Rebellion in Munich

horiz-long grey

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. WE MUST BREAK THE IMPERIAL DISINFORMATION MACHINE.

Sophie Scholl-
THE FINAL DAYS

My generation has seen that history does repeat itself. We know world wars I and II and we have seen “regime change” in action from country to country, from Libya to Iraq. Those who think that history does not repeat itself might read some of these lines about what once happened and what is happening today.


Sophie with soldiers.

After World War II the area with the great fountain in front of Munich’s Ludwig-Maximilian University (LMU) on the famed Ludwigsstrasse was named the Geschwister Scholl Platz in honor of the anti-Nazi brother and sister Scholl who led the student White Rose resistance movement in 1943 against the Nazi dictatorship. In the main building of the university—in which I also studied in the 1960s—not many years earlier Sophia and Hans Scholl had distributed anti-regime leaflets and paid for it with their lives.

In the best known film about the Scholl siblings, The Final Days, (2005, see addendum) Sophie (Sophia) Scholl joins the White Rose student organization run by her brother Hans. They have prepared copies of their sixth anti-Nazi leaflet. Sophie and Hans place stacks of the leaflets outside university lecture rooms. With only minutes left until the period ends, Sophie then goes to the top floor and pushes the remaining copies over the balustrade. As Hans and Sophie are leaving, a janitor who saw Sophie scatter the leaflets holds them until police arrive and arrest them. The siblings are taken to the Munich Stadelheim Prison and interrogated by the Gestapo. Initially Sophie claims she and Hans had nothing to do with the fliers; she just noticed them in the hall and pushed a stack off the railing because it is in her nature to play pranks. She is about to be dismissed when the order arrives to hold her. The investigation has incontrovertible evidence that Sophie and Hans were responsible for the distribution of anti-Nazi leaflets. Sophie concedes her involvement (as does Hans) but determined to protect the others she maintains that the production and distribution of the leaflets in cities throughout the region were entirely the work of her brother and herself. Sophie argues that before 1933 (the date of the Nazi take-over) laws guaranteed freedom of speech. She then describes atrocities committed by the Nazis including reports of concentration camps related by soldiers returning from the Eastern Front. She assumes all blame, and refuses to name accomplices.

Sophie, her brother and a married friend with three children, Christoph Probst, are charged with treason, troop demoralization and abetting the enemy. In a show trial they are condemned to death. Sophie declares that many people agree with what she and her group have said and written, but they dare not express such thoughts. She has the courage to tell the court that “where we stand today, you (the procurator) will stand soon.” That same day Sophie is guillotined. The blade falls and the picture goes black. Footsteps are heard, then Hans's voice exclaims "Es lebe die Freiheit!" ("Long live Freedom!"), before the blade falls again. Probst is brought in next and the blade falls once more. In the closing shot, thousands of leaflets fall from the sky over Munich. A title explains that copies of the White Rose manifesto were smuggled to Scandinavia and then to England, where the Allies printed millions of copies of the "Manifesto of the Students of Munich" that were subsequently dropped on German cities. The first frames of the credits list the names of the seven members of the White Rose group who were executed, more than a dozen who were imprisoned, and supporters and sympathizers who received draconian punishments.

Twenty-five years later during student rebellions across the West, in Munich Sophia and Hans Scholl were remembered. They were already symbols of resistance; now they became a reminder that history does indeed repeat itself. Courage was the question. Courage has always been the ultimate question for each of us. After all, knowledge requires courage. Again today, in another place and time, I have recalled the Scholls. Maybe that is part of the reason that in recent days I began keeping a Facebook log of manifestations of Fascistic violence throughout Italy, echoing the way it began in the 1930s in Germany, and now what is happening in many places in the world.

December 6, 2017: Fascists-Nazis are on the attack across all of Italy. Today Nazi-Fascist demonstrations in front of the offices of the Liberal La Repubblica, one of Europe's major newspapers, and the leftist Espresso weekly magazine, both in Rome. "We're here to stay, they announce. "No truce now." and they are strong throughout the country. Masked faces, fire bombs in the center of Rome. Fascists-Nazis! No holds barred.

December 7, 2017: militants of Fascist Forza Nuova (New Force) are rampaging throughout Italy. After yesterday's demonstrations at the newspaper, La Repubblica and left-wing weekly Espresso, handmade bombs were planted early this morning in front of a Carabiniere station on Rome's central Piazza San Giovanni. At the same time the press is reporting on extensive million Euro financial dealings of Forza Nuova (FN) in Kiev, Ukraine and in Crimea. These are dangerous signals of the growing Fascist menace and financial maneuvers to support it. Let no one think spreading Fascism in Europe or the USA is merely sensationalistic journalism. It started this way for Hitler in Munich and Mussolini in Rome. The Nazi government in Ukraine is becoming a symbol of what is possible elsewhere. The history of Fascism is being repeated.

December 10, 2017: militants of Forza Nuova and anti-Fascists clashed on the streets of a cold Milan, the capital of north Italy, clashes squashed then by police anti-riot forces. The tam tam of the social networks got many anti-fascists on the streets in record time and the Fascists got the worst of the conflict this time. The Fascists were on the streets to demand that public housing be awarded only to Italians, not immigrants. Opposition to immigrants is a major point on the Fascist agenda which creates support for their organizations such as Forza Nuova in Milan and Casa Pound in Rome, in general, among the lower working classes especially in Italy’s major cities.

Everyday history repeats itself. Especially historical evils. It does not require courage to become aware of what evils are happening around us. Courage is however required to do something about those evils. Before arriving in Munich I had witnessed the first stirrings among the student population in Berkeley. I had admired the fiery orators, and imagined emulating them. I marveled at their awareness and interpretations of the events in the world: the Bay of Pigs, the Berlin Wall and the Cold War.

Munich-München: While living in Munich after Slavic studies at Berkeley I began reading my Lenin and my Marx more seriously, more personally, studies which eventually changed my world outlook. I had trouble grasping the historical difficulty of synchronizing European Socialism with Russian Communism and the significance of the concept of revolution. Not that I believed then in the possibility of the resurgence of Nazism that had assassinated its best people; Hitler was dead and gone forever. As was his evil spirit, I thought. But I still did not realize that the much ballyhooed de-nazification never actually took place. Instead the U.S. government had enlisted German Nazis in its war against the Soviet Union. Russia too grabbed the few nuclear scientists it could in its efforts to catch up with America’s nuclear capabilities, while the USA and the Vatican assisted a great number of top Nazis to escape to Latin America. Yet the times of revolution in Europe seemed were over and done, and I accepted the maxim that the history of Nazism could not repeat itself. On the other hand, it became clearer each day that Germany was an instrument of American power—not an ally as some claim today—but a vassal and an occupied country. I had witnessed it happening; authority in new Germany was infested with ex-Nazis. In 1967 the war in Vietnam was raging, over a half million US soldiers were there and the yearly military draft of young Americans growing. In that period German youth looked at everyone over forty with suspicion. Nazi! Fascist! Murderer!



[dropcap]U[/dropcap]niversity students in Munich were becoming infused with the ardor that eventually blossomed into revolutionary 1968 and gave birth to the terrorist Red Army Faktion, also known as the Baader-Meinhoff Gang. Hans and Sophia Scholl had been beheaded only a little over a decade earlier. Die Weisse Rose, the White Rose, might live again.

One precise historical precedent to the 1967-68 student revolt in Munich was remembered by some young people aiming at remaking society: on November 7, 1918 Munich workers led by the bearded Berlin journalist, pure-of-purpose Kurt Eisner had staged a socialist revolution—local and more or less spontaneously—and people discussed the role of “good intentions”—that only good could flow from good—and the eventual emergence of the ideal political leader. It was still disconcerting to me that Eisner’s politics was bloody business. For Eisner’s revolutionary regime—in the words of Max Weber ‘run by poets, semi-poets, mezzo-philosophers and schoolteachers’—left a trail of blood and violence behind it. There is a place in Munich’s Müllerstrasse where the Workers Regime executed a certain Countess Westarp and nine hostages. At some point in those years I read and remembered the Brecht quote: Welche Niedrichkeit würdest Du nicht begehen um die Niedrigkeit abzuschlagen? Eisner’s subsequent electoral defeat and assassination by the anti-Semitic Bavarian aristocrat, Count Anton von Arco-Valley, in April of the next year led to a bloody military repression of the “Socialist” participants in Catholic Bavaria’s only political deviation to the left: in the cellar in the St. Georg Palais the reactionary White Guard shot twenty-one youths of the St. Joseph Gesellenverein. Bavaria was then ripe to become the seedbed of the National Socialism of Adolph Hitler.

And it was from that history that I learned to mistrust “spontaneous revolution” ... if, that is, it is not one of the first stages of the process of real revolution. I deduced that alone spontaneous uprisings and revolts lead to repression, reaction and the crushing of the revolutionary spirit for long periods afterwards. For what kind of a evolution could a Saupreusen journalist (a Prussian pig as real Muncheners called Northerners) organize among unorganized Munich workers who were just hungry and destitute at war’s end, while even the revolt of the Spartacists-Communists led by Karl Liebknecht and Rosa Luxemburg, with a real party and the best leftist leaders of Germany behind them, was failing in Berlin.

Historians like to pose terrifying “what if questions”. Since, as it seems, Eisner’s ‘purity of purpose’, instead of engendering good, willy-nilly paved the way for evil, the question here is again spontaneity and chance: What if Eisner had not left Berlin for Munich? Would there still have been a Bavarian Socialist State? And if not, would Adolf Hitler still have been welcomed in aristocratic Catholic Bavaria to march with his men down the avenue past Munich’s great university? And would the history of twentieth century Europe have been different? Or would the same Hitler or another Hitler have emerged elsewhere?

Busy as we youth were in the 1960s with the festive side of Munich, Oktoberfest and Carnival parties, my friends and I didn’t often discuss political subjects like Capitalism and Socialism. Yet, my own past in the American South seemed dead and sometimes I heard a summons, like a call to the future, a future that weighed on my past. I began to wonder about that past: if instead I had been born German in the post-WWI period, I too might have fought for the same ideals as Sophia and Hans Scholl; or, like Brecht I too might have committed ‘any vileness in order to eliminate vileness’. Or, I came to realize, if I had been born German of an earlier generation I could have been together with Rosa Luxemburg—or perhaps by a twist of destiny become a National Socialist Nazi.

Time and place are a mystery. Everything seems to be circles and repetitions. And chance. Subjects and objects. Who decides which is which? Who decides such things? Who brings a Hitler to Munich? How and why do people like Hans and Sophia Scholl emerge from the morass? Is that truly all chance? For as Sophia said in her final words: they wanted to regain their past … the past when the law guaranteed freedom of speech. Their image of the past seems to us reconstructed. Personal. Distinct. Makes you realize that the past is always incomplete. And that history is people. So what about the personal courage she displayed? Though interesting, history cannot account for it … nor for cowardice, either. So the closest to truth might be our own interpretations of what we think might have happened … which is not always even close to reality.

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]here are times when each single event seems absolute. Eisner in Munich. Rosa Luxemburg in Berlin. I am now cognizant that nothing is absolute, for things are linked and go on changing, fundamentally, and from one moment to the next until you suddenly realize history is repeating itself. So you come to believe less and less in absolutes. You have to mistrust absolutists who demand specific answers, who demand yes or no, who prefer white to black, this to that, and use expressions like ‘in the final analysis’.

It seems I seldom understand what is happening to me while it is happening. And I’m nervous and unclear about what exactly is going on in my world today. But I believe if you open your eyes and begin to really see, you understand everything is ambiguous, ambivalent, two-edged and paradoxical. One says that is life. Still, I am aware of the helplessness you feel when you are unable to see what it is you yourself are doing. Am I alone in that? Or is it the same quagmire with others? I have hated to choose; as if I knew the correct answers and the right choices. I can only guess. I like to think I might have some minimal influence on events—maybe as much as one grain of sand influences the level of the sea. And even if I could exert any influence it might cause damage as political and military leaders prove day by day.
However, in sleepless nights, alone, you might wonder about your own courage. In such moments you might ask yourself: Would I have Sophia’s courage? Courage! The necessary quality, right and just, to awaken awareness of injustice and create dissent. The dissent that can then create the awareness that resistance is the next step … the step toward rebellion and finally revolution.

I believe it was in that period in Munich that I began realizing that I was a social being—another European idea many old friends mistrusted. But I now know, for example, that you can live in America all your life and pay taxes and vote and believe in the Constitution and hang out the flag and hold garage sales and donate to the Red Cross and to missionaries in Africa and go to church on Sunday and always fasten your seat belt and never have an inkling as to what social justice means. One wonders if heroes are born or created by circumstances.

Throughout history heroines like Sophia Scholl have emerged and stepped onto center stage. In the name of justice they have challenged Power by a demand for an apparently normal right even if established Power labels that demand state treason. But always they challenge Power: Antigone, Joan of Arc, Anne Frank and Sophia Scholl.

The question Sophia asked herself was how the individual must act under a dictatorship. She and members of The White Rose instructed Germans to passively resist the Nazi government. The pamphlet used Biblical and philosophical support for an intellectual argument of resistance. In addition to authorship, Scholl helped copy, distribute, and mail pamphlets while also managing the group's finances. She and the rest of the White Rose were arrested for distributing the sixth leaflet at Munich University on 18 February 18, 1943. In the People’s Court on February 22,1943, Scholl was recorded as saying these words:

“Somebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just don't dare express themselves as we did.”

Else Gebel who shared Sophie Scholl's cell recorded her last words before being taken away to be executed: "It is such a splendid sunny day, and I have to go .… What does my death matter if by our acts thousands are warned and alerted. Among the student body there will certainly be a revolt."

In a historical context, the White Rose's legacy has had significance for many commentators and artgists, as a demonstration of personal courage, and as a well-documented case of social dissidence in a society of violent repression, censorship, and conformist pressure. Playwright Lillian Garrett-Groag stated in Newsday on February 22, 1993, that "It (the White Rose) is possibly the most spectacular moment of resistance that I can think of in the twentieth century... The fact that five little kids, in the mouth of the wolf, where it really counted, had the tremendous courage to do what they did, is spectacular to me. I know that the world is better for them having been there, but I do not know why." In the same issue of Newsday, historian Jud Newborn noted that "You cannot really measure the effect of this kind of resistance in whether or not X number of bridges were blown up or a regime fell ... The White Rose really has a more symbolic value, but that's a very important value."

On February 22, 2003, a bust of Scholl was placed by the government of Bavaria in the Walhalla Temple for prominent Germans located near Regensburg in Bavaria. The Scholl Siblings Institute for Political Science at MLU is named for Sophia and Hans Scholl. Many local schools as well as countless streets and squares in Germany have been named after the Scholls. In 2003, in a nationwide competition to choose the top ten most important Germans of all time, Scholl and her brother Hans finished in fourth place, above Bach, Goethe, Gutenberg, Bismarck, Willy Brandt, and Albert Einstein. If the votes of young viewers alone had been counted, Sophia and Hans Scholl would have been ranked first. Earlier, readers of Brigitte, a German magazine for women, voted Scholl "the greatest woman of the twentieth century".


CINEMA, LITERATURE AND THEATER

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]n the 1970s and 1980s, there were three film accounts of Sophia Scholl and the White Rose resistance. The first film was financed by the Bavarian state government and released in the 1970s, entitled Das Versprechen (The Promise). In 1982, Percy Adlon’s Five Last Days presented Lena Stolze as Sophia Scholl in her last days from the point of view of her cellmate, Else Gebel. In the same year, Stolze repeated the role in Michael Verhoeven’s Die Weisse Rose. In February 2005, the movie about Scholl's last days, Sophie Scholl—Die letzten Tage – (The Final Days), featuring actress Julia Jentsch in the title role, was released. It was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Foreign Language Film in 2006. For her portrayal of Scholl, Jentsch won the best actress at the European Film Awards and the Silver Bear for best actress at the Berlin Film Festival.

In literature, Shattering the German Night (1986) about the White Rose by Jud Brown and Annette Dumbachs was reissued in an illustrated edition in 2006 as Sophie Scholl and the White Rose. In February 2009, History Press released Sophie Scholl: The Real Story of the Woman Who Defied Hitler by Frank McDonough. And in February 2010, Carl Hanser Verlag released Sophie Scholl: A Biography by Barbara Beuys in German.

Playwright Lillian Garrett-Groag’s play The White Rose features Sophie Scholl. We Will Not Be Silent, a drama by David Meyers of Scholl’s imprisonment and interrogation premiered at the Contemporary American Theater Festival in Shepherdstown, West Virginia in July 2017. 


GAITHER STEWART—Historians like to pose terrifying “what if questions”. Since, as it seems, Eisner’s ‘purity of purpose’, instead of engendering good, willy-nilly paved the way for evil, the question here is again spontaneity and chance: What if Eisner had not left Berlin for Munich? Would there still have been a Bavarian Socialist State? And if not, would Adolf Hitler still have been welcomed in aristocratic Catholic Bavaria to march with his men down the avenue past Munich’s great university? And would the history of twentieth century Europe have been different? Or would the same Hitler or another Hitler have emerged elsewhere?

ADDENDUM/ BONUS FEATURE



About the Author
GAITHER STEWART Senior Editor, European Correspondent }  Gaither Stewart serves as The Greanville Post  European correspondent, Special Editor for Eastern European developments, and general literary and cultural affairs correspondent. A retired journalist, his latest book is the essay asnthology BABYLON FALLING (Punto Press, 2017). He’s also the author of several other books, including the celebrated Europe Trilogy (The Trojan Spy, Lily Pad Roll and Time of Exile), all of which have also been published by Punto Press. These are thrillers that have been compared to the best of John le Carré, focusing on the work of Western intelligence services, the stealthy strategy of tension, and the gradual encirclement of Russia, a topic of compelling relevance in our time. He makes his home in Rome, with wife Milena. Gaither can be contacted at gaithers@greanvillepost.com. His latest assignment is as Counseling Editor with the Russia Desk. His articles on TGP can be found here. [/su_box]

GAITHER STEWART—Throughout history heroines like Sophia Scholl have emerged and stepped onto center stage. In the name of justice they have challenged Power by a demand for an apparently normal right even if established Power labels that demand state treason. But always they challenge Power: Antigone, Joan of Arc, Anne Frank and Sophia Scholl. The question Sophia asked herself was how the individual must act under a dictatorship. She and members of The White Rose instructed Germans to passively resist the Nazi government...
 Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.




[premium_newsticker id="154171"]

 

 

 

 

 

 

By subscribing you won't miss the special editions!

Parting shot—a word from the editors
The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 

window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




The Russian Navy at the crossroads: paradoxes and choices

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

ORIGINALLY PUBLISHED ON THE SAKER

 By Andrei Martyanov for the Saker blog | click on images for best resolution!

Battle of Tsushima: Russian ships in serious trouble.

The concept, inevitably, utterly failed and had a profound negative effect on French naval development, effectively arresting a building of the large battleships. Jeune Ecole also influenced Russians, who also slowed their entrance into the age of large armored battleships, dedicating much of their attention to experimentation with new, sometimes dubious, naval concepts. The new technology was simply not adequate. In May of 1905 the Russian Navy would sustain a catastrophic defeat in the Battle of Tsushima—the event which would continue to color Russian and Soviet naval thinking for almost a century. But nothing, not even the Tsushima debacle, would compare to an unprecedented naval catastrophe which befell the Soviet Navy in the wake of the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991. In fact, history has no record of a nation simply refusing to inherit a world class advanced navy, the second largest and capable navy in the world, and allowing it to rot and wither away. Two fundamental ideas, apart from the chaos in which post-Soviet Russia fell in the 1990s, were responsible for the virtual death of the Soviet Navy:

1. The West in general and its leader, the United States, were not viewed as enemies anymore, Russia was to be incorporated into this Western World Order and as such she didn’t need armed forces in general, and a navy in particular, with a global reach and capable of fighting and defeating NATO;

2. As anything “Soviet”, the Soviet Navy was deemed backward, not technologically advanced and it lacked what the US Navy had—many nuclear aircraft carriers. In fact, the carrier-centrism of the US Navy was looked at both with admiration and envy.

The reckless dismantling of even Soviet nuclear submarines and the rest of the Soviet fleet severely damaged the security of the Russian people, inviting attacks and humiliations—which were to follow. An unprecedented —criminal—case of official naivete by men who put their immediate class interests and ideology above the nation's good.

Needless to say, those utterly false ideas originated in the “intellectual” top tier of Russian so called liberal reformers who found themselves in power in early 1990s. They originated in the company of people most of whom far from having any serious military and academic background never served a day in uniform and their claim to “expertise” was in raw political power and revulsion towards anything that was achieved during Soviet times. Most of those people were humanities “educated” ideologues, such as one of the main brains behind the destruction of the Russian economy in the 1990s, Yegor Gaidar, economist by trade, or, for that matter, Boris Yeltsin himself—a power hungry cynical opportunist-apparatchik utterly unqualified for any serious military-political task. Many in the “free”—a euphemism for anti-Russian—Russian media cheered on a destruction of any remaining vestiges of the Soviet system. The Navy was Soviet and as such it was supposed to be dismantled.


Soviet sub rotting in the Kola peninsula graveyard.

By 1999 this task was largely accomplished and the Soviet, now Russian, Navy, or, rather, what was left of it, was effectively reduced to a hollow force barely capable of deploying a single nuclear ballistic missile submarine on patrol. Many modern ships and submarines were scrapped or sold abroad for a fraction of their real cost. Often they were sold with secret communications, navigation and weapons’ control systems intact. In 1999 NATO unleashed its aggression against Yugoslavia, Russia not only was left on the sidelines as a passive observer of a military atrocity committed against an independent nation on completely false premises, but eventually Russia was both coerced and bought into betraying Serbia. It was then that the depth of Russia’s fall was exposed to such a degree that the change was inevitable. Those days the phrase “if Russia still had 5th OPESK, there would have been no attack on Serbia” was floating around many Russian military and political forums. Many were lamenting a destruction of the famed Fifth Operational Squadron (5th OPESK), also known as Mediterranean Squadron—a massive Soviet naval force which was more than capable of preventing any attack on Serbia. Not only was this force gone in 1999, but the once mighty Black Sea Fleet was reduced to nothing more than a total of a brigade of heterogeneous, mostly obsolete, forces, and its main naval base of Sevastopol was not in Russia proper anymore.

No better were things with the Pacific Fleet, which was reduced to several submarines and surface combatants barely capable of making it to sea. The Baltic Fleet was rusting in its bases and even the premier Soviet/Russian Northern Fleet, despite having Russia’s only aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov and having the brand new nuclear battlecruiser Peter the Great in its order of battle, was a pale shadow of what used to be the Soviet Northern Fleet. Humiliation in Yugoslavia was compounded with the Kursk tragedy, which completely illuminated the criminal consequences of Russian “reforms” and “reformers” destroying Russia’s military.

BONUS FEATURE
The Raising of the Kursk: an avoidable tragedy
Click on the orange button below to inspect this material.


[bg_collapse view="button-orange" color="#4a4949" icon="eye" expand_text="Show More" collapse_text="Show Less" ]


Ckick on image for best resolution.

 

AND HERE'S THE AMERICAN VIEWPOINT. 
BELOW, a rather self-serving propagandistic version of the Kursk tragedy by the American show FRONTLINE, aired on the supposedly more impartial educational public network PBS. In recent years FRONTLINE, a generally above average journalistic program, has degenerated into another megaphone for the liberal/CIA/Democratic party -sponsored anti-Russian/Putin campaign. Keep that in mind when you examine this material. 


[/bg_collapse]

NATO’s aggression against Yugoslavia in 1999 completely overturned two major “liberal” assumptions about the Russian military. Not only the combined West, especially the United States, never stopped the Cold War against Russia, now emboldened by Russia’s real and perceived weakness and gross overestimation of own capabilities, it showed its real face and intentions. Moreover, suddenly this, supposedly backward and not carrier-centric Soviet Navy was needed as never before, but it was nowhere to be found except for some remnants of it which had been preserved by sheer miracle and the efforts of people who believed that the destructive reformist bacchanalia in Russia had to be stopped at some point.

What many liberal reformers didn’t know, of course, was the fact that Soviet Navy, far from being backward, by the early 1980s was undergoing a massive transformation started in 1970s by its legendary Commander Admiral Sergei Gorshkov. There were a number of technologies and concepts in which the Soviet Navy led the world, including many things which the United States Navy would offer. Yes, the Soviet Navy was global in the sense that it could conduct operations in what is defined as ocean or remote sea zones—far from its bases. Unlike its US counterpart, however, the Soviet Navy was never a Sea Control force. Sea Control, also known as roughly equivalent to Favorable Operational Regime in Russia, being the ability to conduct any uninterrupted maritime activity from naval operations to commercial shipping, meaning keeping Sea Lines of Communications (SLOC) open. The US Navy was designed as such from the onset with the United States as a nation conceived as the “World’s Island” in Admiral Zumwalt’s definition. US Navy also, after the WW II, slowly but surely, while trying to preserve the disappearing mission for its carriers, which bathed themselves in glory during the War in the Pacific, started to evolve into the Power Projection tool of the American Empire, which emerged unscarred and prospered dramatically during and after WW II.

It was the Soviet/Russian Navy that developed and today deploys an array of ASCMs designed precisely to make large, expensive carriers obsolete. The Russian Navy knows the capabilities of its missiles. It also understands that the U.S. Navy, as well as other serious navies, inevitably will break the hypersonic barrier, as well as develop a genuine distributed lethality, and this will rewrite the rules of naval warfare.

The USSR, which bore the brunt of WW II, didn’t have the luxury of such a prosperity, nor, realistically, had intentions to project power anywhere around the globe. The main task for the Soviet Navy was to eventually provide maritime security for the flanks of Soviet Armies fighting in Europe against NATO, and to interdict NATO’s SLOC in the Atlantic, thus cutting supplies to Western European Theater of Operations. That meant fighting in the Mediterranean, Baltic and in what has become known as GIUK gap. But the most important task was not to allow any power projection by NATO navies against Soviet territory first and foremost—this mission being known in the West as Sea Denial, later supplemented with the now popular A2/AD—Anti-Access/Access-Denial concepts. While the US Navy’s posture remained aggressive and offensive since WW II, the Soviet Navy’s posture remained defensive. By the year 2000 Russia simply had no real forces to even fight its A2/AD battles, not to speak of Sea Denial battles in remote sea zones, let alone any ocean—any such attempt would have been easily suppressed by the US Navy and if not for its nuclear deterrent, the Russian Navy was at that point not a contender. Yet, the Soviet Navy left after itself a massive scientific, technological and tactical-operational heritage.

Since its inception, Russian Navy was never in a good position being geographically split into 4 Fleets and 1 Flotilla—an arrangement which complicates things enormously, yet there is no alternative, such as digging Panama Canal, in the case of the US Navy, capable of fast inter-theater maneuver with its forces. Such pressures do create a very different view on naval matters and after the Kursk disaster it became clear that A2/AD must become the primary task for the Russian Navy in the nearest perspective. Some effective and affordable solutions were needed. Some lessons from Jeune Ecole also could be drawn, since unlike the 1870s in the 2000s proper technologies have truly arrived.

Jeune École Mk.2?

[dropcap]I[/dropcap]t was 21 October 1967, when a three-missile salvo from a Soviet built 62-ton, Egyptian Komar-class missile boat sunk the INS Eilat with a new weapon, the P-15 Termit-class antishipping cruise missile (ASCM). Naval warfare changed dramatically. In fact, the revolution Jeune École sought to launch a century before happened because the technology had arrived. The Soviet Navy immediately recognized both the advantages and shortcomings of this new technology, and saw its enormous promise.

This was not the case with the U.S. Navy, which didn’t consider any cruise missile to be important enough to supplement, let alone substitute, U.S. carrier aviation. Later, Elmo Zumwalt would recite in his memoirs a message he received (at the time he was serving as the head of the Division of Systems Analysis) through the Chief Naval Officer’s aide system that the new Harpoon cruise missile should not have a range of more than 50 miles. The Soviet Navy, not burdened by the politics of internal “trade unions,” had no problems with the range and, wanted both range and speeds of its ASCMs to be as great as possible. Thus a new Russian Navy announced its arrival on 7 October 2015 with a salvo of 26 Kalibr (3M14) cruise missiles launched from the Caspian Sea at Islamic State targets in Syria. Out of the four ships which launched missiles, three of the project 21631 Buyan-class missile corvettes barely displaced 900 tons and would not be considered a serious combatant by any large navy. Yet, there they were small, inexpensive, and designed mostly for boats with a strategic reach of 2500 kilometers for their land attack weapons and ability to strike any surface target 600 kilometers away. The Soviet Navy always placed a great emphasis on its Mosquito missile fleet. So much so, that deploying those small ships to the Mediterranean became a permanent feature in operations of what was the Soviet Fifth Operational Squadron in 1970s and 80s. But only with the maturing of missile and targeting technologies, which was demonstrated in Syria to a devastating effect, both from ships and submarines, the Jeune École promise envisioned by Admiral Aube was at last fulfilled.


Russian warship firing Kalibr cruise missiles at ISIS targets. Their precision and effectiveness made the world take note.

The operations of the Russian Navy’s Buyan-class missile ships made an impression globally, so much so that Milan Vego, a long-time authority on small combat craft and professor of joint military operations at the U.S. Naval War College, noted that many navalists overlook the capabilities of smaller craft. “We have been somehow dismissive about the increasing combat power of small combatants,” he said. “The US Navy and other navies, blue water navies, really have to pay more attention to what is going on. These smaller ships are less than 1,000 tons. It is very dangerous to be dismissive, especially in smaller straits where they can do a lot of damage.” The Soviet and Russian Navy has never been dismissive of smaller ships. In fact, today these ships play an important role in a multipronged approach to Russia’s A2/AD force structure, including the ability for inter-theater maneuvers with such ships, using Russia’s river waterways. Construction plans for both the Buyan-class and the brand new Karakurt (project 22800) small-missile ships are impressive. Karakurts, unlike their Buyan-class predecessors, despite smaller displacement are much better sea-keeping platforms, which also feature a more respectable organic air defense capability represented by a navalized version of the Pantzir air defense complex. Construction of 18 of these ships is planned. Together with a dozen operational or under construction Buyans, such a force gives the Russian Navy both operational flexibility and distributed lethality in her littoral and near sea zone. When operational, these small ships will give the Russian Navy around 240 missiles, both land attack and antishipping, in a theoretical “first salvo” across several theaters. When integrated into Russia’s A2/AD force with its air defense and air force components and combined with other naval assets, these small combatants will become a game-changer. They also are a perfect indicator of Russia’s limited naval ambitions, which are primarily defensive. Considering a transitional period for Russia’s shipbuilding industry from foreign (Ukraine, Germany) power plant suppliers to domestic ones and the inevitable delay in commissioning larger combatants such as the Frigates of project 11356, the role of Russia’s Mosquito fleet grows even larger in defense of Russia’s interests in the Eastern Mediterranean.

Obviously, the Russia of 2017 cannot be compared to Russia of 2000 or even of the year 2008. It is a different country today; not only Russia is steadily, despite all undeniable problems, becoming an economic and technological powerhouse, she leads the military world in some very crucial hi-end technologies. This leadership was laid down in Soviet years. But nowhere Russia’s leadership is manifested more than in anti-shipping missiles. Modern Russian anti-shipping missiles’ arsenal is simply unrivaled in the word–all of it is high super-sonic. Last week this arsenal became hyper-sonic with the 3M22 Zircon missile becoming operational. This Mach-8 capable weapon rewrites naval tactics completely because no current or nearest future defense systems are capable of intercepting it. Paradoxically, it is here that the Russian Navy faces its main challenge. The challenge is not in the fact that the Russian Navy has to become at some point of time a Blue Water force—some contours of this force are already recognizable today—from advanced nuclear and non-nuclear missile-carrying submarines to large surface combatants, such as Admiral Gorshkov-class frigates. The issue for the Russian Navy is what to do with the ships Russians dedicated so much effort to making obsolete—large aircraft carriers? It is a conundrum.

Russia’s Naval Paradoxes

[dropcap]T[/dropcap]he Russian Navy doesn’t have a classic CATOBAR aircraft carrier not just because of economic reasons, despite popular western opinion. Russia is capable, even under economic sanctions, to pursue such a goal. The construction of the Zvezda shipyard in Russia’s Far East which, when complete, will be able to build ships up to 350,000 tons of displacement and a length of up to 360 meters, is a clear indication that, despite some issues with Russia’s shipbuilding industry, the development of Russian aircraft carriers is impeded by more than money. The Zvezda shipyard will be more than capable of building large CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take-Off But Arrested Recovery ) carriers. But will it? While the recent document titled “Fundamentals of Russia’s State Naval Policy Through 2030” openly states Russia’s serious maritime ambitions, the document emphasizes the use of high precision and hypersonic weapons and is ambiguous on the fate of carriers, stating that there are plans for the “creation of aircraft carrying complex” in the future. On 18 July, Russia’s Deputy Defense Minister Yuri Borisov revealed that discussion on the development and production of a brand new Yakovlev STOVL (based on the ideas of the Yak-141) aircraft is in full swing and it must enter serial production in 2025. For the Russian large carrier “trade union” and global navalists the news was devastating. Yet, this announcement by Borisov indicated clearly Russia’s ever intensive doctrinal debate and struggle with the carrier issue because it was the Soviet/Russian Navy that developed and today deploys an array of ASCMs designed precisely to make large, expensive carriers obsolete. The Russian Navy knows the capabilities of its missiles. It also understands that the U.S. Navy, as well as other serious navies, inevitably will break the hypersonic barrier, as well as develop a genuine distributed lethality, and this will rewrite the rules of naval warfare. Already, the U.S. Navy deploys some long-range subsonic missiles, such as the LRASM, whose salvo is extremely difficult to defend against. With long-range hypersonic technology, in a hypothetical Russian case, something as expensive as the proposed Storm-class carrier in battle is sim STOVL aircraft providing for a fat, expensive, and prestigious target. In real combat, even damage to the decks of carriers makes them nothing more than a huge pile of metal incapable of launching or landing fixed-wing aircraft. Russia’s very limited power projection needs can be met by other means, especially against the background of the mediocre performance of the Admiral Kuznetsov carrier in Syria.

Some of the problems of cost and deck survivability of CATOBAR carriers are mitigated somewhat in STOVL carriers. In the end, the Soviet/Russian Navy has substantial experience operating these type of carriers. The appearance of the Yak-141 (NATO “Freestyle”) STOVL (short take-off and vertical landing) aircraft in the late 1980s heralded a new set of capabilities for aircraft of this type, with it being a genuine supersonic jet with a respectable range and combat load. Only the collapse of the Soviet Union and an extreme economic crisis stopped the Yak-141 program. Considering Russia’s internationally recognized experience with combat aircraft it is only reasonable to assume that the new STOVL aircraft, if it ever goes into production, will be an impressive machine. If launched into production this aircraft very likely will account for the not always commendable experiences of the U.S. Navy’s F-35B program. Moreover, it opens the road for numerous, multipurpose carriers able to meet tactical and operational tasks required by the Russian Navy. But will the Russian Navy take this path? In the end, apart from serious tactical and operational considerations there is a serious aesthetic (visual) appeal of large carriers as an embodiment of national power. To be sure, the Russian Navy was looking attentively at the US Navy’s LHA-6 (USS America) as one of the possible avenues to pursue with its own carrier program. With America-class ships costing around $3.4 billion, financial comparisons, especially adjusted for Russia’s economic realities, are not in favor of the proposed CVNski, let alone U.S. CVNs whose costs reach upward of $13 billion. Operation costs are also immense. Borisov’s announcement indicates serious rethinking of carriers’ role in the Russian Navy. Old Russian truism states that everything new is well-forgotten old. We may yet see a return, this time on a completely new technological level, to a not so forgotten concept of STOVL carriers, which will vary both in displacement and in capability and which will be more suited for, due to their much lower costs compared to CVNs and deck survivability, for operations in increasingly deadly, long-range super and hypersonic missile-dominated oceans. (Note: CVN is the US Navy designation for all its nuclear-powered carriers, the "N" denoting nuclear plant.)


Russia's YAK-141, a new challenger to Western dominance of the skies and seas.

Throughout its history, the Russian Navy had to operate under unfavorable geopolitical, economic, and combat conditions. These pressures often led to unorthodox solutions, from the bizarre looking round Popovka coastal battleship to an operational adaptation of Jeune Ecole’ to the new technological realities of ASCMs and to leading the way with the drastic expanding of the capabilities’ envelope for STOVL aircraft with the revolutionary Yak-141. A “continuous series of matches between newfangled and old-fashioned military techniques,” in Toynbee’s words, is a never-ending story of technical, tactical, and strategic innovation. One of these matches is between the antishipping missile and the large aircraft carrier. This match finally reached a decisive point when the only role left for large carriers will be that of projecting power against weak opponents. But even this role, considering the proliferation of missile technologies may prove to be a bridge too far in the nearest future. Reducing the cost of carriers to levels which offer a compromise between combat performance and acceptable risks for operations becomes increasingly not just a well-meaning wish, but an imperative.

Can STOVL carriers offer a viable alternative? In terms of costs they can. In the end, only this type of carriers and STOVL aircraft can show their real modern combat worth against a relatively competent adversary during the Falklands War. Due to their significantly lower costs, such carriers may provide what really counts in combat—numbers. In the end, even massive Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class STOVL carriers’ costs is estimated to be around $8 billion—not bad for two ships capable of carrying together 80 combat aircraft. What the Russian Navy can do for $8 billion remains to be seen, but judging by the costs of Russian-made hardware since the mid-2000s, Russia probably will be able to eventually deploy more than two STOVL carriers. The emergence of relatively inexpensive and numerous STOVL carriers and possibly of the STOVL aircraft with characteristics rivaling those being used on CVNs, coupled with further proliferation of the long-range hypersonic weapon, may write a final chapter for this drama in the Soviet/Russian Navy. What, however, is clear already is the fact that even today the Russian Navy, for all its industry and force structure issues, has reached a technological and operational plateau which is a truly great foundation for not only defending Russia’s own shores and littoral—that already has been achieved—but eventually returning the Russian Navy to the oceans as a true guarantor of stability and real peace in the face of a crumbling Pax Americana, whose collapse may yet unleash a string of small and large wars. This kind of Peace and Stability Power Projection is what the world is in dire need of. The dramatically contrasting cases of Libya and Syria are a stark reminder of the changing geopolitical and technological paradigm.


The iconoclastic round-hulk Popovka concept battleship. Only two units were built in the 1870s—the Admiral Popov and the Admiral Novgorod—but were soon discarded due to poor navigational capability in true deep water or even littoral maritime conditions.

 


ABOUT THE SAKER
 Like The Greanville Post, with which it is now allied in his war against official disinformation, the Saker's site, VINEYARD OF THE SAKER, is the hub of an international network of sites devoted to fighting the "billion-dollar deception machinery" supporting the empire's wars against Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and any other independent nation opposing or standing in the way of Washington's drive for global hegemony.  The Saker is published in more than half a dozen languages. A Saker is a very large falcon, native to Europe and Asia. 

ANDREI MARTYANOV—The emergence of relatively inexpensive and numerous STOVL carriers and possibly of the STOVL aircraft with characteristics rivaling those being used on CVNs, coupled with further proliferation of the long-range hypersonic weapon, may write a final chapter for this drama in the Soviet/Russian Navy. What, however, is clear already is the fact that even today the Russian Navy, for all its industry and force structure issues, has reached a technological and operational plateau which is a truly great foundation for not only defending Russia’s own shores and littoral—that already has been achieved—but eventually returning the Russian Navy to the oceans as a true guarantor of stability and real peace in the face of a crumbling Pax Americana, whose collapse may yet unleash a string of small and large wars.

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



black-horizontal
[premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

By subscribing you won’t miss the special editions.

We literally run on fumes. We have no rich backers and no deep pockets, in fact none of our contributing editors, and none of the staff editors are anywhere near comfortable “affluence”. Some of them subsist on squalid social security checks or meager pensions. So, without spoiling your day any further, do what you can. Click on any of our donation buttons and send us a few dollars as a sign that at least you value what we do here. We sincerely thank those who have already done so. By the way, all donations or bequests to TGP —a project of The Voice of Nature Network, a tax-exempt nonprofit organisation—are tax deductible.—The Editor

Provided by CoolFundraisingIdeas.net

window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




Holocaust Survivors Quiet Allies of a Wall St. That Once Invested in Nazi War on Russia & Jews 

HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

BILL OF INDICTMENT

That WW II was a 'good war,' ‘good’ triumphing over ‘evil’ a madman had brought about, has been a gargantuan deception solidified in Wall St owned media & movies ominously conditioning us to tolerate profitable genocide ad infinitum! Criminally insane Hitler was used by wealthy capitalists to invade the USSR. Even Jewish Holocaust survivors quietly support new genocides by the same Wall St that facilitated Jewish genocide.


The Nazi beast at work.


There is no way Hitler could have begun a world war and a multi-nation Holocaust when he did without the mega enormous financial help he received from a fascism supporting USA. There is simply no way an impoverished Germany could have built its Armed Forces up to the number one military in the world during the first seven years of Hitler's rule without Wall Street’s colossal and crucial investing in, and joint venturing with, Nazi Germany, made possible by the US government, which with other governments colluded to permit outright violation of the Versailles Treaty prohibition of German rearmament.[1

The horrendous and ominous point of this stimulus essay is not a thesis, but an incontrovertible, indisputable, incontestable, undeniable, irrefutable, unquestionable, beyond doubt unarguable, undebatable, heavily documented fact: World War Two and the multi-nation Holocaust could have never taken place without the rearming of a prostrate Germany in open violation of its prohibition in the Versailles Treaty, that ended World War One. The point is ominous, because the Second World War, which filled the skies with warplanes, the seas with warships above and below the surface, the land with tank battles between thousands of tanks, and armies of millions that took the lives of millions, made so much money for Wall Street’s investors that it augured the future we have been living, namely, more and more of the same murder, maiming and destruction, murder, maiming, and destruction Americans are forced to accept for criminal media inculcated fear and patriotism based on lies and selective reporting.  No one, not Americans or anyone else seems to notice that the killing, maiming and destruction is profitable for powerful investors, and that is why it continues.

 

Regarding a depression so great that it threatened the status quo, and required fascism and war, one need not read Marx to understand private capital will withdraw when profitability is too low to sustain the privileges and power of the ruling upper class. America’s great independent economist Thorstein Veblen assumed depression to  be “the normal condition in a business-enterprise economy, to be relieved in periods of excitation caused by stimuli not intrinsic to the system, for example, war, expansion abroad, etc.”[from The Theory of the Leisure Class by Thorstein Veblen]
This Essay or tract or stimulus is a detailed history of the root cause of the genocide that was the Second World War and the Holocaust within it. It was the greatest genocide ever. It followed and was preceded by almost continuous genocide somewhere or other, genocide being intrinsic and endemic to the private banking colonial plundering by Europeans that began at the end of the 15th century in Africa, Asia and the Americas and continued on to the present day genocide in seven Muslim counties in the Middle East and Africa led by the United States with Europe, Canada, Australia and New Zealand and sundry satellite nations in tow. [Throughout this essay’s uncovering of historical facts that the Western financial military industrial complex owned media cartel has successfully screened away from public awareness, the term ‘genocide’ is used as defined by the universally signed on to Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly on 9 December 1948: “a) Killing members of a group  b) conspiring to do so.”]
Just as American capital is presently invested in low-wage Asia while much of the U.S. work force is unemployed, during the Great Depression, the rich and powerful of America invested in low-wage, highly productive, and financially impoverished Nazi Germany. While this writer’s out-of-work dad sold apples on the street corner, and with no money to buy milk, mom kept him breast fed through four years of age, workers in Nazi Germany were increasingly employed thanks to America’s wealthy, who were fully aware of Hitler’s intentions toward Jews[2] and the Soviet Union.[3] By their intense investing and joint venturing to arm Germany to the teeth, they were, albeit silently, showing a positive attitude regarding Hitler’s announced hatred of what he believed to be the world's two evils, communism and Judaism, by  putting their money where Hitler’s mouth was, so to speak.
 
But let’s back up further in time: 
 
Near the end of the First World War, immediately following the founding of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic in July 1918, there were bloody invasions of Russia by fourteen armies of twelve capitalist nations, all Russia’s WW I allies (one US Army in Murmansk, another in Vladivostok[4]), making possible a civil war that brought carnage, death and destruction that took millions of lives, three million from cholera alone, but failed to overthrow Russia’s new revolutionary socialist government.  While the Soviet Union was still recovering, what followed was the American led most vile and monstrous investment, joint venturing and evil diplomacy ever conceived. It is succinctly reviewed in the few quoted paragraphs below by Irish journalist Finian Cunningham.
 

“The Western public, inculcated with decades of brainwashing versions of history, have a particular disadvantage in coming to a proper understanding of the world wars…

 

A very different 'version' of history has been concealed, a 'version' that puts the Western rulers in an altogether more pernicious category from their ordinary citizens.

European fascism headed up by Nazi Germany, along with Mussolini in Italy, Franco in Spain and Salazar in Portugal, was not some aberrant force that sprang from nowhere during the 1920s-1930s. The movement was a deliberate cultivation by the rulers of Anglo-American capitalism. European fascism may have been labeled "national socialism" but its root ideology was very much one opposed to overturning the fundamental capitalist order. It was an authoritarian drive to safeguard the capitalist order, which viewed genuine worker-based socialism as an enemy to be ruthlessly crushed.

 

This is what made European fascism so appealing to the Western capitalist ruling class in those times. In particular, Nazi Germany was viewed by the Western elite as a bulwark against possible socialist revolution inspired by the Russian revolution of 1917.
It is no coincidence that American capital investment in Nazi Germany between 1929-1940 far outpaced that in any other European country, ... The industrial rearmament of Germany (despite the strictures of the Versailles Treaty signed at the end of World War One, which were ignored) was indeed facilitated by the American and British capitalist ruling classes. When Hitler annexed Austria and the Czech Sudetenland in 1938, it was ignored. This was not out of complacent appeasement, as widely believed, but rather out of a far more active, albeit secretive, policy of collusion.
According to Alvin Finkel and Clement Leibovitz in their book, ‘The Chamberlain-Hitler Collusion,’ British Conservative leader Neville Chamberlain and his ruling cohort were intent on giving Nazi Germany a "free hand" for eastward expansionism. The real target for the Western sponsors of the Nazi war machine was an attack on the Soviet Union in order to destroy, in their view, the source of international revolutionary socialism. In the 1930s, the very existence of capitalism was teetering on the edge amid the Great Depression, massive poverty and seething popular discontent in the US, Britain and other Western countries. The entire Western capitalist order was under imminent threat from its own masses.
The sixty to seventy million deaths along with the impossible to contemplate mega massive destruction as a direct result of rearming a Nazi Germany under Hitler topped all the genocidal events in history. This evil fashioning of a second world war and cruelly facilitating the Holocaust remains the greatest show of the entirely unlimited above-the-law diabolical and satanic power of private, capitalist, and criminal, speculative investment banking.
This is the historical context for the Western-backed rise of European fascism. Look at some of the undisputed figures from the Second World War... Some 14 million Red Army soldiers died in the eventual defeat of Nazi Germany, compared with less than 400,000 military each from the US and Britain. These Western armies lost less than 4 per cent of personnel of the Red Army's casualties. These figures tell us where the Nazi German war effort was primarily directed towards - the Soviet Union, as the Western imperialist rulers had hoped in their initial sponsoring of Nazi and other European fascist regimes during the 1930s. [Quoted from Finian Cunningham's article World War II Continues... Against Russia, PressTV, 5/10/2014 (underlining added)]

In his book, Mission to Moscow, (later a film as well), US ambassador to Russia from 1936 to 1938, Joseph Davies, chronicled the desperation of the Russians in 1937, unable to get a defensive alliance with England and France, and fully aware that the rearming of Germany was directed at the Soviet Union, and most certainly not meant to be only a 'bulwark,’ as it was excused as being in US media.  By the surprising non-aggression pact with Nazi Germany, Stalin derailed for the moment the West's plan to have Hitler invade the USSR. This gained the Soviet Union the time to build the tanks in the East that would later defeat the Nazi invasion. What Hitler called "a war of extermination" in Western Poland began only one week after the signing of the Molotov-Ribbentrop pact. Hitler would again call for "a war of extermination" with the German invasion of the USSR, June 22, 1941, and at the same time called for the extermination of all Jews in Nazi occupied nations, that will forever be called the Holocaust.

 

World War Two represented the most profitable investment ever made. When WW II ended, the only major industrial plant standing was that owned by Wall Street. Wall Street and the US government that Wall Street controls, had become the first single world superpower in history. Another plus for Wall Street was the death of twenty-seven million citizens of its designated archenemy, Communist Russia, with most of its cities half destroyed.
 
The sixty to seventy million deaths along with the impossible to contemplate mega massive destruction as a direct result of rearming a Nazi Germany under Hitler topped all the genocidal events in history. This evil fashioning of a second world war and cruelly facilitating the Holocaust remains the greatest show of the entirely unlimited above-the-law diabolical and satanic power of private, capitalist, and criminal, speculative investment banking. All the more satanic for it having been ‘just business,’ just ‘making’ money and building the capital wealth needed by the criminally organized wealthy to continue to exploit us. All the dead and maimed bodies of tens of millions of us was not intended. It just part of a ‘good investment’ business. There is no statistic that would embrace the hundreds of millions of survivors with smashed lives, broken hearts, millions unable to live a normal life again. 
 
All the crimes committed by Germans, the crimes that were committed by Russians and those committed by the Americans and British Britain fire bombing entire cities happened during the world war that was made possible by the Anglo-American investors led  enthusiastic rearming of Germany for a singular purpose. When we recall films and photos of skies filled with warplanes, of seas filled with warships and of thousands of tanks engaged in deathly conflict on land, we best remember a lot of upper class people in business suits were gleefully counting their profits from investments in the manufacture of weapons, munitions and uniforms.
 
In the box office hit documentary movie Judgement At Nuremberg staring Burt Lancaster, Spencer Tracy, Marlene Dietrich, Judy Garland and Maximilian Schell, who portrayed the Nazi attorney for the defense, Schell cries out in the summation of the defense, “If these men (indicted Nazi leaders) are guilty, … where is the responsibility of those American industrialists, who helped Hitler to rebuild his armaments, and profited by that rebuilding? Schell also reminds the court of the crimes of Hiroshima and US eugenics.[5]
 
“...helped Hitler to rebuild his armaments,” is an understatement. Most, if not all top US corporations, Ford, GM, GE, Dupont, ITT, IBM, etc., even Kodak and CokeCola invested in, or joint ventured, with a low wage prostrate Nazi Germany [6] while US government officials and Wall Street owned mainstream media continued to excuse it as merely creating a bulwark against a trumped-up fear of invasion by the Soviet Union.
 
The Nazi Council for the Defense had begun with, Why did we succeed, Your Honor? What about the rest of the world? Did it not know the intentions of the Third Reich? Did it not hear the words of Hitler's broadcasts all over the world? Did it not read his intentions in Mein Kampf published in every corner of the world?” (published in eleven languages by 1933)
 
In Mein Kampf, Hitler unequivocally stated a German necessity to invade Russia,[3] and several passages in Mein Kampf regarding Germany’s Jewish citizens are undeniably of a genocidal nature.[2] Mein Kampf was published in July of 1926 and sold a quarter million copies before Hitler came to power.  In it, Hitler announced his hatred of what he believed to be the world's two evils: Communism and Judaism.
 
Hitler’s promise to invade Wall Street’s archenemy, the Soviet Union, would have to have impressed the US and European wealthy whose ‘rule of the rich’ was threatened by socialist fervor at home for their failure to have prevented the ongoing Great Depression with millions suffering even from lack of food. Hitler’s frightening threats against Germany’s Jewish population did not deter the titans of US industry from empowering Hitler’s militarily for war against Russia. The powerful wealthy of Wall Street, who had already long ruled the United States via its government and media, which they owned,[7] were largely responsible for the virulent anti-Semitism in America. In Britain and France, celebrities roll modeled anti-Jewish feelings just as in the USA.[8]
 
In the film Judgement At Nuremberg, the attorney for the Nazi defense, referring to friends of American capitalism in England and Italy, cries out, “Where is the responsibility of the world leader Winston Churchill...who said in an open letter to the London Times in 1938, "Were England to suffer a national disaster, I should pray to God...to send a man of the strength of mind and will of an Adolf Hitler. In 1938![9] your honor,” repeats Schell shouting the date (one year before Hitler invaded Poland):" Are we now to find Winston Churchill guilty? Where is the responsibility of the Vatican...who signed in the concordat with Hitler...giving him his first tremendous prestige? Are we now to find the Vatican guilty? Where is the responsibility of those American industrialists...who helped Hitler to rebuild his armaments, and profited by that rebuilding? Are we now to find the American industrialists guilty? No, Your Honor. Germany alone is not guilty.”   
 
This archival research peoples historian working alongside former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark expects that the reaction of a good many readers to this essay’s title will be one of protest that in spite of the fact that the elite of American industrialists invested in and joint ventured with Nazis rapidly building their Wehrmacht up to world’s number one military force in seven years with the collusion of US and European government leaders permitting violation of the prohibitions in the Versailles Treaty, that these titans of American industry, banking and government could not have imagined or expected Hitler’s 1941 orders for the total genocidal mass murder of all Jews we have come to call the Holocaust. 
 
The Nazis either seized Jewish businesses and properties outright, or forced Jews to sell them at bargain prices. In November 1938, the Nazis organized a riot (pogrom), known as Kristallnacht (the “Night of Broken Glass”). This attack against German and Austrian Jews included the physical destruction of synagogues and Jewish-owned stores, the arrest of Jewish men, the vandalization of homes, and the murder of individuals.[https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/1933-1939-early-stages-of-persecution/
 

The David S. Wyman Institute for Holocaust Studies, (Advisory Committee Chair Elie Wiesel Nobel Peace Prize Laureate) describes the reaction to Kristallnacht in the US:

- “President Franklin Roosevelt condemned the pogrom, recalled the U.S. ambassador from Germany for ‘consultations,’ and extended the visitors’ visas of the approximately 12,000 German Jewish refugees who were then in the United States.  But at the same time, FDR announced that liberalization of America’s tight immigration quotas was ‘not in contemplation.’  The Christian Science Monitor echoed Roosevelt’s position, telling its readers that prayer, not more immigration, was the best response to the persecution of German Jewry.  
- In the wake of Kristallnacht, humanitarian-minded members of Congress introduced legislation to aid German Jewry.  A bill sponsored by Senator Robert F. Wagner (D-NY) and Rep. Edith Rogers (R-Mass) proposed the admission of 20,000 German refugee children outside the quotas.  Nativist and isolationist groups vociferously opposed the Wagner-Rogers bill. Typical of their perspective was a remark by FDR’s cousin, Laura Delano Houghteling, who was the wife of the U.S. Commissioner of Immigration: she warned that ‘20,000 charming children would all too soon grow into 20,000 ugly adults.’  An appeal to FDR by First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt for his support of the bill fell on deaf ears, and an inquiry by a Congresswoman as to the president’s position was returned to his secretary marked ‘File No action FDR.’ Without his support, the Wagner-Rogers bill was buried in committee. February, 1939, The Wagner-Rogers bill died in Congress. Roosevelt refused to take a position on it. 
- On May 13, 1939, the German transatlantic liner St. Louis sailed from Hamburg, Germany, for Havana, Cuba. On the voyage were 937 passengers. Almost all were Jews fleeing from the Third Reich. 743 had been waiting to receive US visas. The Cuban government refused to admit them or to allow them to disembark from the ship. In June sailing so close to Florida that they could see the lights of Miami, some passengers on the St. Louis cabled President Franklin D. Roosevelt asking for refuge. Roosevelt never responded. The State Department and the White House had decided not to take extraordinary measures to permit the refugees to enter the United States. A State Department telegram sent to a passenger stated that the passengers must ‘await their turns on the waiting list and qualify for and obtain immigration visas before they may be admissible into the United States.’ 254 of the passengers returned to Europe would perish in the Holocaust.
‘We can see that one likes to pity the Jews…but no state is prepared to … accept a few thousand Jews.  Thus the conference serves to justify Germany’s policy against Jewry.’”
        Kristallnacht did not fundamentally alter the international community’s response to Hitler.  There were many verbal condemnations, but no economic sanctions against Nazi Germany, no severing of diplomatic relations, no easing of immigration quotas. In the arena of everyday life, Western European culture was unable to deal with the phenomenon of the socially-rising assimilated Jew – the one who spoke his language perfectly, dressed like him, moved into his neighborhood, went to university with him and competed in business.
Jewish History.org puts forth a perceptive description: “Ironically, the more assimilated the Jew became the more this type of anti-Semitism reared its head. To a great degree, the dominant culture was willing to tolerate Jews with long beards, fur hats, a strange language (Yiddish) and who were easily identifiable as Jews. But they were not willing to accept Jews who were clean-shaven, wore no special garb and spoke perfect German or French or English.” [http://www.jewishhistory.org/the-dreyfus-affair/ ]
 
The economic elite of America’s capitalist rule by the rich must have felt their ruling position threatened and their bitter reaction trickled down, or poured down. E.g., the first curse words this peoples historian at age six used when missing a shot playing marbles was ‘jew bastard! without knowing the meaning of either word. First summer job was performing in the only Atlantic City Beach hotel built so Jews would have one hotel sure to give lodging to Jews. 
 
Anyone with half an education can reel off names of the inordinate number of renowned thinkers, philosophers, inventors, composers, physicians, artists, singers, musicians, educators, actors, movie producers, comedians revered as seminal contributors to Western civilization from Maimonides through Einstein and beyond. A student of human history cannot but be amazed at this impressively high proportion of beloved and respected household names being of Jewish descent.  Sociologists tend to attribute this disproportionately high number of geniuses and great achieving stars in the firmament of human development in the West to the emphasis given to study and learning in Jewish religious observance, stressed as an obligatory search for moral intelligence. The root of anti-Jewish talk and discrimination was located in the same void of morals and absence of humanity found in the divide-and-conquer profitable genocide for capital acquisition, economic power and domination championed on Wall Street.
 
U.S. and European financiers made prostrate Germany’s rise to world #1 military power possible while listening to Hitler’s speeches trumpeting the historic expansionist call “Drang nach Osten” (“Push to the East’) that would bring about the smashing of the USSR so desired by investors frightened by Soviet successes, successes that were making the Russian revolution a model for the socialist activism arising everywhere during the depression failure of Western capitalism (its past success in conquering and plundering most of the rest of the world notwithstanding).  For much of the 1930s, approximately 60% of total U.S. investment abroad was in Nazi Germany – another substantial amount had been going into Mussolini’s fascist Italy.
 
Below are excepts from British American Anthony B. Sutton's 'Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler,' Chapter One - 'Wall Street Paves the Way for Hitler.' (Anthony Sutton was an economics professor at California State University, Los Angeles and was research fellow at Stanford University's Hoover Institution from 1968 to 1973.)

Almost everyone in the top ranks of the German bourgeoisie and aristocracy saw Hitler as a mere instrument to their designs. Nazism did not afflict the foundations of capitalist class rule.

Germans were brought to Detroit to learn the techniques of specialized production of components, and of straight-line assembly. The techniques learned in Detroit were eventually used to construct the dive-bombing Stukas .... later I. G. Farben representatives in this country enabled a stream of German engineers to visit not only plane plants but others of military importance. Contemporary American business press confirm that business journals and newspapers were fully aware of the Nazi threat and its nature.

The evidence presented suggests that not only was an influential sector of American business aware of the nature of Naziism, but for its own purposes aided Naziism wherever possible (and profitable) --with full knowledge that the probable outcome would be war involving Europe and the United States.
Synthetic gasoline and explosives (two of the very basic elements of modern warfare), the control of German World War II output was in the hands of two German combines created by Wall Street loans under the Dawes Plan.
The two largest tank producers in Hitler's Germany were Opel, a wholly owned subsidiary of General Motors (controlled by the J.P. Morgan firm), and the Ford A. G. subsidiary of the Ford Motor Company of Detroit. The Nazis granted tax-exempt status to Opel in 1936, to enable General Motors to expand its production facilities. Alcoa and Dow Chemical worked closely with Nazi industry.
In brief, American companies associated with the Morgan-Rockefeller international investment bankers were intimately related to the growth of Nazi industry. It is important to note " that General Motors, Ford, General Electric, DuPont and the handful of U.S. companies intimately involved with the development of Nazi Germany were -- except for the Ford Motor Company -- controlled by the Wall Street elite -- the J.P. Morgan firm, the Rockefeller Chase Bank and to a lesser extent the Warburg Manhattan."
No one will regret the time spent in reading Anthony Sutton's Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler 1976, available at [https://www.voltairenet.org/IMG/pdf/Sutton_Wall_Street_and_Hitler.pdf]
Given the general public ignorance regarding Wall Street responsibility for WW II, Sutton's chapter headings invite our flabbergasted attention:
  • Were American Industrialists and Financiers Guilty of War Crimes?
  • Sutton makes it clear that his book "is not an indictment of all American industry and finance. It is an indictment of the "apex" -- those firms controlled through the handful of financial houses, the Federal Reserve Bank system and the Bank for International Settlements of central importance.”
  •  

    Behind the patriotic propaganda that encouraged the working class to slaughter each other in the interests of competing national interests, international capital quietly kept the commodity circuits flowing and profits growing across all borders, trading with the enemy – war means business as usual for international capital. Higham starts with an account of the Bank for International Settlements in Basel, Switzerland – a Nazi-controlled bank presided over by an American, Thomas H. McKittrick, even in 1944. While Americans were dying in the war, McKittrick sat down with his German, Japanese, Italian, British and American executive staff to discuss the gold bars that had been sent to the Bank earlier that year by the Nazi government for use by its leaders after the war. This was gold that had been looted from the banks of Austria, Belgium, and Czechoslovakia or melted down from teeth fillings, eyeglass frames, and wedding rings of millions of murdered Jews.”


     

     
    Given all the above documentation, readers may decide for themselves which adjectives best describe America’s capitalists investing in, and joint venturing with the Nazis and Hitler. Was it collaboration, collusion, co-conspiring, fraternizing, consorting or ‘merely’ cooperating with the Nazis and Hitler in order to facilitate war? 
    Britain was America’s closest ally. During the year 1936, the King of England and British Empire was for certain a greater follower of Hitler than most Germans. During the occupation of France, the then Duke of Windsor, asked the German forces to place guards at his Paris and Riviera homes – and they did. His pro-Hitler statements, while Governor of the Bahamas during the war had to be hushed up. Even as late as 1970 he spoke affectionately of Hitler. [10]
     
    On May 18, 1942 – The New York Times reported, but on an inside page, that Nazis had machine-gunned over 100,000 Jews in the Baltic states, 100,000 in Poland and twice as many in western Russia.  By this date, millions had been gassed.
    In the June 10, 44 issue of the Nation Magazine, Editor I. F. Stone wrote “For the Jews – Life or Death? – regarding a weak proposal to make so called ‘free ports’ of army camps in the US for refugee Jews.
    “I need not dwell upon the authenticated horrors of the Nazi internment camps and death chambers for Jews. The longer we delay the fewer Jews there will be left to rescue, the slimmer the chances to get them out. Between 4,000,000 and 5,000,000 European Jews have been killed since August, 1942, when the Nazi extermination campaign began.”
     
    Towards the end of the war, when ghastly, spine-chilling photos of the internment and murder of Jews in concentration camps were revealed, the public was shocked into some self-awareness. The most violent persecution, brutal arrests and internment had been done openly in a world basically owned and run by the ‘democratically’ elected legislatures of white industrialized nations, nations that had earlier used their edge in arms manufacture to conquer, colonize and exploit the whole non white population of the world.
    When the difficult to believe newsreels and newspaper photos of the indescribably inhuman conditions inside the camps, of heaps of hundreds of naked bodies and of the cremation ovens were seen, they did not awaken a change in the of the long standing, pervasive, fierce antipathy and prejudice toward Jews which sustained an 
    attitude of opposition to the entry of Jews, even as survivors of the Holocaust, into the USA, in spite of the wide open spaces it contained. 
     
    Approximate Holocaust Deaths
     Of Jews: 6 million, Austria 50,000, Belgium 25,000, Belorussia 245,000, Bohemia/Moravia 80,000, Bulgaria 11,400, Denmark 60, Estonia 1500, Finland 7, France 90,000, Germany 130,000, Great Britain 130, Greece 65,000, Hungary 450,000, Italy 7500, Latvia 70,000, Lithuania 220,000, Luxembourg 1,950, The Netherlands 106,000, Norway 870, Poland 2,900,000, Russia 107,000, Romania 270,000, Slovakia 71,000, Ukraine 900,000, Yugoslavia 60,000. 
    Soviet civilians: around 7 million (including 1.3 Soviet Jewish civilians, who are included in the 6 million figure for Jews), 
    Soviet prisoners of war: around 3 million (including about 50,000 Jewish soldiers), Non-Jewish Polish civilians: around 1.8 million (including between 50,000 and 100,000 members of the Polish elites), Serb civilians (on the territory of Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina): 312,000, People with disabilities living in institutions: up to 250,000, Roma (Gypsies): 196,000–220,000, Jehovah's Witnesses: around 1,900, Repeat criminal offenders and so-called asocials: at least 70,000, German political opponents and resistance activists in Axis-occupied territory: undetermined, homosexuals: hundreds, possibly thousands (possibly also counted in part under the 70,000 repeat criminal offenders and so-called asocials noted above).[source: Holocaust Encyclopedia, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington, DC]
    The above figures are only for the Holocaust extermination program. The rearming of Germany facilitated Hitler’s invasions of twenty-two countries and brought world war to Asia, for Japan would not have dared to attack and declare war on the United States of America without it being able to count on an alliance with an awesomely powerful rearmed Nazi Germany, plus Italy, Romania, Hungary, Bulgaria and Albania, which all declared war on the USA immediately after Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor. That Second World War, which made the rich speculators of Wall Street owned America the sole superpower is estimated to have taken the lives of 60 to 70 million men, women and children. As already mentioned, within this total were the 27 million citizens, men, women and children, of the Soviet Union, which was the target goal for the rearming of Germany by a consensus of the wealthiest American and European capitalists. A further boon for Wall Street was that half cities of Wall Street's designated archenemy, socialist model USSR, lay in ruins. 

    This truth somehow never reached any substantial part of the public. During and afterwards, WW II was heralded in Wall Street owned media and solidified in feature films more than ever as a 'good war,' a clear fight against what a madman had brought about. A recognizably insane Hitler was used by hard pressed wealthy capitalists to invade the Soviet Union while the madman plundered, tortured and murdered Jews. A simple truth with devastating implications that seems to be of little interest now and during all the post Second World War era. It is a real mystery why Russians are so ‘kind’ not to bring this horrific genocidal crime against their people up for serious acknowledgement. 

    Despite severe setbacks, the Red Army managed to hold the line in the interim years between the first and second world wars.

     
    That the Second World War Was A ‘Good War,’ ‘Good’ Triumphing Over ‘Evil,’ has been a Gargantuan Deception Ominously Conditioning All of Humanity to Tolerate Profitable Genocide Ad Infinitum! 
     
    REAFFIRMING THE BARE TRUTH:
    • If no rearming of then Nazi Germany led by Hitler, then no Second World War
    • If no Second World War, then no multination Holocaust of six million Jews among a Holocaust total of eighteen million Europeans: 

    If no multination genocide of Jews, then no 250,000 displaced Jewish survivors refused refuge .

    Seven years before the outbreak of WWII, during this rearming of Nazi Germany, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, the last aristocratic insider US President, wrote to his confidant Colonel House "as you and I know,
    this government has been owned by a financial element in the centers of power since the days of Andrew Jackson."[11]. FDR most certainly meant that they both knew that the “government owned by a financial element” included all three branches, Legislative, Executive and Judicial,  and therefore Congress, the Supreme Court and the Presidency. During the Great Depression, Franklin Roosevelt had been chosen to institute a critical amount of capitalism-saving social programs (Social Security, Unemployment Compensation, Civilian Conservation Corps and the WPA Works Progress Administration) in having government employ the unemployed in building up the country. FDR was most certainly aware of what all his wealthy friends and cronies were up to as they counted on fascism and war to resecure their world wide rule over society.  To save their plundering colonial rule over most of humanity they surpassed the European empires’ record of lives lost in the genocides within the more than five centuries of Caucasian conquering and plundering of Africa, Asia and the Americas. WW II also topped as well the earlier genocides in the short history of the American empire, namely, the African slavery genocide, the genocide for the lands of Native Americans, Mexicans, Filipinos, Chinese, and the mega lucrative loan-sharking which sustained and prolonged the genocide that was World War One. After Wall Street bankrolled Hitler’s greatest genocide of them all, and had its criminal media monopoly cartel of giant entertainment, news and information corporations screen their crime of having promoted war and facilitated the Holocaust, Wall Street was free to make profitable genocide an acceptable way of militarized life with invasions, bombings and covert violence in China, Philippines, Korea, Greece, Albania, Iran, Guatemala, Guyana, Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia, Congo, Brazil, Bolivia, Dominican Republic, Cuba, Indonesia, Somalia, Lebanon, Chile, East Timor, Nicaragua, Grenada, Panama, Yemen, Iraq, Afghanistan, El Salvador, Haiti, Yugoslavia, Sudan, Libya, Syria, South Sudan, Honduras, and Pakistan.

    What uncomfortable realization of the enormity of American and European society’s complicity in the Holocaust there was, formed a backdrop for additional basic business considerations entertained by many of the same influential U.S. politicians beholden to Wall Street’s avarice and economic aggression, who had rearmed Germany. Highly placed villainous capitalist gangsters saw an opportunity to make use of the plight of a quarter million ‘undesirable’ Jewish Holocaust survivors to create a client colony of Europeans in the midst of oil rich Muslim countries. Using AngloAmerican power over an incipient and incomplete United Nations they produced a genocidal stratagem of torching the Holy Land with a phony Partition Resolution never intended to be implemented. Until this deadly partition stratagem is recognized an archetypical colonial crime against humanity there will be no peace in Palestine.[see author’s US Economic Facilitation of Holocaust and Middle East Destabilizing Partition, Minority Perspective, Birmingham, UK, 12/6/2012

     

    , OpEdNews, 9/12/2011
    Synopsis of conclusion of the article: Israel has been in bed with a US business elite that once heavily invested in Hitler, was itself anti-Semitic in outlook, coldly indifferent and even complicit during the Holocaust its investments had made possible.
     A popular quip in Yiddish goes, ‘with such friends, who needs enemies?’ The article points out that Arabs saved Jews from Christian persecutions in 637, 1187, 1492. Now Christians are persecuting Arabs. One could imagine that Jewish-Arab Semitic solidarity is needed and would be appropriate.                          
     
    Hitler’s Carmaker: How General Motors helped jump-start the Third Reich’s military machine, published in 2006, Nazi Nexus: America's Corporate Connections to Hitler's Holocaustpublished in 2009, and The Horrifying American Roots of Nazi Eugenics, in 2003.[12]
    These exposes, by an researcher who nearly perished along with his parents in the Holocaust, should normally have been sufficient for Jews to, at the very least, distance themselves from Wall Street’s postwar worldwide programs of profitable genocide. However, as Wall Street rules America and still most of the world, Wall Street owned media rules minds, including apparently, the minds of too many Holocaust survivors and their families. In 1950, Einstein explained why our civilization continues to be "like an axe in the had of the pathological criminal,"[13]: "Under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions...- Albert Einstein, Essays in Humanism
    On the other hand, there are probably more than a million Orthodox Jews spread out all of the world who, do not accept nor recognize the bloody catastrophe that is the state of Israel. Their opposition to the state of Israel, silent or vocal, might indicate their awareness of how the Second World War and the Holocaust was made to come about. This awareness would have to include remembering that communists genocidally targeted wherever possible by the US after the war, were not only targeted by Nazis alongside of the Jews, but were also the bravest and most successful fighters against the Nazis and against the Nazi Holocaust.
    After the Nuremberg Trials whitewashed the fundamental crimes of American industrialists and bankers, and saw to their German counterparts getting off lightly, Capitalist leaders led by Churchill turned against their WW II allies and Western media returned to anti Soviet propaganda and a renewed ‘Red Scare,’ totally burying the history of an indescribably monstrous crime against humanity, the arming of Nazi Germany during its murderous persecution of German citizens of Jewish identity that led to the annihilation program coded as ‘the final solution’ that we call Holocaust.  
    Too many Holocaust Survivors and their families and friends would eventually become quiet allies of the same eminent Wall St. investors, who once promoted Nazi War on Jews, as they subsequently invested in and arranged profitable genocidal bombings, invasions and covert violence throughout the whole Third World, their criminally falsifying media trumping up anti-communism while blacking our the crimes of colonialist capitalism. While promoting Americans and the British as the good guys who had defeated the bad guys of Germany, Western media loudly instituted a national right to murder designated ‘bad guys’ anywhere and everywhere, eventually taking to funding and directing Muslim terror against the populations of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen, and Iran,[14] 
    Worse than Holocaust denial is denial that US rearmed Hitler's murderously anti-Jewish Nazi Germany for war!
    Selling the war that wall street envisioned and materially facilitated as a ‘good war’ is worst than denying the Holocaust because it allowed those who used Hitler, empowered Hitler, and are inextricably guilty of making the Holocaust possible, to set the stage for ‘good’ USA to be able to lead more ‘good’ genocides in Korea, Indochina, Iraq, Congo, Central America and in more than thirty other former colonies of Europe and the USA.  d
    The Key to stopping the genocide in seven Muslim nations in Africa and the Middle East might be to first create public awareness that the greatest genocide in history, the WW II genocide, along with more than five centuries of speculative investment banking genocides have been simply business, the business of profitable genocide inherent in Western speculative banking backed racist colonialism.
    When justice becomes a topic of conversation throughout the world in the street, home, marketplace, workplace and school, a way will be found to force massive compensation, indemnity and reparations. Otherwise, as long crime pays it will continue. Ramsey Clark sees a future activist group dedicated to justice forming, the justice that will make past genocides to have been unprofitable and future investment in genocide unattractive and thus military crime inoperable.  
    Post script 
    Let us seriously imagine that instead of the UN partition resolution, an Anglo-America stratagem for torching Palestine never meant to have been implemented that barely won UN approval, a plan that called for a single democratic state had won UN enactment.
     
    The UN never reached a unanimous conclusion for partition. A strong minority had felt that nothing in the terms of the postwar treaties and the mandate precluded the establishment in Palestine of a Jewish state denominated along the lines of a‘domestic dependent nation.’ 
     
    Also, the wording in Balfour’s 1917 letter, “His Majesty’s government” views with favor a national home for the Jewish people,” brought forth “The conclusion seems to be inescapable that the vagueness in the wording of both instruments was intentional. The term “National Home” was employed, not “State” or “Commonwealth.” 
     
    “There were, as well, important preliminary legal questions regarding the competence of the United Nations or its members to enforce a solution against the wishes of the majority of the existing population,” had said the Colombian delegate had led this argument.
     
    There could have been no bloodshed at all. 
     
    Albert Einstein, “I am in favor of Palestine being developed as a Jewish Homeland but not as a separate state. It seems to me a matter of simple common sense that we cannot ask to be given political rule over Palestine where two thirds of the population are not Jewish.”[January 19, 1946  Letter to Maurice Dunay]
     
    One can imagine that if the U.S. and the hard line Zionist lobby had failed to push and pressure through partition, the British Mandate Government would not have fled irresponsibly in cowardly complicity, before the fully expected outbreak of bloody violence. Britain had announced it would accept the partition plan, but refused to enforce it, arguing it was not acceptable to both sides! In September 1947, before any plan for a smooth transition of power had been formed, the British government unilaterally announced that the Mandate for Palestine would end on May 14, 1948
     
    Albert Einstein two years earlier, 1/11/46 in testimony before the Anglo-American Committee of Inquiry on Palestine in Washington explained, “The difficulties between the Jews and Arabs are artificially created, and are created by the English...The British are always in a passive alliance with those land possessing owners which suppress the work of the people in the different trades. It is my impression that Palestine is a kind of small model of India… Now how can I explain otherwise that national troublemaking is a British enterprise? You see, if the thing is really so, the British have really very badly violate their obligations…But with the British rule as it is, I believe it is impossible to find a real remedy. … The Irishmen have for a long time suffered under your rule.”
     
    A UN transition trusteeship would have been able to have established a single democratic state, not frenetically in haste, but with calm deliberation in which all parties would have had participation. Menachem Begin’s faction would of have held fast to the goal for somehow eventually arranging a separate Jewish political entity, but the stronger socialist faction Zionists, with its strong vibrant pioneering spirit among the Kibbutzim etc., would have worked to make a Jewish homeland within a new state of Israel-Palestine (Arabs going along with Israel-Palestine rather than Palestine-Israel out of respect for the ancient Kingdom of David and Solomon of the Bible described with reverence in the Qu’ran antedating Arab ancestors’ arrival in the seventh century)
    The partition plan made provision for a continuing influx of Jewish settlers. The UN interim authority would have surely also done so. As the constitution of the state was being planned, Arab opposition to substantial Jewish immigration would have been overcome by compensating factors of new wealth and investments coming in from abroad in support of  Palestine Jewry building a better country for everyone.
    Jews would have had the access to the entire Mandate of Palestine that militant Biblical devotees now seek  encroaching kilometer by kilometer on what islands of land is presently left for the Arabs to call home – a blockaded and occupied home, at that.
    In this kind of imagined format, how easy it might have been for Yehudi Menuhin’s “only possible solution” to have developed , namely, the kind of federated republic that is French-German Switzerland (the Italian part comparable to Druze and Bedouin autonomous areas).
    Given the strong tradition of Jewish cohesion and unity for maintaining customs and Jewish uniqueness, a single undivided Democratic Israel-Palestine eventually might have morphed peacefully and carefully negotiated into two such federated states within one united republic. This would have been extremely logical and entirely possible.
    ‘Have your cake and eat it ‘two.’ ‘One state solution and two state solution at the same time.’ Neither of them phony, like the present Swiss cheese mapped, unsustainable Arab state proposed that no one really wants, nor the now unrealistic, for being 63 years late, single democratic state proposal that Arabs, Ahmadinejad and moral Orthodox sects like Neutrai Karta call for – unacceptable for most all Israelis and unthinkable for its politicians.
    On the other hand, with all the intellectual prowess that immigrating Jews were bringing as engineers, doctors, scientists and workers knowledgeable in advanced technology, and the international financial connections available to their leaders, both sides might have opted to stay mixed, legislating  a great degree of regard for cultural, religious and distinctions that would see  Jews sharing results with Arabs in a Israel-Palestine smack in a sea of Arab nations accepting a Jewish lead in the affairs of this one unique mixed Jewish-Arab state.
    In 1927, in “The Jews and Palestine, ” in About Zionism, Einstein wrote referring to his experience during his visit in 1923, “At no time did I get the impression that the Arab problem might threaten the development of the Palestine project. I believe rather that, among the working classes especially, Jew and Arab on the whole get on excellently together. Two years later,  Einstein said he would not remain associated with the Zionist movement unless it tried to make peace with the Arabs, in deed as well as in word. The Jews should form committees with the Arab peasants and workers, and not try to negotiate only with the leaders.” [Clark, Einstein, 482, citing Bentwich, My 77 years, 99]
     
    Address by Einstein at the Manhattan Opera House to the National Labor Committee for Palestine, as reported in the New York Times. April 20, 1935 JEWISH-ARAB AMITY URGED BY EINSTEIN
     
    Instead of deepening animosity and hatred born in fear and violence, there could have been lots of trade offs – a huge market for a Jewish managed small powerhouse state in a greater Arabian community of nations enjoying the benefits of economic development spreading from a modern ethnically blended state within it, quickly sprung up their Middle East so long held down by colonialism and neocolonialism.
     
    Arabs stopped the Christian persecution of Jews twice, now Jews would have been helping liberate Arabs from Christian exploitation while building a Jewish home in Israel-Palestine.
    What is the point of bringing up all this largely blacked out history now? Well, if all the early support for Hitler and shutting the door on Jewish escape was just appropriate to business profit margins, then might we not assume the subsequent assuaging of conscience for feeling responsibility for the plight of Holocaust survivors, and arranging a war for the founding of Israel and defending Israel’s every policy ever since, must have been just appropriate to business profit margins as well. In both cases, that of fomenting war in Europe and that of fomenting war in Palestine, the arms manufacturing industry reaped and is reaping an unsurpassed level of profits reconstruction flourished.
    If ‘good for business’ always means persecution and war, maybe this thieving and chaotic rule by the wealthy we allow to be explained away as a rational economic ‘system’ (Capitalism) – now a globalized ‘system’ – needs to be thoroughly investigated and substituted by something more rational, sane, humane, peaceful, appropriate to life on earth, and less violent, destructive and murderous.
    With the world evolving and changing, how long will Israel remain merely a U.S. outpost in the Middle East and servant of America’s business run foreign policy of world hegemony in disregard of its own safety and that of everyone else?
     
    Einstein in a  Letter of Protest about visit by Menachem Begin to the United States, as published in the New York Times, Dec. 4,, 1948, “Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our time is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the “Freedom Party” (Tnuat Haherrut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods and political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist right-wing chauvinist organization in Palestine.”   
     
    Menachem Begin would be prime minister of Israel from 1977 to 1983
     
    End Notes
    1.  For the reader: Selected Restrictions (for entire Versailles Treaty text click on http://avalon.law.yale.edu/imt/partv.asp   
    PART V MILITARY, NAVAL AND AIR CLAUSES.
    The German military forces shall be demobilized and reduced as prescribed hereinafter. Importation into Germany of arms, munitions and war material of every kind shall be strictly prohibited. The same applies to the manufacture for, and export to, foreign countries of arms, munitions and war material of every kind.
    2.  Several passages in Mein Kampf are undeniably of a genocidal nature. Hitler wrote "the nationalization of our masses will succeed only when, aside from all the positive struggle for the soul of our people, their international poisoners are exterminated. If at the beginning of the war and during the war twelve or fifteen thousand of these Hebrew corrupters of the nation had been subjected to poison gas, such as had to be endured in the field by hundreds of thousands of our very best German workers of all classes and professions, then the sacrifice of millions at the front would not have been in vain." In Mein Kampf, Hitler blamed Germany's chief woes on the parliament of the Weimar Republic, the Jews, and Social Democrats, as well as Marxists, though he believed that Marxists, Social Democrats, and the parliament were all working for Jewish interests.
    3..  In Mein Kampf Hitler openly stated the future German expansion in the East, foreshadowing Generalplan Ost:English: Master Plan for the East), abbreviated GPO, was the Nazi German government's plan for the genocide and ethnic cleansing on a vast scale, and colonization of Central and Eastern Europe by Germans. Central and Eastern Europe by Germans.
    In the chapter "Eastern Orientation or Eastern Policy", Hitler argued that the Germans needed Lebensraum in the East, a "historic destiny" that would properly nurture the German people.[14]
    “And so we National Socialists consciously draw a line beneath the foreign policy tendency of our pre-War period. We take up where we broke off six hundred years ago. We stop the endless German movement to the south and west, and turn our gaze toward the land in the east. At long last we break off the colonial and commercial policy of the pre-War period and shift to the soil policy of the future. If we speak of soil in Europe today, we can primarily have in mind only Russia and her vassal border states.” 
    4.  There are official US Army photos of Americans standing over dead Bolsheviks* posted in the margins of Wikipedia's articles, Polar Bear Expedition and the American Expeditionary Force Siberia(*'bolshevik' in Russian means 'majority' referring to past voting results).
    At another point Schell makes a withering deprecation of the victor's right to judge the vanquished, “Is Hiroshima,” he wonders aloud, “the superior morality?”
                * Buck v. Bell,[https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/274/200/] (1927), is a decision of the United States Supreme Court written by Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., in which the Court ruled that a state statute permitting compulsory sterilization of the unfit, including the intellectually disabled, "for the protection and health of the state" did not violate the Due Process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. The decision was largely seen as an endorsement of negative eugenics—the attempt to improve the human race by eliminating "defectives" from the gene pool. The Supreme Court has never expressly overturned Buck v. Bell.
     
     
     
     
    7.   In its crusade to “make the world safe for democracy,“ the Wilson administration took immediate steps at home to curtail one of the pillars of democracy – press freedom – by implementing a plan to control, manipulate and censor all news coverage, on a scale never seen in U.S. history.
    Following the lead of the Germans and British, Wilson elevated propaganda and censorship to strategic elements of all-out war. Even before the U.S. entered the war, Wilson had expressed the expectation that his fellow Americans would show what he considered “loyalty.
    Immediately upon entering the war, the Wilson administration brought the most modern management techniques to bear in the area of government-press relations. Wilson started one of the earliest uses of government propaganda. He waged a campaign of intimidation and outright suppression against those ethnic and socialist papers that continued to oppose the war. Taken together, these wartime measures added up to an unprecedented assault on press freedom. By Christopher B. Daly, smithsonian.com April 28, 2017
    The manipulation of the American mind: Edward Bernays and the birth of public relations

    July 9, 2015, Author Richard Gunderman Chancellor's Professor of Medicine, Liberal Arts, and Philanthropy, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis

     

    In the 1920s, Joseph Goebbels became an avid admirer of Bernays and his writings – despite the fact that Bernays was a Jew. When Goebbels became the minister of propaganda for the Third Reich, he sought to exploit Bernays’ ideas to the fullest extent possible. For example, he created a “Fuhrer cult” around Adolph Hitler.
    Bernays learned that the Nazis were using his work in 1933, from a foreign correspondent for Hearst newspapers. He later recounted in his 1965 autobiography:
    They were using my books as the basis for a destructive campaign against the Jews of Germany. This shocked me, but I knew any human activity can be used for social purposes or misused for antisocial ones.
    What Bernays’ writings furnish is not a principle or tradition by which to evaluate the appropriateness of propaganda, but simply a means for shaping public opinion for any purpose whatsoever, whether beneficial to human beings or not.
    describing him and his colleagues as ‘professional poisoners of the public mind, exploiters of foolishness, fanaticism, and self-interest.’ http://theconversation.com/the-manipulation-of-the-american-mind-edward-bernays-and-the-birth-of-public-relations-44393
    Britain’s Moment in Palestine, Robert Cohen, 2014
     
    9.  A second quote of Churchill:“I have always said that if Great Britain were defeated in war I hoped we should find a Hitler to lead us back to our rightful position among the nations.” Winston Churchill in the House of Commons, Nov. 6, also in 1938 
     
    11.  “The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson.”
        Franklin D. Roosevelt in a letter to his confidant Colonel House, 1932 (Jackson was US president a hundred years earlier)
     
    “In 1904, the Carnegie Institution established a laboratory complex at Cold Spring Harbor on Long Island that stockpiled millions of index cards on ordinary Americans, as researchers carefully plotted the removal of families, bloodlines and whole peoples. From Cold Spring Harbor, eugenics advocates agitated in the legislatures of America, as well as the nation’s social service agencies and associations. The Rockefeller Foundation helped funded the German eugenics program and even funded the program that Josef Mengele worked in before he went to Auschwitz.
    Even the United States Supreme Court endorsed aspects of eugenics. In its infamous 1927 decision, Supreme Court Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes wrote, “It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind”. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.” This decision opened the floodgates for thousands to be coercively sterilized or otherwise persecuted as subhuman. Years later, the Nazis at the Nuremberg trials quoted Holmes’s words in their own defense.
    Hitler proudly told his comrades just how closely he followed the progress of the American eugenics movement. “I have studied with great interest,” he told a fellow Nazi, “the laws of several American states concerning prevention of reproduction by people whose progeny would, in all probability, be of no value or be injurious to the racial stock.”
    Hitler even wrote a fan letter to American eugenic leader Madison Grant calling his race-based eugenics book, The Passing of the Great Race his “bible.”
    [later on] Egenicists across America welcomed Hitler’s plans as the logical fulfillment of their own decades of research and effort. California eugenicists republished Nazi propaganda for American consumption. They also arranged for Nazi scientific exhibits, such as an August 1934 display at the L.A. County Museum, for the annual meeting of the American Public Health Association.

    In 1934, as Germany’s sterilizations were accelerating beyond 5,000 per month, the California eugenics leader C. M. Goethe upon returning from Germany ebulliently bragged to a key colleague, “You will be interested to know, that your work has played a powerful part in shaping the opinions of the group of intellectuals who are behind Hitler in this epoch-making program. Everywhere I sensed that their opinions have been tremendously stimulated by American thought.

     

    , who became director and eventually an architect of Hitler’s systematic medical repression.
    Beginning in 1940, thousands of Germans taken from old age homes, mental institutions and other custodial facilities were systematically gassed. Between 50,000 and 100,000 were eventually killed.
    13.  Albert Einstein described our present world situation way back during the First World War: "How is it at all possible that this culture-loving era could be so monstrously amoral? " All our lauded technological progress -- our very civilization - is like the axe in the hand of the pathological criminal." - Albert Einstein, Letter to Heinrich Zangger (1917)
    Mockingbird was a secret operation by the United States Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to influence media. Begun in the 1950s, organization recruited leading American journalists into a network to help present the CIA's views, and funded some student and cultural organizations, and magazines as fronts and also worked to influence foreign media and political campaigns.
    After 1953, Operation Mockingbird had major influence over 25 newspapers and wire agencies. The usual methodology was placing reports developed from intelligence provided by the CIA to witting or unwitting reporters. Those reports would then be repeated or cited by the preceding reporters which in turn would then be cited throughout the media wire services. These networks were run by people with well-known pro-American big business and anti-communist views.
    The CIA currently maintains a network of individuals around the world who attempt to influence opinion through the use of covert propaganda, and provide direct access to a large amount of newspapers and periodicals, scores of press services and news agencies, radio and television stations, commercial book publishers, and other foreign media outlets."
    After leaving The Washington Post in 1977, Carl Bernstein spent six months looking at the relationship of the CIA and the press during the Cold War years.
    There Was No Libyan Peaceful Protest, Just Murderous Gangs and Nic Robertson By Jay Janson June 20 2011
    The destruction of a beautifully well-kept and prosperous nation, the 53rd highest developed country in the world with free health care and education. A standard of living that was higher than nine European nations, including Russia, is no more, 
     


    About the Author
     Jay Janson, who lived and taught in Korea for six years, is an archival research peoples historian activist, musician and writer; has lived and worked on all continents in 67 countries; articles on media published in China, Italy, UK, India, Sweden, Germany Vietnam and the US; now resides in NYC; First effort was a series of articles on deadly cultural pollution endangering seven areas of life emanating from Western corporate owned commercial media published in Hong Kong’s Window Magazine 1993; is coordinator of the Howard Zinn co-founded King Condemned US Wars International Awareness Campaign: (King Condemned US Wars) http://kingcondemneduswars.blogspot.com/ and website historian of the Ramsey Clark co-founded Prosecute US Crimes Against Humanity Now Campaign http://prosecuteuscrimesagainsthumanitynow.blogspot.com/ featuring a country by country history of US crimes and laws pertaining. Jay spent eight years as Assistant Conductor of the Vietnam Symphony Orchestra in Hanoi and also toured, with Dan Tai-Son, Tchaikovsky Competition First Prize winner, who practiced in a Hanoi bomb shelter. The orchestra was founded by Ho Chi Minh, and it plays most of its concerts in the Opera House, a diminutive copy of the Paris Opera.

    More about the amazing life of Jay Janson.

    In 1945, US ally Ho, from a balcony overlooking the large square and flanked by an American Major and a British Colonel, declared Vietnam independent. Everyone in the orchestra lost family, “killed by the Americans” they would mention simply, with kind Buddhist equanimity. Jay can be reached at: tdmedia2000@yahoo.com. Read other articles by Jay http://dissidentvoice.org/author/jayjanson/Jay Janson, spent eight years as Assistant Conductor of the Vietnam Symphony Orchestra in Hanoi and also toured, including with Dan Tai-son, who practiced in a Hanoi bomb shelter. The orchestra was founded by Ho Chi Minh,and it plays most of its concerts in the Opera House, a diminutive copy of the Paris Opera. In 1945, our ally Ho, from a balcony overlooking the large square and flanked by an American Major and a British Colonel, declared Vietnam independent. Everyone in the orchestra lost family, “killed by the Americans” they would mention simply, with Buddhist un-accusing acceptance. Read other articles by Jay.



    JAY JANSON—What uncomfortable realization of the enormity of American and European society’s complicity in the Holocaust there was, formed a backdrop for additional basic business considerations entertained by many of the same influential U.S. politicians beholden to Wall Street’s avarice and economic aggression, who had rearmed Germany. Highly placed villainous capitalist gangsters saw an opportunity to make use of the plight of a quarter million ‘undesirable’ Jewish Holocaust survivors to create a client colony of Europeans in the midst of oil rich Muslim countries.

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



    black-horizontal
    [premium_newsticker id=”154171″]

    By subscribing you won’t miss the special editions.

    Parting shot—a word from the editors
    The Best Definition of Donald Trump We Have Found

    In his zeal to prove to his antagonists in the War Party that he is as bloodthirsty as their champion, Hillary Clinton, and more manly than Barack Obama, Trump seems to have gone “play-crazy” -- acting like an unpredictable maniac in order to terrorize the Russians into forcing some kind of dramatic concessions from their Syrian allies, or risk Armageddon.However, the “play-crazy” gambit can only work when the leader is, in real life, a disciplined and intelligent actor, who knows precisely what actual boundaries must not be crossed. That ain’t Donald Trump -- a pitifully shallow and ill-disciplined man, emotionally handicapped by obscene privilege and cognitively crippled by white American chauvinism. By pushing Trump into a corner and demanding that he display his most bellicose self, or be ceaselessly mocked as a “puppet” and minion of Russia, a lesser power, the War Party and its media and clandestine services have created a perfect storm of mayhem that may consume us all. Glen Ford, Editor in Chief, Black Agenda Report 

    window.newShareCountsAuto="smart";




    Russian Fleet PART 1: Towards a ‘frigate-centric’ navy

     

    Russian Fleet PART 1: Towards a ‘frigate-centric’ navy

    by LeDahu

    After a brief interlude due to professional reasons, please find below the first part of an article on the Russian Navy, on the latest generation of frigates and the technological advances that has enabled Russian sea power to be noticed globally.

    This is article is partly in response to the original article, “New, Blue-Water Frigates to Become Main Surface Vessels of the Russian Navy”,  back in the summer, written by an Ukrainian naval officer for the Jamestown Foundation and widely circulated on social media. To save the readers too much trouble, the Russian naval capabilities are mostly presented in a negative light, and yet at the same time the author over exaggerates the Russian Navy’s overall ambitions.  [NB Typical Western commentator framing of Russian military].

    The author devotes a chunk of the article to the woes of operating the “Admiral Kuznetsov” aircraft carrier. The author also slants his article towards a perception of Russia’s naval ambitions being blunted by financial woes. (Russia Insider 15 May 2017). What the Jamestown author does show is the fact that the Russian Navy is concentrating its efforts on frigate-type ships rather than carriers or Mistral type Amphibious Helicopter ships. Given the need of reconciling divergent interests, 1. Geopolitical necessities, 2. financial restrictions and 3. actual/projected naval operational capabilities, all of which requires careful consideration when designing a surface warship.

    The Admiral Grigorovich frigate will be the first in a series of six frigates of the Project 11356 being built for the Black Sea Fleet to join the Russian Navy.

    What does it all mean in real terms, and what is a frigate anyway? And how does modern technology blur this definition beyond the traditional concepts of the last 50 years? Going back to basics:

    1. Definition & role of frigate is:

    a warship with a mixed armament, generally lighter than a destroyer (in the US navy, heavier) and of a kind originally introduced for convoy escort work.”  And post-war: “also adopted an antiaircraft role.”

    In other words, a multi-tasking warship, between approximately 3000-7000 tonnes, with various types of missiles, guns, air defence systems/radars & ASW sensors, designed to either operate autonomously, or as part of a task group, with also the ability to escort merchant ships.  A complex naval platform, with multilayered and overlapping systems onboard.

    Thus, by their very nature, frigates tend to be the mainstay combat ship of most navies. China has 24 Type 054A frigates in service for example,(with 46 overall), compared to 35 destroyers, whereas India has 11 frigates & 11 destroyers. The number & use of frigates does vary from navy to navy, depending on its naval doctrine. The designation of ‘frigate’ to ships can be misleading, take for instance, at the moment, the US Navy also has only 1 frigate in commission, the “USS Constitution”.

    The US Navy retired its Oliver Hazard Perry frigate class and its intended replacement is the Littoral Combat Ship, (LCS), (8 currently in service) which for a long time has been riddled with technical glitches & ‘issues’.(Wikipedia 2017). Not quite a frigate but a glorified expensive oversized patrol boat, judging by the comments made in various US reports. (Bloomberg May 2013) (DefenceWorld Net April 2013)

    A little bit about shipping and technology in general for context. At a time when shipyards are building bigger and bigger, with container ships of 21,000+ TEU, this shows well how important parts of merchant shipping is increasing vastly in size, and rapidly too.  Now compare this to the military, where downsizing and automating systems is becoming increasingly the norm and extremely vital for improving combat effectiveness.

    The space once filled by battleships, followed by large missile cruisers taking the limelight, is now filled primarily by frigates. Big gun ships became obsolete with improved air power & long-range coastal defences. Not quite the same story with large missile cruisers, as this is largely based on impressive changes in missile technology as well as electronics, computing, engineering miniaturisation & nanotechnology.

    Another aspect to consider is flexibility, in other words multi-tasking roles. The US Navy initially took the route of using modular units, (using ISO containers), for its LCS class ships, the idea of being able to change the mission roles of a ship in matter of weeks. This trailblazing concept has hit a few snags along the way, and as a result it has been reconsidered. (US Navy April 2017). Yet they certainly don’t have the same firepower as a  much smaller Russian navy Buyan-M class corvette! [More on that in Part 2].

    This nevertheless shows the huge innovative & ambitious design concept that continued expansion of high-tech technology has offered in the naval field in a few decades.  Add in, the increased use of unmanned vehicles in a combat role is also a significant step forward. Interestingly, the US Navy is now reconfiguring the LCS into a frigate class. [NB The keywords to retain are flexibility and multi-tasking.]

    A comprehensive technical rundown of the top 10 modern frigates from around the world is covered in this article. (Defencyclopedia  2 Jan 2016). Surprisingly the number one spot is a Russian frigate that has not yet entered service.

    Background- Russian navy

    [dropcap]B[/dropcap]ack in April 2017, Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu, said that in the near future the main combat ships of the Navy frigates will be like “Admiral Gorshkov”. He stated that: “Such multi-purpose frigates, equipped with long-range precision weapons, should become the Navy’s main combat ships in the near future,” (TASS 21 April 2017).He continued by adding “Their commissioning for service will help ensure the smooth renewal of the fleets’ surface forces and raise their combat potential by 30%”.

    Several days later, President Putin stated in a defence meeting that “by 2020, the share of modern weapons and equipment both in the Army and Navy should rise to 70%.” (Kremlin.ru 25 April 2017). At the end of 2016, it stood at 47%.

    Taking a strictly conservative outlook, yes, the Russian navy has downsized considerably, it is a shadow of what the Soviet Navy was and hadn’t had the opportunity to modernise itself effectively until fairly recently.  President Putin termed it this week as : …”navy reboot program…” (TASS 16 May 2017)

    The underpinning defence doctrine is largely based on the perception of making Russia secure, as part of “Eurasia” as an entity. Broadly similar to what China is doing. In other words, ensuring a robust defensive posture of what is regarded as being on “home turf”.  When there is news that construction of a an aircraft carrier is being touted in Russia, it is because some defence contractors are trying to position themselves for future potential bids.  Yet, the shipyards are busy with mostly submarine or small combatant ship building.

    The Russian & Chinese military doctrines are poles apart with that of the US, with its aggressively militarized global ‘exceptionalism’ doctrine, with its 10+ “carriers which are the centerpiece of America’s naval fleet.” (The National Interest 15 May 2017) They are substantially different in approach, methodology and expectations.

    The main focus of attention of the Russian Navy is on green-water operations, defending its coastline, close to home first and foremost. Even the US Navy saw the large destroyers would not be effective in shallow waters, hence the introduction of the LCS. However, Russia took out one element out of the US navy convoluted thought process, and went straight for a versatile frigate class warship, ideal for a green water environment, but also having the capability to carry out long-range blue-water missions as necessary. Quite a challenging portfolio for naval designers.

    The Jamestown author, however does not mention the obvious fact that there has been a gaping ‘hole’ in the combat capabilities of the Russian navy for several decades.  That hole needed to be filled by a dedicated frigate class warship, comparable to the range of sophisticated NATO frigates. The last time there was a frigate class was with the Soviet-era Burevestnik Class frigates (Project 1135).

    What does Russia have on the table that makes a shift towards a ‘frigate-centric’ navy purposeful?

    [dropcap]B[/dropcap]asically, Russia had almost a clean slate when designing its new frigates, taking into consideration the capabilities of its ‘competitors’ but also its domestic defence needs & power projection. But having a clean slate also means encountering problems along the way. The US Navy  too has experienced that quite clearly & persistently with its LCS program. However, undertaking such a design also meant halting & reversing significant long-term decline in Russian naval research and development. Despite having limited access to Western naval shipbuilders know-how, (mostly through the Mistral class contract), Russian naval constructors still lag behind their Western & Asian counterparts.

    Which Russian Navy fleets will get the modern frigates first designed back in 1997 and 2003 respectively? One, the  Admiral Essen,  has its permanent home port as part of the Black Sea Fleet, joining the Admiral Grigorovich, (TASS 5 May 2017).”By the end of the year the Black Sea fleet will receive two new frigates”.

    1. The ‘Grigorovich class’ (Project 11356Р/М), it is a multi-purpose frigate: Role: AD- ASW- Escort. Full displacement: 4,035 tons. Length:124.8m and 60,900 shp

    The successor to the Burevestnik class, based on a proven design originating in the proven Indian Talwar class, the “Admiral Grigorovich” class is an alternative to the “Admiral Gorshkov” class. This particular class were constructed as a stop-gap measure, largely due to the ongoing problems with construction of the “Admiral Gorshkov”.  Not as powerful, but still with a good overall capability as a frigate.

    The “Admiral Grigorovich” itself has already gained some ‘notoriety’, judging by the hype of the MSM articles written about it so far. This now famous frigate initially earned its reputation for taking part in Syrian operations back in 2015, with a series of Kalibr launches against terrorists targets. US naval expert, J. Harley remarked that the Russian Navy was a key factor in the Syrian campaign, something that was inconceivable 15 years previously. [Harley, Jeffrey A. “Meeting operational needs. President’s forum.” Naval War College Review, Winter 2017, p. 7+. Academic OneFile]

    Not taking MSM articles at face value, but the latest missile technology suite presented onboard a frigate such as the “Admiral Essen”, has twice the main weapons capacity of a Sovremmeny class destroyer with 8 Moskits. Another  example of the technological leap would be the Soviet Kynda class cruiser with the SSN3 missile unit onboard.  It was so bulky that reloads were limited to 16 missiles in total capacity. Now compare its size and capacity with that of the “Admiral Grigorovich” class.

    Interestingly, the Black Sea Fleet is earmarked to have all 4 of this class.  So the Northern Sea and Pacific Sea Fleets aren’t expected to have this warship class at all. The last 2 of this class are earmarked to be sold to India, as announced by the USC shipyard in August 2017.

    1. ‘Admiral Gorshkov-class’ frigates- (Project 22350): Role: AD-ASW- escort.

    A Project 22350 frigate has a displacement of 4,550 tons, with a length of 135m. The capacity of its diesel-gas-turbine power plant is 65,000 hp.

    As exemplified in this video:

    Project 22350 ‘Admiral Gorshkov’ frigate was earmarked to be a jewel in the Russian Navy’s combat inventory. Beset by a long-running series of technical problems since the start, it is intended as the successor to the ‘Krivak’ class.

    Although it was originally planned to have 6 built by 2020, (Lenta 5 May 16), only two more Admiral Gorshkov-class frigates are expected to be commissioned into the Russian Navy by 2020. (TASS 5 March 2017) and with another 2 anticipated by 2025. (RIA 16 May 2017)

    This is largely due to the non-availability of appropriate marine turbines. However, the start of a domestic serial production of such turbines planned for next year, should help to clear up the hold-up in construction programs at a later date (RIA Novosti Dec 2016). This is so significant that President Putin opened a production line for marine gas turbines at the Saturn, (NPO), company earlier in the year.

    The “Admiral Makarov”, (on sea missile trials, see below) is also in its final stages of operational acceptance, as of late April, as shown on Russian TV (April 2017).  The Northern Sea Fleet is the intended recipient for all of these frigates.

    SEE MORE: “Admiral Makarov” photo gallery

    Video of trials in Russian

    Video of trials “Shtil-1” on “Admiral Makarov”

    https://youtu.be/y0ioOPtX5MQ

    Significantly, the head of Naval Shipbuilding, Vladimir Trapeznikov, said that “after the Navy receives four project 22350 frigates, the project will be upgraded.” (RIA 16 May 2017). Notice ‘upgrade’, not new blue-sky new off-the-wall design, well meant design concept similar to what the US Navy envisaged with the LCS program but instead ended up in a mess. [Which is probably why the Russian Navy ‘Lider-Class’ has not gone ahead as originally scheduled].

    Limitations in physical numbers of frigates have been offset by a versatile missile technology, which allows a small ship to have a formidable missile capability. Probably what Defence Minister Shoigu’s quote of raising combat potential by 30% was referring to.

    Missiles are the post WW2 naval game changers, take for example: the destruction of the ‘Eilat’ and the sinking of HMS ‘Sheffield’.  Both changed the naval dimension of conflict and subsequently redefined the types & roles of warships, in response to the missile threat.

    At the heart of the Russian navy modernisation program is the Kalibr cruise missile, first in service in 2012. It is a tremendous potent force multiplier for the Russian military overall and makes the Russian Navy significantly more powerful & with greater range, proportionally to its overall tonnage.

    A self-contained, compact, multi-purpose frigate is extremely useful for general high-end naval missions. This is what we are seeing (as a microcosm) in Syria of late, more so that there the “Admiral Essen” & “Admiral Grigorovich” have been together as part of the Mediterranean Squadron. (TASS 5 May 2017)

    The predominant use of frigates and corvettes, (which I will cover in Part II) are sufficient to give Russia an effective security/defence buffer zone, with the added benefit of a long-range strike capacity. As testified in this US navy document “The new technologically advanced Russian Navy, increasingly armed with the Kalibr family of weapons, will be able to more capably defend the maritime approaches to the Russian Federation and exert significant influence in adjacent seas”.

    [NB: Yeah – those ‘adjacent areas’ so coveted by NATO as sole property, is being slowly contested by Russian sea power.]

     Quickly outlining the types of Kalibrs in naval use on warships:

    SURFACE SHIP   SUBMARINE  
    Anti-ship variant Land-attack Variant Anti-ship variant Land-attack Variant
     3M54T 3M14T 3M54K 3M14K
    VLS VLS _ _
    Thrust Vectoring boosters Thrust Vectoring boosters _ _
    440-660km range 1.500-2.500km range 440-660km range 1.500-2.500km range

    The Kalibr is designated the SS-N-27 Sizzler by NATO and LACM has NATO designation of SS-N-30A. The Russian cruise missile counterpart to the well-known U.S Navy Tomahawk, made its world combat debut on 7 October 2015, launched from Mediterranean and Caspian Sea based Buyan-class corvettes.

    The ship-based Kalibr cruise missile is deployed from a VLS (Vertical Launch System: a ‘cell’, part of the UKSK module), based on 2x 4-missile tubular configuration. The advantage of this, is that missiles can clear the hull of the ship before igniting. Thus a ship can launch a series of high-precision strikes on shore targets from a distance of thousands of kilometers. Another variant is the 3C-14 box missile launcher unit, (more rectangular at deck level).

    Russia continues to use Kalibrs against terrorist infrastructures in Syria, in which both the ‘Admiral Essen” and “Admiral Grigorovich” have played a significant role so far and likely to continue to do so for the time being. The use of ship-borne missile strikes during the Syrian campaign is a classic example of what is cited as being “liquid warfare”, liquid warfare being “a way of war that shuns the direct control of territory, focusing instead on the destruction of enemy forces and/or infrastructure.”[Mutschler, Max M. “Liquid warfare as a challenge to international order.”]

    In other words, something that had been the exclusive domain of the US and NATO, has also been harnessed by Russia.

    The small numbers of current & planned Russian Navy frigates have been largely offset by the combat proven versatile Kalibr missile and other advanced electronic technology.  It was probably hoped that the Russian Navy in the next decade would have shifted towards a ‘frigate- centric’ navy, but this in fact hasn’t happened, due to the small numbers and limitations on power plants, shipbuilding and design parameters.  Yet at the same time, focus has also been geared towards a ‘corvette-centric’ navy, which will be covered more in Part 2.

    BONUS VIDEO
    Russia produces simpler but resilient and versatile weapons, its warplanes are celebrated for those qualities. Here’s the story of the famed SU 25, Russia’s answer to the American A-10.

    ABOUT THE SAKER
     Like The Greanville Post, with which it is now allied in his war against official disinformation, the Saker's site, VINEYARD OF THE SAKER, is the hub of an international network of sites devoted to fighting the "billion-dollar deception machinery" supporting the empire's wars against Russia, China, Iran, Syria, Venezuela and any other independent nation opposing or standing in the way of Washington's drive for global hegemony.  The Saker is published in more than half a dozen languages. A Saker is a very large falcon, native to Europe and Asia. 




    The Crooks, the Clowns and the Nazis – a dynamic analysis


    HELP ENLIGHTEN YOUR FELLOWS. BE SURE TO PASS THIS ON. SURVIVAL DEPENDS ON IT.

    The latest big news out of the Ukraine



    Have you heard what the latest big news out of the Ukraine is? No? There is a mini-Maidan under way and Ukrainian nationalists seem to hope that Poroshenko will be kicked out before the end of the week. You did not know? Well, that is the real big news, the fact that you did not hear about this.


    Mikhail Saakashvili was one of the ambitious thugs that came to power in the aftermath of the USSR dissolution. He has naturally proved useful to Washington's machinations in the region.

    Truthfully, what is going on is kind of interesting. Let me sum it up: the former President of Georgia Mikhail Saakashvili (who was stripped of his Georgian citizenship and of his Ukrainian citizenship) recently crossed the border (through Poland, of course) and proceeded to travel to Kiev to demand Poroshenko’s resignation. You think that I am kidding? Check the Wikipedia article about him, it has all the details. It gets better. There is a consensus amongst analysts that Saakashvili is being used as a battering ram by somebody far more influential – Iulia Timoshenko, of course. But what is really new is that many well informed analysts and commentators seem to think that the USA and EU are not the main driving force behind these latest developments (though they are involved, of course).

    What is going on here?

    Well, as I said, the big news is that you did not hear about it. You did not hear about it because fundamentally nobody cares, least of all the Trump Administration. True, the Trump Administration is so busy self-destructing that it does not really care about Kurdistan either and that implies that it does not even really care about the Holy of Holies : Israel (cry me a river Bibi!). So never mind the Trump administration, even the Ziomedia mostly seems not to care any more what happens in the Ukraine (of course, some hardcore hardliners still continue to hallucinate). Hence the (relative) silence on this issue. What this tells the Ukrainian politicians is that they are pretty much on their own. And that is why they are taking matters in their own hands.


    Donbass fighters

    I don’t think that it is worthwhile to plunge into all the personalities and factions which are currently involved in the political struggle. I can summarize it by saying that there are four main groups currently identifiable: bad, worse, even worse and the silent majority. Let’s begin by the last one, the silent majority.

    By all accounts (and from all my personal contacts) it is pretty obvious that the vast majority of those who could not leave the Ukraine are now depressed, silent and in a “survival mode”. The Ukrainians, like the Russians, are extremely good at this survival mode which a very painful history has taught them: they could survive in conditions where everybody else would perish. Their history has also taught them that there are times when you want to stay low, shut up and focus on making it through the day. I also think that most Ukrainians fully realize that there is no faction/force out there representing their interest and that means that they have absolutely no reason at all to get involved. This has nothing to do with passivity or political ignorance: that is common sense. Getting involved is what gets you killed. Hunkering down until the worst of the storm passes is the only correct survival technique in times of very ugly political struggles.

    Then there are bad, worse and even worse. Bad – that’s Poroshenko. Worse – that’s the crazies à la Oleg Liashko. Even worse – that would be the rabid ideologues like Tiagnibok or Farion. We can think of it as the Crooks, the Clowns and the Nazis.

    The Crooks, the Clown and the Nazis:

    [dropcap]R[/dropcap]ight now, the Crooks are still in power but they are struggling. Worse, the Crooks are terrified of the Nazis, so they constantly have to engage into a stream of concessions to try to appease them which, of course, fails, and only emboldens them even further (sounds exactly like Trump’s never-ending stream of concessions to the Neocons, doesn’t it?). As for the Clowns, they can be bought by both sides, sometimes at the same time, and they keep the people entertained by their antics. The Clowns are really a byproduct of the terminally lunatic Ukrainian nationalist ideology, but they don’t really represent a powerful constituency: the Crooks and the Nazis are far more powerful. Still, don’t dismiss the Clowns too soon, because they could suddenly switch to the Crooks or the Nazis depending who offers them a better deal (or scares them most).


    Members of the volunteer forces supporting the Novorussians, a kind of foreign legion. Their morale is high, but the enemy is well armed and numerically superior.


    This would all seem rather amusing if yet another Ukronazi attack was not a very real possibility. Here is how this could happen.

    The Crooks are barely holding on to power, and they might have to start a war only to deflect the mounting political pressure against them into another direction. Wars are good to circle the wagons and to crush the opposition.

    The Clowns, due to their ideology, would have to approve of a new war. They simply could not say anything against it. If a war is launched, they would have to give it a standing ovation. Besides, if they tried any form of disagreement they would be easily crushed by the Crooks and Nazis. So the Clowns will always support whatever the other two factions agree upon.

    As for for Nazis, well, war against Russia and anything Russian is their raison d’être, the very core of their identity and the purpose of their lives. The Ukronazis have a profoundly revanchist worldview and agenda and if defeating Russia is not an option (although some of them won’t even accept that as a fact of life) then killing or expelling all the non-Ukronazis from the Ukraine is an acceptable substitute for them. Yup, they even have some convoluted racial purity theories (Ukie Aryans versus Finno-Ugric Russian Mongols). True, bona fide Nazis are a minority in the Ukraine, but they compensate for that by having guns, lots of guns.

    What has kept from Ukronazis from attacking since their last attempt is the painful memory of the crushing defeat they suffered at the hands of the Novorussians. But herein also lies a very real risk: defeats often make armies better, victories often makes them complacent. When I hear the Novorussians speaking of “next time we go to Kiev” I hope that their confidence is warranted, but I am afraid that they might be underestimating the opponent.

    Are the sides really ready for a resumption of warfare?

    Ukrainian troops

    [dropcap]I[/dropcap]n truth it is very hard to assess the chances of another Ukronazi attack. On one hand, the Ukronazi forces have had two years to regroup, lick their wounds, reorganize, rearm, retrain, etc. Most importantly, it appears that they have built defensive positions in depth, possibly including 2 or even 3 defensive echelons. Why does defense matter? Because if your defensive positions are strong, then the risk of counter-attack by the enemy’s forces are much lower and that, in turn, means that your offensive is far less likely to end up surrounded in a “cauldron” (I simplify here, in reality this is a little more complicated as it depends on the depth of your attack, but nevermind that). A couple of years is a lot of time to dig in an prepare for defense and without access to classified data it is hard to gauge how effective these efforts have been. In terms of new equipment (whether Ukrainian or new deliveries from the Empire), they will make no difference at all, that’s just political talk. My advice is that as soon as you hear or read anything about the delivery of “lethal weapons” you ignore everything that comes after that. Ditto for training by Polish or US experts. That is just propaganda. What is not propaganda is the intelligence support offered by the Empire overtly (satellites) or covertly (EU ‘observers’ etc.). That and the fact that the Ukronazis have a 2-2.5:1 numerical advantage over the Novorussians.

    Much of the same could be said about the Novorussians: they also have had 2 years to dig in, by all reports they have now integrated their forces into a regular army capable of operational-depth counter-offensives, their morale and training is probably much higher than on the Ukronazi side and they can count on Russian support (intelligence, logistics, training, etc.). Also, they would have the home turf advantage. Finally, and Putin very clearly stated that recently, Russia will not allow the military reconquest of Novorussia, which means that even if the Ukronazis somehow succeed in breaking through the Novorussian defenses they will be engaged by the Russian armed forces, primarily by missile/bombing strikes at which point the war will stop in less than 24 hours.

    The big conceptual mistake, however, would be to assume that the Ukronazis really want to reconquer Novorussia (or Crimea, for that matter). In reality, everybody knows that these territories are gone forever and that Kiev simply has no means to control them even without Russian assistance. Let me repeat this: even if by some magical effect the Russians were to let the Ukronazis invade the Donbass this would result in a fantastically nasty guerrilla war by the locals which the Ukronazis would have no chance at all to defeat. Yes, it would be a bloodbath, but it would never end with a workable pacification of the Donbass by the Ukronazis. I would therefore say that the role of Russia is not to prevent Kiev from regaining the control of the Donbass, but to prevent a bloodbath in the Donbass.


    Ukronazi: yea, quite literally. They exist and are numerous and quite in the open in Western Ukraine. Thank the US Neocons and their EU allies.

    The real goal: not to win, but to trigger a Russian intervention (same old, same old)

    [dropcap]N[/dropcap]ow, and I have been saying that for years now, the real goal of the junta is to force Russia to openly intervene in the Donbass. As soon as the Russians overtly get involved that would kill the Minsk 1 and 2 agreements, it would turn the current disaster in the Nazi occupied Ukraine into a war of national liberation against the hated Moskals, NATO would immediately put an end to all that recent cozying-up of various EU political parties towards Russia and the AngloZionist Empire’s wet dream would finally come true: such a Russian intervention would usher a new Cold, possibly even Tepid, War in Europe thereby giving a meaning to NATO (finally!) and crushing any kind of anti-imperial feelings in Europe. The Balts and the Poles would finally be secure in their mission to “protect Europe from a resurgent Russia” and the US Neocons would have a big victory party. True, Russia would liberate all of Novorussia in 24 hours or less and, yes, with Russian help the Novorussians could push the line of contact (well, at this point, the frontline) pretty much as far West as they would want to. But that would be a small victory in the context of a global political catastrophe (along with an ugly bloodbath).

    This is why the Russians have made a huge effort *not* to intervene, even if that has cost them a lot of political capital (there are still those out there who speak of a Russian “sell-out” of the Donbass). Unlike their western counterpart, who still don’t understand that the purpose of warfare is to achieve a political objective, the Russians fully realize that an (easy) military victory against the Ukronazis would come at a cost of an immense political disaster. The last thing the Kremlin wants is to copy what the US Americans did in Iraq and Afghanistan: begin by an easy victory, declare victory, and then end up with an absolute disaster on their hands from which they still are unable to extricate themselves. In this respect, Crimea was a totally different and unique case: a vitally important piece of land, which historically was Russian, populated by people who were overwhelmingly pro-Russian (or, simply, Russian), with easy to control choke-points connecting with the Nazi occupied Ukraine and fantastic economic prospects. And yet, even in these ideal condition, the Russian economy is struggling to rebuild this relatively small territory.

    It is pretty clear that at the end of the day, Russia will also have to pay for most of the reconstruction of the Donbass, however hard this will be. But as much as that is possible, Russia would much prefer to make the reconstruction of the Ukraine an international problem, yet another reason for her to try to avoid any real, overt, military intervention. Because once Russia occupies any territory, she owns it and she becomes responsible for it.

    The bottom line is this: we don’t hear much about the Ukraine right now because at least the US Americans seem to have given up on this entire project and because they are busy with more important issues (self-destructing, mostly). But that does not mean that the situation in the Ukraine cannot suddenly reignite with very serious international consequences.

    So when I speak of Crooks, Clowns and Nazis, I am not taking these issues lightly at all. Yes, they truly are crooks, clowns and Nazis, but they also very dangerous individuals, especially collectively.

    A tiny ray of hope for “less bad”?

    Kolomoiskii: A Jew and a billionaire, but his lack of scruples never impeded his funding one of the most vicious Nazi battalions, the Azovs.

    [dropcap]R[/dropcap]umor has it that the two big figures behind the scenes in the Ukraine are Igor Kolomoiskii (who now has a personal vendetta against Poroshenko and Saakashvili) and Iulia Timoshenko. I honestly have no means to assess these claims, but I will say that while these two are truly profoundly evil and hateful people (Kolomoiskii was probably deeply involved in the MH-17 false flag), neither of them is stupid. Furthermore, they are both Crooks, not Clowns or Nazis, which means that they can be negotiated with, however distasteful this may be. Last but not least, they both have a real power base in the Ukraine, money in Kolomoiskii’s case, true popularity in Timoshenko’s case. In this I see a tiny ray of hope.


    With the US Americans busy fighting each other internally, and with the Europeans slowly waking up to the total disaster “their” (it is not really “theirs” – but nevermind that) Ukrainian policy has been, maybe, just maybe, there is a tiny chance of, say, some EU leaders getting together with, say, Timoshenko (Kolomoiskii will never be a public official again, he will pull the strings in the back) to sit down with the Russians and the Novorussians and finally seriously negotiate some kind of end to this very dangerous situation. Remember, Poroshenko is a pure US puppet, and he is weak. There is no way he could negotiate *anything* of substance any more. All he needs to do now is to prepare his flight to the US, UK or Israel. But Timoshenko is still “for real” and she is far more capable of dealing with the Nazis than Poroshenko, his billions, his chocolate factory and his Yeltsin-like dependence on alcohol.

    Of course, there is “the devil you know” argument. And in many ways, Poroshenko being the greedy weak booze-soaked coward that he is looks like the lesser evil. The problem with that is that he is terrified of the Nazis and that they are either paralyzing him or making him do stupid things (like the recent law making Ukrainian the sole language used in schools). And for all the desperate window-dressing the fact remains that the Ukraine is already a failed state which is going down the tubes with a momentum which nobody can stop, at least not with the current political deadlock in Kiev. Still, we should also remember that Yeltsin was also a greedy weak booze-soaked coward, but that did not prevent him form triggering the bloodbath of the First Chechen war. Greedy weak booze-soaked cowards can be extremely dangerous.

    This article was written for the Unz Review  

    About the Author
     The Saker is an ex-military analyst who was born in Europe to a family of Russian refugees. He now lives in Florida where he writes the Vineyard of the Saker blog and is a regular contributor to Russia Insider, The UNZ Review, and other leading political websites such as The Greanville Post. The international community of Saker Blogs includes, besides the original Saker blog, French, German, Russian, Oceania and Serbian members and will soon include a Latin American member. 

    THE SAKER—The bottom line is this: we don’t hear much about the Ukraine right now because at least the US Americans seem to have given up on this entire project and because they are busy with more important issues (self-destructing, mostly). But that does not mean that the situation in the Ukraine cannot suddenly reignite with very serious international consequences.

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


    black-horizontal
    [premium_newsticker id=”154171″]