Tag: russia

New US-Ukraine Bilateral Security Agreement: A Path to Escalation and Burden on American Taxpayers

By signing the new Bilateral Security Agreement between the United States and Ukraine, Joe Biden has added Ukraine to the long list of countries whose defense the US is obligated to support.

While the agreement is technically bilateral, the specific benefits to the US remain unclear. Unlike NATO’s Article 5, this agreement does not include mutual defense commitments. However, the act of signing it has significantly increased the likelihood of conflict with Russia.

Additionally, the agreement will impose costs on US taxpayers in the short, medium, and long term, and could potentially cost American lives in the not-so-distant future.

The United States and Ukraine signed a 10-year bilateral security agreement on June 13, 2024, during the Group of Seven (G7) summit in Italy. This agreement aims to solidify long-term defense and security cooperation between the two nations.

According to U.S. National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan, the agreement sends a clear message of resolve to Russia, indicating that the coalition supporting Ukraine remains strong. The pact includes provisions to enhance Ukraine’s defense capabilities and ensure continued U.S. assistance, funded by U.S. taxpayers, in addressing Ukraine’s security needs well into the future.

While the agreement focuses on various aspects such as training Ukraine’s armed forces, enhancing intelligence sharing, and developing military capabilities, it does not include specific monetary pledges.

However, in conjunction with this agreement, the G7 leaders have backed a $50 billion loan package to support Ukraine’s broader economic and defense needs. This financial support is separate from the $60 billion in aid that the US has already approved for Ukraine.

The agreement is not a step toward NATO membership and does not commit US or NATO forces to direct military involvement in the ongoing war with Russia. Consequently, the White House can claim that it does not increase the risk of escalation.

However, Russia has predictably reacted negatively, condemning the signing of the agreement and viewing it as a direct threat and a provocative act that challenges its strategic interests in the region.

Keep reading

MSM Very Belatedly Reports On Ukraine’s Brutal Military Recruitment Methods

A mere year ago, there was already ample evidence that Ukrainian recruitment officers were using brutal and desperate tactics to ensure a steady supply of young soldiers for the front lines in the fight against Russia. This is a trend which has only grown, as the tragic situation of masses of casualties persists, and also amid the Zelensky government’s refusal to even attempt to negotiate a peaceful end to the war.

But earlier in the conflict, any Western outlet or pundit who highlighted and condemned scenes of young men being beaten and harshly seized off Ukraine’a streets by military recruiters would have been dismissed as a ‘pro-Russian propagandist’. Yet now this trend has long been impossible to deny, and only very belatedly mainstream media sources are covering it. For example, on Sunday The Washington Post highlighted that Ukraine has resorted to releasing nearly 3,000 hardened criminals and convicts from prisons to serve in the military. The plan has immediately been met with pushback and controversy. “No one has trust in this, but we need it,” one military official involved in the policy told WaPo. However, the official admitted while describing the likelihood that this will cause disorder on the frontlines: “They’re all going to run like Forrest Gump.”

The report detailed that many of the newly released convicts were “jailed for dealing drugs, stealing phones and committing armed assaults and murders, among other serious crimes.“ However, Ukrainian Justice Minister Denis Malyuska was cited in the report as claiming “the motivation of our inmates is stronger than our ordinary soldiers,” and insisted that ultimately they “want to protect their country and they want to turn the page.” Washington Post isn’t the only outlet which has begrudgingly shifted from its fawning and overly idealist coverage of Ukraine’s armed forces and the dire battlefield situation, but BBC too has this week issued some devastating footage portraying the severe manpower crisis (and here’s a similar one from CNN days ago).

Keep reading

Campaigners Decry ‘Dangerous Escalation’ as NATO Chief Floats Nuclear Deployment

Nuclear disarmament campaigners on Monday implored NATO and Russia to step back from the brink after the head of the Western military alliance said its members are considering deploying additional atomic weapons to counter Moscow and Beijing.

“This is the dangerous escalation inherent to the deterrence doctrine,” the International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons (ICAN) wrote on social media, referring to the notion that the threat of catastrophic nuclear retaliation prevents nations from using atomic weaponry.

The U.S., which spent more on its atomic weapons arsenal than every other nuclear-armed nation combined last year, currently has nukes deployed in five NATO countries—Italy, Germany, Turkey, Belgium, and the Netherlands. Russia, meanwhile, recently deployed nuclear weapons to Belarus, which said earlier this month that it would join Moscow’s nuclear exercises.

ICAN said Monday that “it’s time for both to reverse course.”

“NATO countries hosting U.S. nuclear weapons should admit to their citizens they have weapons of mass destruction on their soil with no public say,” ICAN added. “But neither Belarus nor NATO allies should flaunt being prepared to indiscriminately kill millions of people.”

Keep reading

Documents: Putin Was Willing To Compromise To End War in 2022

In April 2022, Ukraine and Russia were on the brink of signing a deal to end the war just weeks after it began. The New York Times published documents showing President Vladimir Putin was willing to make concessions to get an agreement signed.

According to the documents, Putin initially sought to have Kiev recognize Moscow’s 2014 annexation of Crimea. However, a draft agreement from April 15, 2022, suggests both parties were prepared to set aside the issue to end the conflict. “Paragraph 1 of Article 2 and Articles 4, 5, and 11 of this Treaty shall not apply to Crimea and Sevastopol,” the document says.

In December, Ukrainian negotiator Oleksandr Chalyi explained that an agreement was reached in the spring of 2022, stating the two sides “managed to find a very real compromise. We were very close in the middle of April, in the end of April, to finalize our war with some peaceful settlement.”

Kiev was also willing to accept neutrality with regards to NATO, according to the NYT. Ukraine’s negotiation team proposed a peace deal that would say the country “does not join any military alliances” and “does not deploy foreign military bases and contingents.”

The draft deal would have allowed Kiev to sign bilateral agreements with NATO states, as well as become a member of the European Union, but would have required Ukraine’s security partners to lift sanctions on Russia.

The Kremlin also sought to protect the rights of millions of Russian speakers living in Ukraine by forcing Kiev to repeal restrictions on the Russian language, and to bar the state from erecting monuments glorifying neo-Nazis and WWII-era Nazi collaborators.

Keep reading

Will Average Western Citizens Pay the Price for G7’s Theft of Russian Funds?

Analysts worry Thursday’s announcement could spell dire consequences for the economic stability of the United States and its allies, as G7 leaders reached a deal this week to seize the interest from Russian assets to fund the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine.

News of the development emerged Thursday, although the group of Western economies has yet to formally approve the action. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni confirmed the reports, drawing a distinction between the expropriation of earned interest and the outright seizure of Russian savings held in European banks. “We are certainly not talking about confiscating these assets,” Meloni claimed at the G7 meeting in Fasano.

But the move is nonetheless highly controversial in the precedent it sets, claims analyst Dr. George Szamuely, and may be seen as a prelude to the wholesale theft of the funds. The analyst at the London-based Global Policy Institute joined Sputnik’s The Final Countdown program on Thursday to discuss how the development will harm financially strained Western citizens.

“It doesn’t in any way conform to international law,” said Szamuely of the G7’s plan, “and let’s keep in mind this has never been done before.”

Keep reading

NATO Seeks to Set Up 3 Bases in Member States to Coordinate Arms Supplies to Ukraine – Orban

NATO seeks to create military bases in Poland, Romania and Slovakia as part of its mission in Ukraine to coordinate arms supplies to Kiev, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban said on Friday.

Orban stressed that should this bases be established in countries bordering Ukraine like Poland, Romania and Slovakia, they “will become military targets”. Prime minister underscored that Hungary is worried about its security and will not take part in these activities anyhow.

Keep reading

US Senator Says Ukraine Is ‘Gold Mine’ with $12 Trillion of Minerals ‘We Can’t Afford to Lose’

Aprominent US lawmaker has referred to Ukraine as a “gold mine”, insisting the West must maintain access to its estimated $12 trillion worth of critical minerals.

US Senator Lindsey Graham made these comments in a June 10 interview on the CBS program “Face the Nation”.

“They’re sitting on $10 to $12 trillion of critical minerals in Ukraine”, Graham said.

“They could be the richest country in all of Europe. I don’t want to give that money and those assets to Putin to share with China”, he added.

Graham, a Republican, recalled that, when Donald Trump was president, he sent Ukraine military aid in the form of loans.

The senator strongly implied that Ukraine should pay the West for weapons shipments with its large mineral reserves.

Keep reading

Russia just let the world know they will NOT protect Big Pharma’s predatory patents

At the 2024 St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), a Russian Member of Parliament (MP) sparked international debate by prioritizing the protection of Russian lives over the enforcement of intellectual property rights for Western pharmaceutical giants. During a panel discussion on drug security within BRICS nations, MP Aleksandr Petrov emphasized Russia’s commitment to safeguarding the health and well-being of its citizens and allies, even if it means challenging predatory patent laws and erecting a national drug manufacturing apparatus.

Russia takes hard stance against Western pharmaceutical companies

Petrov’s stance resonated with many, underscoring the significance of national health priorities and sound economic policies over crony corporate interests that are bankrupting medical systems in the West. Petrov cautioned Western pharmaceutical companies against overly relying on patent laws, stating, “When it comes to the lives and health of our citizens and those of our allies, we will break it.”

Petrov’s position isn’t endorsing intellectual piracy but instead advocating for legal mechanisms to ensure access to vital medications, particularly in the face of rising prices for essential drugs and while facing a barrage of economic sanctions that threaten equitable access to lifesaving drugs for the Russian people.

A focal point of the discussion was the case of Ozempic, a crucial anti-diabetic medication manufactured by Danish pharmaceutical giant Novo Nordisk. Following disruptions in the drug’s supply due to Western sanctions, Russia responded by issuing emergency licenses to produce generic versions right in Russia. Petrov commended the rapid response of Russian pharmaceutical firms, highlighting their ability to mitigate shortages and uphold national drug security.

Keep reading

There Are Only Downsides To Prolonging The War In Ukraine

Last week, President Joe Biden and a number of top American and European officials met in Normandy to attend a ceremony marking the eightieth anniversary of the D-day invasion. In a pair of speeches, Biden recounted the operation that he said marked the beginning of the “great crusade to liberate Europe from tyranny” before drawing a direct connection to where things stand with the war in Ukraine.

Biden called Russian president Vladamir Putin a tyrant who invaded Ukraine simply because he is “bent on domination.” Biden then renewed one of his favorite tropes, asserting that if Ukraine falls, its people will be subjugated, its neighbors will be in immediate danger, and all of Europe will be threatened by Putin’s aggressive ambitions.

But the West’s chosen depiction of Putin as a tyrant bent on conquering the entire European continent suffered its latest setback last month when it came out that the Russian president is interested in halting the fighting and negotiating a deal that recognizes the current battlefield lines.

Putin is showing this interest even though the Russian military is in a strong position that seems likely to get even stronger. Last year’s long-anticipated Ukrainian counteroffensive was meant to drive Russian forces out of Ukraine. But since its launch last summer, Ukraine has lost more territory than it has gained. Recently, the Russians even launched a brand new incursion into territory around the northeastern city of Kharkiv—territory that had already been recaptured by the Ukrainians in late 2022.

Russia’s minefields, artillery, and punishing glide bombs have not only kept Ukrainian forces from advancing but left them struggling to hold their positions along the current front line. Meanwhile, Russia has significantly boosted war-related production far beyond anything we’re seeing from the West, which, while bad for the Russian economy in the long run, ensures the intensity of Russia’s bombing and shelling will not cease anytime soon.

At the same time, the Ukrainian government is facing a serious shortage of soldiers that no amount of foreign aid or equipment transfers can do anything to alleviate. Earlier this year, the Ukrainian parliament passed a law that sought to boost conscription rates by making it easier for the government to find and identify draft-eligible men. But the problem persists, leading Ukrainian officials to tap into the country’s prison population, cut consular services to military-aged Ukrainian men living abroad, and forbid men who are dual citizens from leaving Ukraine. As the country’s supply of young men runs low, the average age of a Ukrainian soldier has climbed to forty-three years old.

What makes Ukraine’s situation even more tragic is how easily it could have been avoided. One month after Russia invaded in early 2022, both sides reached an agreement where Russia would pull back to preinvasion boundaries and, in return, Ukraine would agree to not seek NATO membership.

The deal could have put an end to the fighting and handed Kyiv control of all the land Russia had just seized. But, according to senior negotiators on both sides and high-level mediators from the various countries facilitating the talks, officials from the United Kingdom and the United States convinced the Ukrainians to walk away from the deal and fight.

Keep reading

US-NATO Threats Ignore ‘Red Lines’ in Ukraine

Front lines are collapsing for the Ukrainian army, whole units surrendering. Top commanders are fired. Faced with complete disarray of the U.S.-NATO instigated war in Ukraine, U.S. militarists are doubling down.

According to the Ukrainian constitution, President Volodymir Zelensky’s term in office is over. But he remains in power by martial law. This has led Ukrainian workers to hold strikes and work stoppages. But this news is ignored in the Western media.

A national truckers’ work slowdown inside Ukraine moved traffic to a 5-mile-an hour crawl and halted grain exports based on national anger at the expanded draft mobilization made by Zelensky, now an unelected president. (yahoonews.com, May 18)

Ukraine’s combat units are so severely understaffed that the government would have to triple its mobilization in order to continue the current level of fighting, according to Eric Ciaramella, former U.S. National Intelligence Council official. The draft can’t fill the current gap, nor can even kidnapping men off the streets.Lockhart, PaulBest Price: $17.49Buy New $24.31(as of 05:02 UTC – Details)

U.S. Failure on Two Fronts

U.S. efforts to dismember Russia appear to have utterly failed. Economic sanctions, price caps, the protracted war on Russia’s border and tens of billions of dollars, along with hundreds of U.S. and other NATO member troops sent as trainers, plus mercenary contractors can’t hold the corrupt Ukrainian military machine together.

At the same time, on the world stage the one strategic ally of the U.S. in Western Asia, Israel, has utterly failed in its genocidal war on Gaza. Both setbacks mean that U.S. political dominance is being challenged in fundamental ways.

U.S. strategy toward Russia aimed to partition and dismember the country, destabilize the border and block China’s Belt and Road development plans in Central Asia.

U.S. strategists considered all these steps crucial in preventing People’s China from surpassing the U.S. economically. The opposite has happened. What imperialist strategists have warned about for decades and sought to prevent is now the reality.

China and Russia’s relations of intense cooperation and a merge of common interests is unfolding steadily. This was further cemented during the very warm state meeting between China’s President Xi Jinping and Russia’s President Vladimir Putin on May 16.

That means U.S.-NATO plans are in total disarray. Rather than reconsider their strategy, which has brought setbacks and defeats in Ukraine and for Israel in Gaza, this has led to an ominous escalation in U.S. military threats.

The threat to dangerously escalate the war in Ukraine arises from the plans to give Ukraine high-speed missiles and allow the Kyiv regime to use the weapons to strike inside Russia. This threat is not just from a single statement or one delivery of weapons.

The statements promoting strikes with the U.S.-supplied weapons to targets inside Russia are being made directly by President Biden and Secretary of State Antony Blinken, U.S. Speaker of the House Mike Johnson and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg, who is a former prime minister of Norway, but acts as if he were a U.S. official.

Keep reading