MIKE WHITNEY—First the Americans decided to target Ukraine to separate it from Russia. This tactic came from Bismarck. This anti-Russian tradition aimed to embroil Russia in conflict in order to take over the whole Eurasian space. The strategy was first put forth by Bismark, then picked up by the British,, and then finally by the leading American political scientist Zbigniew Brzezinski, who said on many occasions that Russia cannot be a superpower without Ukraine and that embroiling Russia with Ukraine will benefit America and the West.
-
-
THE SAKER—I have always contended that pro-US liberals and the all-is-losters fundamentally share the same ideas and are, whether they are aware of this or not, objectively advancing the kind of defeatism which the western PSYOPs want to inject in the Russian collective psyche. That idea is what I call the “Borg ultimatum” (from the Star Trek the Next Generation series): “resistance is futile, you shall be incorporated”.
When degenerate liberals a la Muratov or pseudo-democrats like Navalny spew that crap, they get traction with only a tiny proportion, a few percents max, of the Russian population.
-
L. LAZARO TIJERINA—Where Gerasimov is correct in his prediction of contemporary modern warfare is that there is no peace, there is no war of demarcation in the traditional sense of terms of war and peace. One only has to look at the Donbass region of Eastern Ukraine to understand the methodology Gerasimov has observed about the human condition in our times, and therefore how he has manifested his own fluidity in combat operations in such conflict regions which are more complex than for instance the asymmetrical and symmetrical warfare the Syrian Army conducted in Palmyra and Aleppo.
-
Brutal monster, tyrant and sadist or moderniser, victor and reformer – it’s hard to find a more controversial figure in Russian history than Joseph Stalin. And while successive Russian leaders have approached his legacy differently, it remains as divisive today as ever. Can Russia come to terms with its dramatic past and is it possible to achieve closure, considering the mark this towering figure has left on the Russian people and national psyche? Oksana is joined by Stephen Cohen, Professor Emeritus of Russian Studies at New York University, to examine these issues.
-
Any discussion of the ABM treaty is likely to remain obtuse and confusing unless its strategic/historical context is explained. Such contextual analysis is indeed attached to the Martyanov article, and you can read it in the Appendix. The gist of the analysis is that the US, by finally disavowing the ABM Treaty, and continuing its longstanding push to perfect its anti-missile defences, is looking for ways to free its hands to obtain, once again, a survivable first-strike nuclear capability. The US is the only major nuclear power that has never renounced this criminal posture, and, of course, the only nation in history to have used atomic weapons against a civilian population.
