On February 1 the New York Times ran a front page story by two of
their journalists confirming the intentions of the United States to
increase its occupation of and military presence in Europe particularly
the east. Under the title “U.S. Fortifying Europe’s East to Deter Putin”
the story sets out just one in a continuing series of acts of
aggression against Russia. At the same time as the Americans announced
this action they pretended to negotiate with Russia in Geneva about a
solution to the American and allied aggression against Syria.
Of course, the story begins with the lie in the headline of a need to
“deter Putin.” It then continues with the standard set of lies and
propaganda about world events that we always get from the government of
that country. No one outside the United States can read these things
without laughing or crying, but of course they are intended to justify
the criminal actions of the American government and ruling elite to the
people who have to pay for the criminal wars they conduct, that is, to
justify the unjustifiable, to the citizens of the United States.
There is no need to enter once again into the real history of events
in Ukraine, Syria, Europe, Asia, Africa and all the places in the world
where American and European meddling have wreaked havoc and loosed Chaos
with the dogs of war. The history is well known by those who are
interested. But there is a need to comprehend the meaning of what the
United States is doing by announcing that it will increase its military
budget for eastern Europe by 400%, from a current budget of $789 million
to $3.4 billion in 2017. Since the Russians are not the threat in the
region, but the United States and NATO are, the placement of military
hardware to support a full armoured combat brigade in the region, and
right on top of Russia’s borders can have only one other purpose,
aggression.
One can even argue that the pattern of moving equipment and forces
continually nearer to Russia’s border, the continuous military exercises
and their increasing control of the governments of the east European
states in lockstep with this military build up, looks far too much like
Nazi Germany’s build of forces prior to Operation Barbarossa, the Nazi
invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. History never repeats itself
exactly, we have learned that much. But the overall pattern is very
similar and the objectives and motivations remain the same.
The story also quoted American officials as stating that the
equipment could be used in Syria, another threat to Russia. But the main
threat is against Russia itself. Indeed the writers stated,
“Still, there is no doubt the primary target of the funding is Russia.”
The Times admits that the 1997 agreement known as the NATO-Russia
Founding Act stipulates that neither side can place forces along their
respective borders and admits that the deployment of American and NATO
troops along Russia’s borders is a clear violation of the agreement.
But, being the weasels that they are, they always state that wrong is
right and so they simply deny they are in violation of the agreement or
excuse it based on ”Russia’s incursion” into Crimea. This makes no sense
of course since the United States took over Ukraine as its protectorate
in the coup in 2014. Its forces have been there ever since and it has
been in violation of the agreement from the day it was signed as NATO
occupied, one by one, the countries formerly protected from NATO by the
Soviet Union. The agreement means nothing to them. They just shrug their
shoulders if it is mentioned and chew their gum.
Since the build-up of American
forces in Europe is explicitly directed at Russia and since a few months
ago an American general stated that they expected Russia to engage in
“hybrid warfare” in the Baltic states and regard this as a “certainty”
for which NATO has to prepare an objective observer must ask whether
the US itself intends to stage a series of provocations in the Baltic
and blame them on Russia.
The Americans, British and Turks have created a series of
provocations in the past weeks, accusing Russia of killing civilians in
Syria, of violating Turkish, therefore NATO airspace, of murdering
Russians abroad on the personal orders of President Putin, and as with
other leaders they have attacked and murdered in the past, now accuse
President Putin of corruption, a charge they levelled at President
Milosevic when he was attacked and then finally arrested in Serbia.
This writer had the opportunity of meeting with Serbian officials who
were in charge of the case against Milosevic at that time and I asked
them if the corruption charges were true. They told me that they were
completely false but that the Americans pushed them to charge Milosevic
in order to undermine support for him in Serbia and as an excuse to hold
him until they could kidnap him and take him in chains to their NATO
tribunal in The Hague. They further told me that the Americans had
threatened to bomb them again if they refused to cooperate.
The accusations made against President Putin are in line with this
strategy of setting him up to be labelled in the west as a criminal with
whom negotiations are impossible and therefore, setting the stage for
sowing confusion amongst the Russian people about their own leaders, and
undermining support for their government. But this is only one purpose
and since the Russian people are very aware of how the game works, it is
unlikely that this campaign of defamation against President Putin will
have any success inside Russia. So, the primary objective is to demonise
him in the eyes of the western public in order to justify further
aggression against Russia and since these stories receive saturation
coverage in the west, the NATO propagandists are succeeding.
It took nearly ten years for Operation Barbarossa to be set up and
put into effect, from the time that Hitler was made Chancellor of
Germany and began to discuss with the British and French his intentions
of attacking the Soviet Union. The British and French were very content
for the Nazis to do that and there is no doubt that the primary
objective of Hitler was always the crushing of Russia. That the attack
failed is one of the reasons the NATO leaders snubbed the Moscow Victory
Parade last summer since they now identify themselves with the
objectives of the defeated Nazi regime.
Some doubt that the NATO powers will actually attack Russia and risk a
world war and point out that the forces being placed in eastern Europe
are too weak to mount any attack. But they miss the point, which is that
the build up is steady, and it is increasing, along with the propaganda
and increased economic warfare. The Americans are really prepositioning
resources, stores, equipment and headquarters and logistics bases that
can be rapidly used to build up NATO forces at the right moment. The
question is when that moment will be.
Unless the European powers can escape the American pressure and
become independent states once again and unless a new regime dedicated
to peace arises in the United States, neither of which look likely for
the foreseeable future, it rests with us, the citizens of the world to
get off our chairs and get on the streets and demand that these
preparations for world war be stopped. For, unless that happens, the
march to war by the Americans and their NATO lieutenants appears to be
inexorable.
Christopher Black is an international criminal
lawyer based in Toronto, he is a member of the Law Society of Upper
Canada and he is known for a number of high-profile cases involving
human rights and war crimes, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
Source: Global Research
Originally posted in New Easter Outlook
|