Inter-Korean Talks

By Stephen Lendman

Diplomacy is the only way to avoid catastrophic war on the Korean peninsula – something neither Pyongyang or Seoul wants. Both countries acted responsibly by agreeing to talks today, their first ones in over two years. Last week, a hotline between both nations was reconnected.

Reportedly, Pyongyang agreed to participate in the February Winter Games in South Korea.

According to the Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), Kim Jong-un “clearly stated that our country needs to stick to the policy, which will lead to the breakthrough of the all-sufficient unification,” adding:

“It is not worth stirring up the past and recalling the specifics of relations with Seoul. Instead of this, relations between the North and South must be improved.”

“It is not only about the normalization of the inter-Korean relations, but about the reconciliation of the nation and its free-will unification.” Above all, it’s crucial to avoid war on the peninsula, catastrophic for both countries if occurs. On Tuesday in Panmunjom along the DMZ, North Korean Committee for the Peaceful Reunification of the Country chairman Ri Son-gwon said “(t)oday, North and South Korea will engage in talks in a serious and sincere stance,” hoping for “precious” results.

South Korean Deputy Unification Minister Chun Hae-sung explained “North Korea said that they are determined to make today’s talks fruitful, and make it a groundbreaking opportunity.”

It will send athletes and high-level officials to the Winter Games. Delegations from both countries may march together in the opening ceremony. South Korean Unification Minister Cho Myoung-gyon said “(w)e will make efforts to make the PyeongChang Games and the Paralympics a ‘peace festival’ and help it serve as the first step toward an improvement in inter-Korean ties.”

South Korean President Moon Jae-in hopes today’s talks, participation of the DPRK in the Winter Games, and follow-up dialogue will improve inter-Korean relations.

On Tuesday, senior advisor to Rex Tillerson on Asia policy Brian Hook explained the Trump administration intends maintaining pressure on Pyongyang “until we achieve our policy (imperial) goals.”

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert irresponsibly accused Kim of trying “to drive a wedge” between Washington and Seoul. Like its predecessors since the Truman era, the Trump administration rejects good faith dialogue with Pyongyang. In 1994, US/North Korean talks were held. An Agreed Framework was signed.

Pyongyang agreed to freeze and replace its nuclear power plant program with a light water nuclear reactor, along with steps toward normalizing relations with Washington.

The Clinton administration agreed to build two light-water reactors by 2003. In the interim, it would supply Pyongyang with 500,000 tons of heavy fuel annually. US sanctions would be lifted. The DPRK would be removed from the State Department’s state sponsors of terrorism list. Both countries agreed to provide “formal assurances” against threatened or actual use of nuclear weapons.

Pyongyang agreed to allow Washington to monitor its nuclear sites. The deal collapsed after GW Bush called North Korea part of an axis of evil in his first State of the Union address. The DPRK upheld its part of the deal. Washington systematically breached it, reneging on its word. North Korea responded by resuming its plutonium enrichment program.

Its nuclear weapons deterrent was developed because Washington can’t be trusted. Its hostility toward the DPRK risks US aggression on the country. North Korea’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs are solely for defense, not offense. Responsibility for peninsula tensions lies in Washington, not Pyongyang.

Significantly improved inter-Korean relations remain unattainable as long as America exerts pressure on Seoul to prevent them. US administrations treat the country like a colony, occupying it with military forces, refusing to consider a formal end to the 1950s Korean War.

Republicans and undemocratic Dems want North Korea used as a punching bag – China America’s main regional adversary. Longstanding US plans call for replacing all sovereign independent countries with pro-Western puppet regimes – China and Russia Washington’s top two targeted nations.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Stephen Lendman was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

North Korea and South Korea Are Threatening to Seek Peace

By William Boardman, Reader Supported News

Rex Tillerson has made a career of serving corporate power, first as top climate-denying corporate honcho at Exxon, and now as part of the appalling and sociopathic Trump cabinet. Not surprising he should be hurling imperialist insults at North Korea, since he apparently values careerism and pride over possible vaporization via nuclear exchanges. Or maybe he’ll say what is required to avoid being fired by the Big Bumbling Idiot currently in charge.

Korean détente puts decades of failed, corrupt US policy at risk

few gestures of mutual respect between North Korea and South Korea during the first week of January are a long way from a stable, enduring peace on the Korean peninsula, but these gestures are the best signs of sanity there in decades. On January 1, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un called for immediate dialogue with South Korea ahead of next month’s Winter Olympics there. On January 2, South Korea’s President Moon Jae-in proposed that talks begin next week in Panmunjom (a border village where intermittent talks to end the Korean War have continued since 1953). On January 3, the two Koreas reopened a communications hotline that has been dysfunctional for almost two years (requiring South Korea to use a megaphone across the border in order to repatriate several North Korean fishermen). Talks on January 9 are expected to include North Korean participation in the Winter Olympics that begin February 9 in Pyeongchang, South Korea.

Kim Jong-un’s call for dialogue may or may not have surprised US officials, but reactions from the White House press secretary, the UN Ambassador, and the State Department were uniformly hostile and negative. The most civil was Heather Nauert at State, who said, with little nuance: “Right now, if the two countries decide that they want to have talks, that would certainly be their choice.” She might as well have added “bless their little hearts.” Patronize is what the US does when it’s being polite. More typical bullying came from UN Ambassador Nikki Haley: “We won’t take any of the talks seriously if they don’t do something to ban all nuclear weapons in North Korea.”

US policy is hopelessly tone-deaf if it believes that bell can be un-rung. But that’s the way the US has behaved for decades, tone-deaf and unilaterally demanding, insisting that the US and the US alone has the right to determine what at least some sovereign nations can and cannot do. In December, anticipating a North Korean satellite launch (not a missile test), Secretary of State Rex Tillerson told the United Nationswith straight-faced moral arrogance:

The North Korean regime’s continuing unlawful missile launches and testing activities signal its contempt for the United States, its neighbors in Asia, and all members of the United Nations. In the face of such a threat, inaction is unacceptable for any nation.

Well, no, that’s only true if you believe you rule the world. It’s not true in any context where parties have equal rights. And the US secretary’s covert urging of others to take aggressive action tiptoes toward a war crime, as does the implied US threat of aggressive war.

The obtuse inflexibility of US policy revealed itself yet again in the initial groupthink response to a different part of Kim Jong-un’s January 1 speech where he indicated that he had a “nuclear button” on his desk and would not hesitate to use it if anyone attacked North Korea. Under constant threat from the US and its allies since 1953, North Korea has made the rational choice to become a nuclear power, to have a nuclear deterrent, to have some semblance of national security. The US, irrationally, has refused to accept this with North Korea even while supporting Israel’s nuclear deterrent. Kim Jong-un’s button reference elicited a reflexive US reiteration of failed policy in florid Trumpian form when the president tweeted on January 2:

North Korean Leader Kim Jong Un just stated that the “Nuclear Button is on his desk at all times.” Will someone from his depleted and food starved regime please inform him that I too have a Nuclear Button, but it is a much bigger & more powerful one than his, and my Button works!

This twitter feed from the Great Disruptor got the twittering classes much atwitter over nothing more important than sexual innuendo, while fleeing from yet another presidential threat of nuclear destruction. And then came the firestorm of “Fire and Fury,” and almost all thought of Korea was driven from public discourse, even though what happens in Korea is orders of magnitude more important than what Michael Wolff says Steve Bannon said about Trumpian treason.

But the facts on the ground in Korea have changed materially in the past year despite US bullying and interference. First, North Korea has become a nuclear power, no matter how puny, and it will continue to become more capable of defending itself unless the US thinks it would be better to do the unthinkable (what are the odds?). The second, more important change in Korea is that South Korea shed itself of a corrupt president beholden to US interests and, in May, inaugurated Moon Jae-in, who has actively sought reconciliation with the North for years before his election.

US policy has failed for more than six decades to achieve any resolution of the conflict, not even a formal end to the Korean War. The conventional wisdom, as posed by The New York Times, is a dead end: “The United States, the South’s key ally, views the overture with deep suspicion.” In a rational world, the US would have good reason to support its ally, the president of South Korea, in re-thinking a stalemate. Even President Trump seems to think so, in a hilariously narcissistic tweet of January 4:

With all of the failed “experts” weighing in, does anybody really believe that talks and dialogue would be going on between North and South Korea right now if I wasn’t firm, strong and willing to commit our total “might” against the North. Fools, but talks are a good thing!

Talks are a good thing. One of North Korea’s chronic complaints, as well as a clearly legitimate grievance, has been the endless US/South Korean military exercises aimed at North Korea several times a year. In his January 1 speech, Kim Jong-un again called for South Korea to end joint military exercises with the US. On January 4, the Pentagon delayed the latest version of that clear provocation – scheduled to overlap with the Olympics. Defense Secretary Jim Mattis denied that the delay was a political gesture, saying its purpose was to provide logistical support to the Olympics (whatever that means). Whatever Mattis says, the gesture is a positive gesture and reinforces the drift toward peace, however slightly. Can it be possible that reality and sanity are getting traction? Who knows what’s really going on here? And who are the “fools” Trump refers to?

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

William M. Boardman has over 40 years experience in theatre, radio, TV, print journalism, and non-fiction, including 20 years in the Vermont judiciary. He has received honors from Writers Guild of America, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Vermont Life magazine, and an Emmy Award nomination from the Academy of Television Arts and Sciences. Reader Supported News is the Publication of Origin for this work. Permission to republish is freely granted with credit and a link back to Reader Supported News.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License

CAPTIONS AND PULL QUOTES BY THE EDITORS NOT THE AUTHORS

Comment here or on our Facebook Group page.

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Trump’s Hollow Outreach to North Korea

BE SURE TO PASS OUR ARTICLES ON TO KIN, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES

Washington’s geopolitical agenda is hard-wired under Republicans and undemocratic Dems. It seeks elimination of all sovereign independent states, wanting them replaced with pro-Western puppet rule.

North Korea is an interesting case. Since the Korean peninsula was divided along the 38th parallel post-WW II, Washington has been hostile toward the country. In the modern era, it’s a convenient punching bag – China’s regional preeminence, its economic strength, political importance and military power America’s main target, wanting unchallenged control over the Asia/Pacific.

Japan and South Korea are virtual US colonies. The late Chalmers Johnson explained, saying “(o)nce upon a time, you could trace the spread of imperialism by counting up colonies. America’s version of the colony is the military base; and by following the changing politics of global basing, one can learn much about our ever more all-encompassing imperial footprint and the militarism that grows with it, (far) more than in past empires.”

“A well-entrenched militarism (lies) at the heart of our imperial adventures. Each year, (Washington) spends more on our armed forces than all others nations on earth combined (to garrison troops” in more than two-thirds of countries worldwide.

Bases are platforms for control, intimidation and warmaking. They’re intrusive, hostile, and detrimental to local populations and world peace. Status of Forces Agreements (SOFAs) are arranged with occupied countries, permitting America to do what it pleases, ignoring laws of host nations, along with no concern for the rights and welfare of their people.

Trump laughably said he’s willing to talk to Kim Jong-un – under conditions unacceptable to North Korea and most other nations – namely, we’re boss and what we say goes. That’s the deal, no compromise.

With Pyongyang/Seoul talks upcoming on January 9, Trump was asked if he’d speak to Kim by phone.

“Sure, I always believe in talking,” he said, adding:

Kim “knows I’m not messing around. Not even a little bit, not even one-percent. He understands that.”

“At the same time, if we can come up with a very peaceful and good solution. If something can happen and something can come out of these talks, that would be a great thing for all of humanity.”

His unacceptable terms include Pyongyang rendering itself defenseless by abandoning its nuclear and ballistic missile deterrent against feared US aggression. Any bilateral rapprochement would require the DPRK to unconditionally surrender its sovereignty to US control. Conditions Washington demands are unacceptable, wanting control over planet earth, its nations, resources and populations. Its favored strategy is achieving it by endless wars of aggression.

No responsible leadership would surrender the sovereignty of its nation to control by another power.

North and South Korean officials will hold talks on Tuesday, meeting in Panmunjom along the DMZ.

According to Pyongyang’s Korean Central News Agency (KCNA), talks are “not only about the normalization of the inter-Korean relations, but about the reconciliation of the nation and its free-will unification.” China welcomes the meeting, its Foreign Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang saying:

“We hope that all relevant parties on the Korean peninsula issue will seize upon the opportunity of the Winter Olympics to meet each other halfway, return to the correct path of peacefully solving problems through dialogue and consultation.”

The DPRK’s Olympic Committee representative said his country will likely participate in the Winter Games. A Pyongyang/Seoul hotline was reopened, a positive sign. In his New Year’s address, Kim struck a conciliatory tone regarding North/South relations, saying conditions must be established for normalizing bilateral relations – a notion Washington opposes.

According to KCNA, “(t)he head of the nation clearly stated that our country needs to stick to the policy, which will lead to the breakthrough of the all-sufficient unification,” adding:

“It is not worth stirring up the past and recalling the specifics of relations with Seoul. Instead of this, relations between the North and South must be improved.”

Achieving this goal would be a significant step toward avoiding conflict on the peninsula.

America’s aim for regional dominance would suffer a body blow.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

STEPHEN LENDMAN was born in 1934 in Boston, MA. In 1956, he received a BA from Harvard University. Two years of US Army service followed, then an MBA from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania in 1960. After working seven years as a marketing research analyst, he joined the Lendman Group family business in 1967. He remained there until retiring at year end 1999. Writing on major world and national issues began in summer 2005. In early 2007, radio hosting followed. Lendman now hosts the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network three times weekly. Distinguished guests are featured. Listen live or archived. Major world and national issues are discussed. Lendman is a 2008 Project Censored winner and 2011 Mexican Journalists Club international journalism award recipient. His new site is at http://stephenlendman.org

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Kim Jong-Un’s New Year’s Address

BE SURE TO PASS OUR ARTICLES ON TO KIN, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES

Trump disgracefully calls Kim a “madman,” a characterization applying to him, not North Korea’s leader, his country’s security gravely threatened by possible US aggression. In a New Year’s address, Kim showed he wants peace, not war. He’s “open to dialogue” with Seoul, a willingness to participate in the February Olympics, saying:

“North Korea’s participation in the Winter Games will be a good opportunity to show the unity of the people, and we hope the Games will be a success.” Officials from both countries may meet to discuss DPRK participation. Kim stressed the importance of his country’s nuclear and ballistic missile programs, deterrents against possible US aggression, not to wage war he opposes.

Korea;'s Kim: No trust in the US, tha mark of rationality, not insanity as incessant propaganda would have us believe.

His address was a diplomatic message of outreach and peace. South Korean President Moon Jae-in said Pyongyang’s participation in the winter games would help insure their safety.

He urged postponing last month’s joint military exercises with Pentagon force, held as schedule because Washington remains hardline. The DPRK denounces what it calls provocative rehearsals for war, fearing it could come in the new year after the winter Olympics.

Kim said his military will focus on mass producing nuclear warheads and ballistic missiles for operational deployment” in 2018, adding: “The entire US is within range of our nuclear weapons, and a nuclear button is always on my desk.”

“This is reality, not a threat,” stressing “these weapons will be used only if our security is threatened.” North Korean nuclear and ballistic missiles capabilities don’t threaten continental America so far. Yet technological advances continue being made.

Asia/Pacific countries already are threatened if Washington attacks the DPRK, devastating nuclear war likely following – South Korea, Japan, and US regional forces likely targets in response to an attack on North Korean territory.

Kim stressed the importance of “bolster(ing)” the nation’s “military capabilities for self-defense,” not offense. A South Korean government spokesman said its leadership views Kim’s address positively, suggesting a ministerial-level dialogue with Pyongyang to discuss ways of improving relations. An uneasy armistice since the 1950s, along with America’s rage for war prevent resolving crisis conditions on the Korean peninsula.

The problem lies squarely in Washington, not Pyongyang.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

Lendman on China’s Flawed Reasoning Behind New North Korea Sanctions & other topics

BE SURE TO PASS OUR ARTICLES ON TO KIN, FRIENDS AND COLLEAGUES

China’s Flawed Reasoning Behind New North Korea Sanctions

Sanctions don’t work. They’re counterproductive and ineffective. They’re imposed for punitive reasons, yet accomplish nothing other than harming ordinary people in targeted nations.

A picture released by the North Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) on 23 January 2014 shows North Korean leader Kim Jong-un (C) inspecting a North Korean Army unit conducting a winter drill. KCNA reported it without elaborating on the timing of the visit or the venue. EPA/KCNA /LANDOV

US sanctions on Russia failed, its economy growing again this year, expecting greater growth in 2018. Many years of Iran and North Korea sanctions did nothing to change their policies, just the opposite. Both countries became more determined to defend themselves against feared US aggression.

Nuclear weapons aside which Iran lacks, its military matches or exceeds the capability of other Middle East nations. Nuclear armed North Korea’s military is formidable. Both nations face the risk of US aggression. In Iran’s case, Israel poses a major threat. For both countries, military power is essential for self-defense, neither nation an aggressor. Their histories proves it, providing clear evidence neither country threatens any others. They’re threatened, not the other way around, requiring a strong defense. North Korea decided to include nuclear weapons in its arsenal, believing they’re the best way to deter US aggression.

Iran advocates a nuclear-free region, a world free from these weapons of mass destruction. It developed its military with powerful conventional weapons – never attacking another nation in centuries, threatening none now.

Piling on more sanctions against these or other countries makes them more determined to enhance their defense capabilities. Anything less would be irresponsible.

The problem of their military capabilities lies in Washington, not their seats of government.

If America’s rage for global dominance didn’t exist, nor Israel’s quest for regional hegemony, North Korea and Iran wouldn’t have gone all-out to develop potent military capabilities.

In going along with Washington’s demand for tougher Security Council sanctions on North Korea, along with earlier rounds, Russia and China acted irresponsibly.

They bowed to America’s imperial will, failing to reject it, imposing enormous harm on ordinary North Koreans, accomplishing nothing else.

According to China’s Global Times (GT), representing Beijing’s views, its government “object(ed) to a maritime military blockade against Pyongyang that might trigger conflict.”

Fact: By banning most DPRK imports, including food and other essentials, China and Russia effectively agreed to a partial blockade – a shameful act by both countries, siding with an imperial aggressor, opposing the aggrieved nation.

GT: New sanctions show “the determination of major powers to prevent the country conducting further tests.”

Fact: Each round of sanctions encouraged Pyongyang to continue developing its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities, nothing to curtail them.

GT: “The international community is hoping new sanctions stop Pyongyang conducting nuclear activities and make Washington more patient to break the stalemate.”

Fact: Chances for accomplishing these objectives are virtually nil. Russia and China know it – why pretend otherwise!

GT: “The US military threat does not sound like a mere verbal menace anymore. Now is undoubtedly the most insecure time for Pyongyang since the 1950s.”

Fact: Indeed so! Sanctions achieve nothing toward reducing the threat North Korea faces.

Fact: America is a notorious bully, a threat to world peace. The only language it understands is force, targeting nations it can easily overwhelm.

Fact: Combined, Russian and Chinese military capabilities match Washington’s. Instead of going along with its imperial designs, including sanctions on North Korea, both countries should challenge the Trump administration – short of risking war.

Fact: When confronted by strength matching its own, bullies usually back off. Failing to do so makes matters worse.

In the case of North Korea, it advances things closer to war on the peninsula, the risk greater after the latest round of sanctions, not the other way around.

GT: China is “sympathetic toward North Korean people that suffer the hardships. We hope the sanctions only target its nuclear development and missile activities. We do not want to hurt people’s livelihoods or impair the stability of the” nation.

Fact: That’s precisely what multiple rounds of sanctions did. Since first imposed on its nuclear program in 2006, it steadily advanced, far more capable now than then, along with ballistic missiles able to travel longer distances.

A nuclear-free world would be ideal – not as long as America maintains an arsenal, its capability Trump and other US hawks intend enhancing.

Perhaps they’ll be used against North Korea, Iran and/or another targeted country ahead.

The DPRK wants peace, a formal end to the 1950s conflict, recognition of its sovereign rights, and oppressive sanctions lifted.

America wants endless wars of aggression, seeking subservience of all nations to its will.

Unless challenged, global war may be inevitable – China and Russia the only nations able to do it effectively.

Appeasing hegemons doesn’t work. Confronting them responsibly may be the only way “to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind” – as stated by the UN Charter’s Preamble.

A Final Comment

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]n response to the latest SC sanctions, Pyongyang’s Korean Central News Agency (KCNA) said the following:

“We will further consolidate our self-defensive nuclear deterrence aimed at eradicating the US nuclear threats and establishing the balance of force with it.”

DPRK nuclear weapons aim to protect the nation against “the blackmail of American imperialists.”

“The US should not forget that the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea has rapidly emerged as a strategic state capable of posing a substantial nuclear threat to the US mainland.”

Likely not yet, perhaps soon, and the DPRK’s message is clear. It intends pursuing its nuclear and ballistic missile capabilities as long as it fears possible US aggression.

No matter how severe, sanctions won’t stop it from advancing its ability to defend the nation.

WaPo Russophobia

[dropcap]R[/dropcap]epublicans, undemocratic Dems, and media scoundrels criticize Russia for its sovereign independence, its opposition to America’s imperial agenda, its support for multi-world polarity – inventing reasons to vilify the country and its leadership.

The neocon/CIA-connected Washington Post is notoriously Russophobic. It latest tirade irresponsibly claims “Russian submarines are prowling around vital undersea cables…making NATO nervous,” adding:

Activity is “dramatically stepped up,” claiming what’s nonexistent is “part of a more aggressive naval posture…giv(ing) the Kremlin the power to sever or tap into vital data lines…”

Fact: Russia is a preeminent world peace leader, threatening no other nations, at war with none.

Fact: Its geopolitical agenda is polar opposite America’s, waging endless wars of aggression, threatening all nations not subservient to its will, deploring diplomacy, confrontation and belligerence its favored strategies.

Why would Russia want to threaten the “undersea infrastructure of NATO nations? What benefit could it gain? Like virtually all other Western accusations against the Kremlin, this one is baseless, the latest example of irresponsible Russia bashing. According to WaPo, NATO intends reestablishing a command post to secure the North Atlantic. It’s increasing anti-submarine warfare capabilities, along with developing advanced submarine detection aircraft.

Why when no threats exist, just invented ones? Claiming them is an old trick to justify unjustifiably greater military spending, diverting more of the nation’s resources for militarism and belligerence, reducing amounts for vital homeland needs, including an excuse to further erode social justice programs.

WaPo: “Britain’s top military commander…warned that Russia could imperil the cables that form the backbone of the modern global economy.”

What utter rubbish! Russia is part of the global economy. Why would it harm its own interests?

Britain’s air chief marshal Stuart Peach warned if cables are cut or disrupted, (it) would immediately and potentially catastrophically affect both our economy and other ways of living…”

They’re in no danger of being disrupted or cut by Russia – maybe jeopardized by Washington and Britain to falsely blame the Kremlin for something it would never do – a possible joint false flag they may be planning, or something as nefarious.

WaPo added more baseless accusations, claiming Moscow threatens NATO aircraft and troops.

US-dominated NATO expanded close to Russia’s borders, breaking then-Secretary of State James Baker’s “iron-clad” pledge to Mikhail Gorbachev not to expand the alliance “one inch eastward.”

Today, US-led NATO forces surround Russia, posing a major threat to its security, not the other way around.

Moscow threatens no other nations, seeks mutual cooperation with them all worldwide, and is committed to global peace and stability. Its record speaks for itself, dispelling Big Lies about its agenda.

America and its rogue allies pursue endless wars of aggression – posing humanity’s greatest threat.

WaPo is a CIA house organ. Its geopolitical reporting lacks credibility. Its Russia bashing goes on endlessly.

Its support for US imperial wars of aggression is longstanding, along with its disdain for world peace and stability.

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]