore patrol vessels, the HMS Tamar and HMS Spey, will be based in the region

The naval base at Singapore, where the Royal Navy maintains a small naval party tasked with logistics and fueling, might act as a convenient home for the vessels. Sasebo or Guam might also be conceivable homes for the ships.

However, Asia Times understands that they will not have a permanent base in the region, and will fly in rotational crews of sailors and Royal Marines from the UK.

The modest UK naval commitment did not impress Global Times.

"The UK simply does not have the ability to reshape the pattern in the South China Sea," the newspaper editorialized. "To be precise, if the UK wants to play the role of bullying China in the region, it is demeaning itself. And if there is any real action against China, it is looking for a defeat."

72

For Your Information / Former British ambassador to Damascus OPCW mere ‘puppet' of West against Syria

« on: July 15, 2021, 07:52:21 AM »

   Former British ambassador to Damascus says OPCW mere ‘puppet' of West against Syria
Press TV

10 July 2021


   It is a "tragedy" that the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) has been "corrupted" in a way that it is being used as a "puppet" by the West to exert pressure on Syria rather than being an international and technical monitoring organization, the former British ambassador to Syria tells Press TV.

Peter Ford, who is also an expert on West Asian affairs, made the comments from Manchester during Press TV's Spotlight program, which was aired on Friday night.

He said that he was completely in agreement with what the Syrian government has recently reiterated that the global chemical watchdog is no longer a technical organization but a political tool in the hands of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France to exert pressure on Damascus.

"Sadly I have to agree one hundred percent with that take on the OPCW. It is a tragedy that a very important international monitoring body should be corrupted in this way by being politicized by Western powers. The OPCW should be playing an impartial role and should be seen to be extremely impartial. But for the last few years, decision after decision, it is shown that it is a puppet of the Western powers," Ford said.

He added that the UK and the US, in particular, were responsible as they have staffed the OPCW with officials from their own administrations.

These officials do not respect the impartiality of the watchdog but rather "carry out the wishes of their masters in Washington and London. This is basically why the OPCW is well underway to be completely discredited," Ford further said.

Comments by the former British ambassador to Syria came hours after the chairwoman of the Syrian mission to the OPCW said the US and its allies had lowered the status of the international watchdog, and turned it into a political tool to level baseless accusations against Damascus and exert pressure on it.

Addressing the 97th session of the Executive Council of the OPCW, Rania al-Refaei stated earlier on Friday that anti-Syria claims are meant to advance the agendas of certain countries, and implement the plots hatched by terror outfits.

She categorically dismissed allegations that the Damascus government has chemical weapons in its possession, terming such accusations as "spurious and unfounded."

Syria surrendered its stockpile of chemical weapons in 2014 to a joint mission led by the US and the OPCW, which oversaw the destruction of the weaponry. It has also consistently denied using chemical weapons.

However, the Western media and governments have repeatedly accused the Syrian government of using chemical weapons against its own citizens in the war against terrorists.

The OPCW, in line with the Western powers, accuses Damascus of using chemical weapons, including an alleged attack in Hama in 2017. Damascus has repeatedly rejected such accusations, describing them as false flag operations.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Ford said that the Western powers and the so-called rebels obviously benefit from such accusations and false flag operations.

"The Western powers needed to justify their illegal bombing of Syria. That's why they can never admit, that it was carried out on the basis of falsehood. That's why they continue to sustain this lie. They have to justify their continuing of war on Syria which mainly takes the form of economic warfare, in the shape of sanctions and withholding reconstruction," he added.

Brussels-based Elijah Magnier, a veteran war-zone correspondent and political analyst covering West Asia and North Africa, was the other panelist invited to the Spotlight program, who also confirmed that the OPCW's reports have been politicized.

"When Jose Bustani came out with his narrative saying that we inspectors are scientists and according to scientists' opinion there is no chemical attack on Douma. The reason why the OPCW is insisting is to justify the US, UK and France's attack on Damascus. The whole world watched that the OPCW is lacking trust these days, particularly after the Douma attack and it is obvious that a lot of pressure was put on the organization," he said

If the decision is made before the attack by the West, there is no need to go there and gather evidence impartially, Magnier added.

Current and former staff members of the OPCW decry the organization's new report that blamed the Syrian government for suspected chemical attacks.

On April 7, 2018, an alleged chemical attack hit the Syrian city of Douma near the capital Damascus. Western countries were quick to blame it on the government of President Bashar al-Assad.

A week later, the US, Britain, and France launched a coordinated missile attack against sites and research facilities near Damascus and Homs with the purported goal of paralyzing the Syrian government's capability to produce chemicals.

Damascus, however, said that no chemical attack had happened and that the Douma incident had been staged by foreign intelligence agencies to pressure the government in the face of army advances against militants.

In October 2019, Jose Bustani, the OPCW's first chief, said that convincing evidence of irregular behavior in the OPCW investigation of the alleged Douma chemical attack confirmed doubts and suspicions he already had.

In October next year, he was scheduled to testify at the UN Security Council about the alleged cover-up by the OPCW regarding the Douma chemical attack. However, the US, UK, and France blocked Bustani from testifying, claiming that he left the watchdog in 2002 and thus was not involved in the issues being discussed.

Nevertheless, the Russian envoy at the UNSC read out Butsani's statement, which stated that the OPCW engaged in "evidence suppression, selective use of data and exclusion of key investigators" when it was making its report about the so-called Douma chemical attack.

73

For Your Information / A "Global Britain" is a Military Threat to the World's People

« on: June 30, 2021, 02:53:36 PM »

"Stealth jets fight Daesh in first combat missions from HMS Queen Elizabeth":
A "Global Britain" is a Military Threat to the World's People

On Tuesday May 22, the government announced [1] that after spending "weeks working with its NATO allies", its newly deployed UK Carrier Strike Group had launched "stealth jets to fight Daesh (Islamic State)". These bombings and air attacks on Daesh are part of the US-led Operation Shader [2] in Syria, Iraq and the Levant region [3] with British and US F-35 jets carrying out these very first "combat missions" from HMS Queen Elizabeth. The Carrier Strike Group which left Britain for its deployment on May 22 and announced to be stopping at a "100 ports in over 40 countries" is heading to the Asia-Pacific. According to the report, the last leg of the voyage will take the strike group into what is described as the
Chinese Aircraft Carrier Liaoning most serious part of the "journey through the South China Sea, waters which China claims more of than is internationally recognised". This is before taking part in provocative military exercises with Japan and "visiting" South Korea. Such hostile acts will not go unchallenged as Britain continues its military interference in the Middle East and then enters into a dangerous stand-off with China and the DPRK, countries which are rightly already opposing the hostile war preparations of the US in the Indo-Pacific, South China Sea, East China Sea and Yellow Sea. Britain is already carrying out hostile actions in the Black Sea against the Russian Federation and giving warships to Ukraine in a defence deal [4] all aimed at increasing the tensions further between Russia and Ukraine, which is not in the interests of either neighbouring country.

Emphasising that the UK Carrier Strike Group represents "Global Britain" as a military threat to the world's people, the government statement says that "it marks a change of emphasis. From exercises and international engagements, the Carrier Strike Group is now delivering its full might of naval and air power, putting the 'strike' into Carrier Strike Group and contributing to the UK's fight against Daesh." Defence Secretary Ben Wallace confirmed, "The Carrier Strike Group is a physical embodiment of Global Britain and a show of international military strength." He claimed that it would "deter anyone who seeks to undermine global security". This means that such sabre-rattling is not just aimed at Daesh, who they had also claimed to have bombed out of existence in 2019 [5], but it is aimed against any country who challenges the "rules-based international order" dominated by the US.

This is also calculated to accompany what the Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, claimed in March was Britain's Indo-Pacific "tilt" at the heart of the national defence and security review. Such a "tilt" in war preparations has to be seen alongside the US "pivot" to Asia and Australia's Pacific "step up". It also coincides with NATO's 2030 agenda confirmed at the NATO Summit in Belgium on June 14 to extend its reach to the Asia-Pacific.

The government statement also emphasises that Britain is to be even more integrated into the US war machine than in the days of the invasion of Iraq in 2003 and the subservience of Britain's then Prime Minister Tony Blair to then US President Bush. The statement quotes Commodore Steve Moorhouse, Commander of the UK Carrier Strike Group: "This is also notable as the first combat mission flown by US aircraft from a foreign carrier since HMS Victorious in the South Pacific in 1943. The level of integration between Royal Navy, Royal Air Force and US Marine Corps is truly seamless, and testament to how close we've become since we first embarked together last October." Of course, what Commodore Steve Moorhouse fails to mention is that in 1943 Britain and the US were in a formal alliance with the Soviet Union against Hitlerite fascism, which was in the interests of all the world's people to defeat the fascist invasions and occupations, and that such integration of forces was against a world war and not, as it is today, preparations to unleash a new world war.

The latest actions of the UK Carrier Strike Group are revealing that once again the mask has slipped in the attempt to project post-Brexit "Global Britain" as part of a "rules-based international order" that is acting for "global security". In other words, the UK Carrier Strike Group represents "Global Britain" as a military threat to the world and integration of British with the US forces. It is a dangerous attempt to continue the Anglo-US "might makes right" war preparations in their rivalry with other powers and in opposition to the rights of the world's people, who wish to live without sanctions and war from the Anglo-US imperialist system of states. In Britain, the working class and people must demand that the UK Carrier Strike Group is recalled to British waters immediately and that all its US forces return to the US. The people should affirm the right to be of all nations and peoples of the world, and take a stand to renew international relations based on international law, declaring that international issues and world security is not settled by force of arms. Another world is a necessity for the people to live in a peaceful world!


Notes
1. "Stealth jets fight Daesh in first combat missions from HMS Queen Elizabeth" - Ministry of Defence and The Rt Hon Ben Wallace MP, June 22, 2021
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/stealth-jets-fight-daesh-in-first-combat-missions-from-hms-queen-elizabeth
2. Since Operation Shader began in 2014, the RAF has conducted more than a thousand air strikes over Iraq and Syria, using more than 4,300 weapons launched from Tornado, Typhoon and Reaper drone aircraft. By January 2019, the Ministry of Defence stated that "1,700 British air strikes had killed or injured 4,315 enemy fighters" in Iraq and Syria. The number of air strikes carried out in Iraq and Syria has been described as "second only to the United States". The operation is the most intense flying mission the RAF has undertaken in 25 years. Sources: Wikipedia and https://www.forces.net/
3. The Levant region comprises Lebanon, Syria, Iraq, Palestine and Jordan.
4. "UK Giving Ukraine Sandown-Class Vessels in Defence Deal", June 22, 2021
https://www.forces.net/news/uk-giving-ukraine-sandown-class-vessels-defence-deal
5. "On December 19, 2018, President Donald Trump declared that ISIS was defeated and signalled his intention to withdraw all 2,000 US troops supporting the SDF in Syria. But the SDF continued its offensive and in February 2019 launched the final siege on ISIS forces in Baghouz, the last holdout. Baghouz fell on March 23, 2019, formally ending the caliphate's claim to any territory. The mass surrender of ISIS fighters and their families illustrated the lingering challenge: how to deal with jihadists to forestall its transformation into an insurgency in Iraq and Syria. The Baghdadi era of ISIS ended on October 26, 2019, when the leader was killed in a US raid in northern Syria." The Wilson Centre
https://www.wilsoncenter.org/article/timeline-the-rise-spread-and-fall-the-islamic-state




Anti-War Movement statements on British actions in the Black Sea
HMS Defender's Encroachment into the Black Sea

Stop The War Statement - June 24, 2021

Stop the War condemns the provocative decision for the UK destroyer HMS Defender to sail into disputed waters in the Black Sea near the Crimea. HMS Defender sailed just 12 miles off the Crimean coast, despite warnings from the Russian forces that they regard these as Russian waters. Moscow's defence ministry said a patrol ship fired warning shots towards the destroyer and a jet dropped bombs in the path of HMS Defender.

The UK government has played down events and denied such a military incident, but Jonathan Beale, a BBC journalist who was on the destroyer, said that the ship was indeed harassed by the Russian military. It is clear that the crew of the Defender knew that their action was likely to cause a dangerous incident. Beale reported that, "the crew were already at action stations as they approached the southern tip of Russian-occupied Crimea. Weapons systems on board the Royal Navy destroyer had already been loaded."

UK government sources have confirmed that the ship's action was deliberate, saying that "it was not there to pick a fight but to make a point". In recent weeks the US and its allies have ramped up their intervention in Ukraine, inflaming an already tense situation which could erupt into a shooting war at any time.

The British government's use of a navy destroyer to back up US brinkmanship is completely irresponsible. It is a dangerous act of aggression that has nothing to do with defence or security. We call on the government to end its support and participation in NATO's provocations against Russia.



Warmongering British Actions in the Black Sea

Craig Murray, June 24, 2021 (excerpts)


HMS Defender entering the Black Sea

The pre-positioning of the BBC correspondent on HMS Defender shatters the pretence that the BBC is something different to a state propaganda broadcaster. It also makes plain that this propaganda exercise to provoke the Russian military was calculated and deliberate. Indeed that was confirmed by that BBC correspondent's TV news report last night when he broadcast that the Defender's route "had been approved at the very highest levels of the British government".

The Prime Minister does not normally look at the precise positions of British ships. This was a deliberate act of dangerous belligerence.

The presence of a BBC correspondent is more than a political point. In fact it has important legal consequences. One thing that is plain is that the Defender cannot possibly claim it was engaged in "innocent passage" through territorial waters, between Odessa and Georgia. Let me for now leave aside the fact that there is absolutely no necessity to pass within 12 miles of Cape Fiolent on such passage, and the designated sea lane (originally designated by Ukraine) stays just out of the territorial sea. [...]

So far as I can establish, the British are not claiming they were engaged in innocent passage, which is plainly nonsense, but that they were entering territorial waters off Crimea at the invitation of the government of Ukraine, and that they regard Crimea as the territory of Ukraine and Crimean territorial waters as Ukrainian territorial waters.

I want to impress on you how mad this is. The whole point of "territorial sea" is that, legally, it is an integral part of the state and that the state's full domestic law applies within the territorial sea. That is not the case with the much larger 200 mile exclusive economic zone or sometimes even larger continental shelf, where the coastal state's legal jurisdiction only applies to specific marine or mineral resources rights.

Let me put it this way. If somebody is murdered on a ship within twelve nautical miles of the coast, the coastal state has jurisdiction and its law applies. If somebody is murdered on a ship more than twelve miles off the coast, the jurisdiction and law of the flag state of the ship applies, not the law of any coastal state in whose exclusive economic zone the ship is.

In international law, the twelve mile territorial sea is as much part of the state as its land. So to sail a warship into Crimean territorial seas is exactly the same act as to land a regiment of paratroops in the Crimea and declare you are doing so at the invitation of the Government of Ukraine.

[...] the UK government legal position can only be that Russia is an "occupying power". It is impossible that the UK government legal position is that Ukraine is in "effective control" of the territory.

We need to see the legal advice provided by FCO legal advisers. It is simply not the practice in international law to ignore the existence of an occupying power which is a recognised state, and act with armed forces on the authority of a government not in effective control. The difference in British attitude towards Russia as an occupying power and towards Israel is tellingly different.

The legality of the British action is, at very best, moot. In realpolitik, it is an act of brinkmanship with a nuclear power and further effort to ramp up the new Cold War with Russia, to the benefit of the military, security services and armaments companies and the disbenefit of those who need more socially useful government spending. It is further an act of jingoist populism for the neo-liberal elite to distract the masses, as the billionaires' incredible wealth continues to boom.

[...]

Source Workers' Weekly
http://www.rcpbml.org.uk/wwie-21/ww21-20/ww21-20.htm

74

South Tyneside Stop the War / Exercise BALTOPS 50 kicks off June 7

« on: June 12, 2021, 08:44:05 AM »

Exercise BALTOPS 50 kicks off today
US European Command

June 7, 2021


   The 50th Baltic Operations (BALTOPS 50) exercise, the premier maritime-focused exercise in the Baltic Region, kicks off today, June 6.

Between June 6-18, air and maritime assets from 18 NATO Allies and partner nations will participate in live training events that include air defence, anti-submarine warfare, amphibious operations, maritime interdiction, mine countermeasure operations.

"This year, we celebrate the 50th BALTOPS, an exercise that sets the foundation of interoperability across the Alliance," said U.S. Vice Adm. Gene Black, commander, Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO and commander, U.S. Sixth Fleet. "BALTOPS stands as the keystone of our exercise season, demonstrating half a century of the unwavering commitment of our partners and Allies. Lessons learned in BALTOPS enable international strike group operations, advanced missile defense capabilities and seamless surface action group missions."

BALTOPS 50 consists of two at-sea training phases: the combat enhancement training (CET) and force integration training (FIT) portion and the final tactical phase of the exercise (TACEX).

During the first six days (the CET/FIT phase), ships and aircraft will transit through the Danish Straits, focusing on maritime operations in critical chokepoints, ensuring access and freedom of navigation in the Baltic Sea.

The exercise will continue to move East during its two phases, operating in accordance with international law and supported by participating Allies and partners. The exercise will culminate with the TACEX phase, where the exercise paradigm will shift into a "free-play" portion, and commanders are given more freedom to run their own tactical programs. The TACEX phase is designed to better represent operating in real-world situations.

For the first time, exercise design incorporates defensive cyber warfare tactics, techniques and procedures as BALTOPS continues to adapt and train to ensure an asymmetric advantage in the era of modern warfare.

Naval Striking and Support Forces NATO (STRIKFORNATO) will again command and control BALTOPS from its headquarters in Oeiras, Portugal.

II Marine Expeditionary Brigade and Expeditionary Strike Group 2 will command and control exercise Marine forces throughout the exercise from aboard USS Mount Whitney (LCC 20), demonstrating international naval integration and power projection ashore for an amphibious demonstration in Lithuania.

BALTOPS 50 involves participation from 18 nations. The 16 NATO and 2 partner nations will provide approximately 40 maritime units, 60 aircraft, and 4,000 personnel.

The participating nations are: Belgium, Canada, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the U.K., and the U.S.

BALTOPS, held in the Baltic region since in 1972, is a joint, maritime-focused exercise that brings together NATO Allies and partners in order to increase interoperability and enhance flexibility among the participants.

75

South Tyneside Stop the War / Belarus: Western media, Bellingcat, failed to save the reputation of neo-Nazi

« on: June 04, 2021, 09:46:28 AM »

Belarus: Western media, even Bellingcat, failed to save the reputation of neo-Nazi soldier Protasevich
Donbas Insider

May 28, 2021


   Since the arrest of Roman Protasevich in Minsk after the emergency landing of the Ryanair flight he was on, a real battle for his reputation has been launched between Belarus and the West, among other things to know whether or not he fought for the neo-Nazi battalion ?Azov? in the Donbass.

On the Russian and Belarusian side, some people quickly pointed out that Roman Protasevich had fought in the neo-Nazi Azov battalion at the beginning of the conflict in Donbass. This was denied by the Western media and even by some Ukrainians, such as Andrey Biletsky, the former commander of the Azov battalion.

On his blog hosted on the Ukra?nskaya Pravda website, Biletsky explains that Protasevich was indeed with the Azov battalion in the Donbass, but allegedly as a ?journalist?.

?I will immediately dot all the ?i?s?. Yes, Roman really fought with Azov and other military units against the occupation of Ukraine. He was with us near Shirokino, where he was wounded. But his weapon as a journalist was not a machine gun, but words,? wrote Biletski.

The problem is that no matter how hard you look on the Internet, you can?t find an article from him about the Donbass war. Rather strange.

Then the cover of the 15th issue of the magazine of the neo-Nazi battalion Azov appeared, on which Protasevich is clearly seen posing in uniform, weapon in hand!

Roman protassevitch sur la couverture du magazine du bataillon n?o-nazi Azov

There was general panic on the Western side, it was absolutely necessary to save the soldier Protasevich by proving that he was not a neo-Nazi mercenary, and to avoid him ending up like Navalny, whose extreme right-wing political positions had caused him to lose his status of political prisoner with Amnesty International (before regaining it after an appropriate change of direction), and his reputation.

For such a difficult assignment, it was Bellingcat and its affiliates such as The Insider (based in Russia) that were put on the case.

It was first Michael Colborne, a Bellingcat ?journalist?, who launched the ?save soldier Protasevich? operation by trying to prove that if he was indeed a member of the neo-Nazi battalion ?Azov?, he was only a journalist.

Some speculated that the cover photo was doctored to add Protasevich?s face. But very quickly someone found an archive of the PDF file published on 8 July 2015 on a page of Azov hosted on the social network VK! There is no doubt that the cover is genuine!

Archive de la page VK d'Azov

The next day, The Insider tried another approach and published an article claiming that the man in the cover photo was not Protasevich but another soldier, Andrey Snitko, who has since died.

But in the meantime a lot of other photos and videos have come out of the bag, including from Protasevich?s own phone, which prove undeniably that he fought in the neo-Nazi battalion ?Azov?.

Roman Protasevich

Roman Protasevich in uniform and weapon with neo-nazi battalion Azov chevron

Roman Protasevich during a parade of neo-nazi battalion Azov in Mariupol

Zoom on Roman Protasevich

Roman Protasevich during a parade of neo-nazi battalion Azov in Mariupol

We see Protasevich in uniform with the battalion?s chevron, the weapon in his hand and a bunch of magazines for his machine gun in the bullet-proof vest! What a strange outfit for a ?journalist?! He can also be seen in a video and photos taken during a parade of the Azov battalion in Mariupol! Since when do journalists march in a military parade

At a pro-Belarus event, Protasevich?s own father admitted that his son had fought in the Donbass.

?Cases were filed against my son as early as 2014, when he was on the Donbass territory, fighting alongside the Ukrainian army,? said his father at the time, who of course retracted his statement once his son was arrested in Minsk.

Faced with the rapidly accumulating evidence, The Insider simply deleted the article, but too late. An archive was kept, showing the efforts of this Bellingcat-affiliated ?media? to try to whitewash Protasevich.

The final blow came from Protasevich himself. Indeed, in September 2015, he had given an interview to the media outlet Nasha Niva. His head is hidden in the photo illustrating the article but it is not difficult to recognise the photo of Protasevich found in his phone!

Interview donn?e par Roman Protassevitch ? Nacha Niva

Comparaison des photos

In the interview, Protassevitch is referred to as ?Kim?. He says that he was wounded near Shirokino, which is consistent with other elements of Protasevich?s biography. He also says that he fights in Ukraine because he has Ukrainian ancestors, that he hates communists and Russia as the successor of the USSR, and to ?stop Putin?s Russian horde? before they attack Belarus. He even recounts his first fight and his first shot! What a strange journalist he is.

Then comes the classic argument ?yes, but they are not all neo-Nazis at Azov?.

Problem: another photo of Protasevich proves that he is indeed a neo-Nazi. In this photo he is clearly seen (on the left) wearing a Sva Stone t-shirt with four swastikas!

Roman Protassevitch avec un t-shirt arborant des svastikas

Pull avec le m?me dessin

This brand is an active supporter of the neo-Nazi battalions Azov and Right Sector, as can be seen in this poster.

Affiche du bataillon n?o-nazi Azov

The brand sells T-shirts with explicit names like ?pure blood? or ? perun sekira? (the name of a neo-Nazi music group), as well as ?blitzkrieg? waistcoats, or ?Romper Stomper? (the name of a film about a neo-Nazi skinhead gang in Melbourne), etc.

Clearly, Roman Protasevich is neither a nice guy who came to bring democracy to Belarus, nor a journalist, but a former fighter of the neo-Nazi battalion ?Azov?, who adheres to the ideology of this battalion, and wanted to organise a violent Maidan-style coup in his home country. It seems that the West can only recruit neo-Nazis and Islamist terrorists to lead its colour revolutions.

Christelle N?ant