Cold War

Photo by Jiyeon Park on Unsplash Edward Curtin May 19, 2022 Isn’t it always? With the start of World War III by the United States “declaring” war against Russia by its actions in Ukraine, we have entered a time when the end of time has become very possible. I am speaking of nuclear annihilation. I look down at my great-uncle’s gold Elgin pocket watch from the 19th century. His name was John Patrick Whalen, an Irish immigrant to the US who fled England’s colonialist created famine in Ireland. It tells me it is 5:15 PM on April 21, 2022, a date, coincidentally, with a history.  Originally published at Off-Guardian No doubt John looked at his watch on this date in 1898 when the United States, after the USS Maine exploded from within in Havana harbour (a possible false flag attack), declared war on Spain in order to confiscate Spanish territories – Cuba, Puerto Rico,...

Ben Norton May 18, 2022 NATO sees Ukrainians as mere cannon fodder in its imperial proxy war on Russia The US-led NATO military alliance has made it clear that it is willing to fight to the last Ukrainian in order to bleed Russia and advance Western geopolitical interests. In a shockingly blunt admission, The Washington Post acknowledged that some NATO member states want “Ukrainians to keep fighting, and dying” in order to prevent Russia from making political gains. Originally published at Globalresearch In an April 5 report on peace talks between Ukraine and Russia, the major US newspaper disclosed that NATO is afraid that Kyiv may give in to some of Moscow’s demands. The Washington Post wrote explicitly: “For some in NATO, it’s better for the Ukrainians to keep fighting, and dying than to achieve a peace that comes too early or at too high a cost to Kyiv and the rest of Europe.” Anonymous...

A 30 mins panel discussion led by Ms Liu Xin, a very important TV personality known to CGTN’s 150 million viewers because of her program “The Point”. CGTN stands for China Global Television Network – more about it here. And here is its YouTube Channel. The participants in this edition of “The Point” are: Yury Tavrovsky, chairman of Experts Commission of Russian-Chinese Committee for Friendship, Peace and Development Ulrich Brückner, professor, Stanford University in Berlin Michael E. O’Hanlon, senior fellow and director of research in Foreign Policy at the Brookings Institution Brian Berletic, Geopolitical Analyst, Bangkok And here it is on YouTube. Enjoy the debate! Is this type of reasoning, based on decades of free research and knowledge-building, of merit in a democracy and for the discussion about NATO?If you think so, TFF would be grateful for your support. Thanks!

Jan Oberg May 19, 2022 This short article aims to merely illustrate – not prove – the difference between security political intellectualism and ignorance. It does not focus on peace – theories, ideas, concept or policies – simply because none of the personalities appearing below are in the business of peace. By means of some videos, I aim to illustrate the differences between security political intellectualism and the kind of populist rhetorics that has become so widespread. Weapons have been around for decades but mostly managed by elites who operated within some kind of intellectual framework – agreeing or not agreeing with its characteristics is not the point here. Most people who conducted security politics decades ago were well-educated and experienced compared with most of today’s security political decision-makers. This overall intellectual disarmament coupled to ever-higher levels of military armament and the recent talk about the use of nuclear weapons...

Richard E. Rubenstein May 17, 2022 Following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on February 24, it was fair to call the ensuing conflict “Putin’s war.” True, the U.S. and Europe could probably have avoided the invasion by calling a halt to NATO expansion and negotiating seriously with the Russians about key security issues. True, U.S. arms had been pouring into Ukraine since the overthrow of the pro-Russian government there in 2014, and Ukraine was using them to kill pro-Russian separatists in the Donbass region. But Putin was still responsible for crossing the line into organized violence. It does matter who shoots first, and he shot first. Originally published at Transcend.org Even so, that is not the end of the discussion. Far from it. At first one could rightfully have called this Putin’s war, but it has now become Joe Biden’s war as well. Consider what has happened so far. The advance...

Sunday the 15th, 2022, I was asked to comment from a peace research point of view on Finland and Sweden’s moves to become full members of NATO. I gladly do so since it is a long time since I commented on anything on RT. For those who think that it is surprising or even wrong to speak with Russian media, my media policy can be found here. The denial of access by the EU and others to RT is an indisputable violation of human rights – but most people do not know it. I’m talking about the UN’s International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights Article 19 from 1966. If you want to get around that violation of your rights, download and pay for a proxy server such as PrivateVPN, set it to e.g. Finland and you will be able to access RT. Then you may also read my front...

Jan Oberg 14 maj, 2022 Engelska versionen av denna finns här Detta är vad västvärlden intellektuellt sett – mitt i sin gränslöst självrättfärdiga, militaristiska sinnesstämning – inte förmår att se: Natos expansionspolitik skapade – och är ansvarig för – konflikten. Ryssland skapade – och är ansvarigt för – kriget. Det finns inget våld som inte har sin grund i underliggande konflikter. Konflikt- och fredskunniga människor talar därför om båda. Och om de vill ha fred ökar de inte symptomen – kriget – utan de tar itu med den verkliga orsaken, konflikten, och ber de stridande parterna att berätta vad de fruktar och vad de vill och tar sig sedan steg för steg vidare mot en hållbar lösning. Men varken mainstream media eller politiker har civilkurage nog att ta itu med konflikten. Det handlar bara om kriget och bara om Ryssland/Putin som måste straffas, oavsett vilket pris kommande generationer ska betala....

Hats off to Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines for her Senate May 10, 2022, testimony on the likelihood of nuclear war with Russia, even though parts of it were surreal, as we discuss below. From an intelligence perspective, she told it like it is. Not only that; she took the quintessential nuclear-use question a step beyond what CIA Director William Burns had told the Financial Times on May 7. Burns pointed out that Russian President Vladimir Putin “doesn’t believe he can afford to lose” in Ukraine. Burns added: “I don’t think this means Putin is deterred at this point because he staked so much on the choice that he made to launch this invasion that I think he’s convinced right now that doubling down still will enable him to make progress.” Whether or not Burns read our brief VIPS Memo of May 1, it was, frankly, good to see...

Jan Oberg May 12, 2022 Here’s what the West is intellectually unable – in the midst of its boundlessly self-righteous, militarist mood to see: NATO’s expansion policy created – and is responsible for – the conflict. Russia created – and is responsible for – the war. There exists no violence which is not rooted in underlying conflicts. Conflict and peace literate people, therefore, talk about both. And if they want peace, they do not increase the symptoms – the war – they address the real cause, the conflict and ask the conflicting parties to tell what they fear and what they want and then move, step-by-step towards a sustainable solution. But neither the mainstream media nor politicians have the civil courage to address the conflict. It’s only about the war and only about Russia/Putin who must be punished, no matter the price to be paid by future generations. If we...

Diplomatic Security Service conducts a training at the National Cathedral in Washington in 2020. (U.S. State Department) Sam Husseini May 2, 2022 The late U.S. secretary of state’s association with Biden and the Clintons can be seen as a war-making, mutually absolving clique, writes Sam Husseini. It’s fitting that U.S. President Joe Biden and Bill and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should eulogize Madeleine Albright at the mammoth Episcopalian institution calling itself the “National Cathedral.” After all, just last year, Albright eulogized fellow war maker, “trailblazer” and fellow Episcopalian Colin Powell there for his “honesty, dignity, loyalty and an unshakable commitment to his calling and word.”  Albright, Biden and the Clintons covered for each other’s criminal war making — and ultimately, they all enabled and covered for Republican criminality as well. All showed they were capable of murderous deceits.  Originally published at Consortiumnews.com It sparked some measure of attention during the 2020 election,...

The Guardian of April 25, 2022, and several other media brought the news top front page about the Russia-Ukraine war: US ‘wants to see Russia weakened’ – the sensational headline statement by US Secretary of Defence, Lloyd Austin, after his and Secretary of State, Antony Blinken’s surprise visit to Kyiv. It was stated also in connection with yet another US arms package for Ukraine (US$ 738 million – making total US military assistance to Ukraine pass US$ 3,4 billion) and before the meeting on April 26 in Ramstein, Germany where more than 40 countries gathered to intensify their cooperation about further militarizing the conflict with Russia played out of Ukraine. Please note – there has been no similar meeting about how to de-escalate, mediate or whatever else to stop the war. Here is the Pentagon transcript of what Austin said and Blinken endorsed: “SECRETARY AUSTIN: I’ll just start and I’ll...

Trita Parsi April 18, 2022 The West appears blind to its own hypocrisy and narrow interests in calling for a rules-based order. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been nothing short of brilliant in his outreach to Western audiences. The overwhelming Western support for Ukraine is due not only to the brutality of Russia’s illegal invasion, but also to the astuteness and charisma with which Zelenskyy has made Ukraine’s case for aid. But as effective as Zelenskyy has been in drumming up Western support, Ukraine’s message has been far less compelling to audiences in the Global South, where many countries have declined to join Western campaigns to sanction Russia’s economy and isolate it diplomatically. This was vividly clear at the Doha Forum last month in Qatar, where Zelenskyy and Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister Emine Dzhaparova were given a big platform. A powerful communicator in her own right, Dzhaparova — a Muslim Tatar from Crimea...