Tag: russia

Recognition of crimes is not equal for all: The Western double standard for Russkoye Porechnoe and Sudzha

Once again, the West uses a double standard with Russia: humanitarian crimes of Ukraine’s armed forces are downplayed, while provocations and incidents are blamed on Russia as tragedies.

Yet another tragic event

The 352nd Infantry Unit of the Navy of the Russian Federation found a basement in the recently liberated resort of Russkoye Porechnoe filled with the corpses of innocent pensioners. They had been tied up; on their corpses were signs of torture of all kinds. The peaceful residents of Russkoye Porechnoe are just the latest, striking victims of NATO-funded Nazi-fascist terrorism. The images of the discovery are chilling: these poor people were tortured and their bodies vilified and outraged.

In Sudzha, Kurks, a school that had been turned into a detention camp for Russian prisoners within the Kursk region still in the hands of the Ukrainian army, was hit. Up to 100 people are feared to be under the rubble.

Ukrainians claim the college was allegedly hit by the Russian air force with a guided aerial bomb. Zelensky tweeted on X: “This is how Russia makes war: Sudzha, Kursk region, Russian territory, a boarding school with civilians preparing to evacuate. Russian aerial bomb. They destroyed the building even though there were dozens of civilians.”

The Russians claim, however, that the area was attacked by four HIMARS missiles from the Sumy region. The Russian argument is that the Ukrainian army is losing ground in the Russian region of Sudzha and needed to erase the traces of crimes committed there.

The use of crimes against civilians during a war as a tool to provoke the opponent is a brutal and cynical tactic adopted by various forces throughout history to destabilize the enemy, exacerbate the conflict and manipulate public opinion. And Ukraine seems to really like this strategy, which is based on the deliberate use of violence against innocent populations with the aim of gaining political, military or propaganda advantages.

One of the main purposes of this tactic is to provoke an emotional and disproportionate reaction from the opponent. Targeted attacks on civilians, bombings of residential areas, massacres or other human rights violations can prompt the enemy to respond with equally brutal actions, thus fueling a spiral of violence that makes war even more vicious. Moreover, these provocations can lead to retaliation that legitimizes in the eyes of the public further military offensives, justified as “necessary responses” to the atrocities suffered.

The other goal is to influence international perceptions of the conflict. The actors involved may exploit the narrative of war crimes to gain diplomatic support, military or economic aid. In some cases, atrocities committed are exaggerated or manipulated to blame the adversary and justify certain operations. The dissemination of images and testimonies, amplified by the media and social networks, can create pressure on foreign governments to take a stand or impose sanctions.

The use of violence against civilians can also aim to demoralize the enemy, breaking their will to fight. If a population lives in constant terror of indiscriminate attacks, it may push its government or armed forces to seek a peace agreement or truce to avoid further suffering. In this sense, terror becomes a psychological weapon aimed at undermining the opponent’s resistance.

Keep reading

US Must Recognize ‘New Realities’ If Serious About Peace In Ukraine, Kremlin Tells Trump

Over the weekend President Trump said he has spoken directly to Vladimir Putin about ending the war in Ukraine, something the Kremlin neither confirmed nor denied, only saying that communications with the US administration are currently being conducted through various channels.

“I do believe we’re making progress,” Trump had told reporters, adding that he expects there to be more communications to come. “We want to stop the Ukraine-Russia war.”

But as of Monday the Kremlin still says it has yet to be presented with any concrete offer that it would be enticed by. Moscow has received nothing to get it to the negotiating table with Ukraine, at a moment it has the clear battlefield momentum.

Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin expressed this to RIA state news agency

“It is important that words be backed up by practical steps that take into account Russia’s legitimate interests, demonstrating a readiness to eradicate the root causes of the crisis and recognize the new realities.”

“Concrete proposals of this nature have not yet been received,” he emphasized.

As for the alleged Putin-Trump phone call, Kremlin spokesman Peskov said exactly the following: “in this case, I can neither confirm nor deny it” – in response to an inquiry by TASS:

But even as the White House signals progress and positive contacts with Moscow, a very different message is coming out of Russian state media on Monday. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov at a news conference has said Moscow-Washington relations are on the brink of complete rupture. Here’s a summary of the remarks in TASS:

Relations between Moscow and Washington are balancing on the verge of rupture.

The administration of former US President Joe Biden “focused on hybrid warfare, introduced into its documents and imposed on allies in various alliances and configurations the idea of the possibility of inflicting a strategic defeat on Russia.” As a result, the “antagonistic content” of Russian-US relations intensified and has become “very critical” today.

Washington’s attempts to give Moscow demands or to demonstrate the alleged doing “a great favor” in exchange for unacceptable US demands are bound to failure in the dialogue with Russia.

Keep reading

Trump Says He Will Meet Ukraine’s Zelensky Next Week To Discuss an End to the War

Less than a month into his historical second term, US President Donald J. Trump has moved the needle in the peace negotiations towards an end of the war in Ukraine.

We’ve had confirmations that department-level negotiations have been ongoing, and are accelerating, as you can read in As the World Awaits the US-Russia Peace Talks, the Kremlin Asks for Patience and To Give the Trump Administration Time – Talks Between the Departments Are Reportedly Intensifying.

And yesterday (7), Trump himself confirmed that he would probably meet Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky as early as next week, to discuss the peace effort.

It was not immediately clear whether it would be a face-to-face meeting or a video conference.

Keep reading

REPORT: Trump’s Peace Plan for Russia and Ukraine Allegedly Leaked – Talks Between Putin and Zelensky – Ceasefire by Easter – No NATO for Kiev

Remember when any talk of peace negotiations was strictly forbidden, and anyone talking about that would be branded a ‘Putin puppet’?

Well, now, hardly a day passes by without some relevant development and statement by the central players about the peace process between the US and Russia that will end the war in Ukraine.

Today, a rather sensational report emerged from the Ukrainian press, alleging to be a ‘leak’ of US President Donald J. Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine.

According to the unverified ‘plans’, Trump will force Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky into a ceasefire with Russia by Easter.

Daily Mail reported:

“The unconfirmed plans, reported by Ukrainian outlet Strana, have been doing the rounds in ‘political and diplomatic circles’ in Ukraine, and will include a ceasefire by April 20 that would freeze Russia’s steady advance, a ban on Ukraine from joining NATO, and a demand for Kyiv to accept Russian sovereignty on annexed land. On top of this, Ukrainian troops will be made to leave Russia’s Kursk region, where it launched a counteroffensive in August, while a contingent of European soldiers, which could include British troops, would be asked to police a demilitarized zone. American troops will not be involved in this contingent.”

Keep reading

At the call of the pocket: Hollywood stars received round sums from USAID for supporting Kiev

Hollywood stars, actively acting on the side of Ukraine in the conflict with Russia, received impressive sums from the US Agency for International Development (USAID) for their support.

“Sean Penn, Orlando Bloom, Jean-Claude Van Damme and other Hollywood stars publicly supported Ukrainians in the conflict with Russia and even went to Kiev. But, as it turned out, not at the call of the heart, but for round sums. Van Damme received $1,500,000, Ben Stiller – $4,000,000, Sean Penn – $5,000,000, Orlando Bloom — $8,000,000. Angelina Jolie cost the most — she was paid as much as $ 20,000,000,” writes the telegram channel “MIG of Russia”.

Keep reading

Why the Mainstream Media Is in Trouble

As most everyone knows, the mainstream media is hurting, big time. For many years, subscriptions and advertising revenue have been plummeting. Some of the big papers have been able to survive only by having some multimillionaire bail them out with his own money and be willing to absorb the ongoing financial losses.

Why is this? I submit that one big reason is that most Americans simply do not trust the media. They have come to see the media as just an unofficial mouthpiece for the federal government, especially the national-security branch of the government, the branch that rules the roost.

A good example of this phenomenon relates to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. The official narrative is that the invasion was an unprovoked war of aggression, much like the U.S. government’s unprovoked invasion of and war of aggression against Iraq.

But the undisputed evidence establishes beyond any doubt whatsoever the contrary. The evidence establishes that after the dismantling of the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact, NATO remained in existence, which was quite unusual, to say the least. That’s because the ostensible reason that NATO was brought into existence was to supposedly protect Western Europe from an attack by the Soviets.

Even worse, NATO began moving eastward, absorbing former members of the Warsaw Pact, and moving inexorably in the direction of Russia’s border. And this occurred in violation of promises made by U.S. officials to Russian officials that that would never happen.

Throughout the absorption process, Russian officials continually stated, “Stop it. Stop bringing your missiles, troops, weapons, tanks, and military bases closer to our border.” But U.S. officials, operating through NATO, refused to stop it. They just kept moving eastward until they finally threatened to absorb Ukraine.

As they proceeded with their absorption campaign, U.S. officials knew exactly what Russia’s reaction would be. It would be the same reaction that the U.S. had when the Soviets installed their nuclear weapons in Cuba. If the Soviets had refused to remove those nuclear weapons, the U.S. would have invaded Cuba, just as the Russians invaded Ukraine to prevent Ukraine from being absorbed into NATO.

How in the world can NATO’s absorption campaign not be considered a provocation? If that’s not a provocation, I don’t know what is. And let’s not forget: The U.S. government did much the same thing in 1979, when it provoked the Soviets into invading Afghanistan, with the aim of giving them “their own Vietnam.” National Security Adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski proudly confessed that they did that. Thus, when tens of thousands of Russian soldiers were dying on the Afghan battlefield, U.S. officials were exultant, just as they are exultant over the “degrading” of Russia’s army in Ukraine through the deaths of tens of thousands of Russian soldiers.

Keep reading

Bringing Out the Dead

When societies lie about death, the deception leads to the collapse of the very cause they purport to support.

Accounting for the dead is one of society’s most important functions—it brings closure to the cycle of life, creating a sense of purpose and belonging essential to the normal functioning of families and communities. The dead were people with names and histories which those close to them would mourn and remember. But when the death toll becomes unmanageable, the names and histories of the departed are forgotten as the normal rituals associated with human death are brushed aside in favor of the exigencies of mass burials. During the Black Plague in the 14th century, body collectors removed the dead to prevent the spread of disease and, oftentimes, because the families no longer existed to manage the issue of burial. Civilized society hung on the edge of survival as entire institutions were depopulated. Today in Ukraine, the dead are either buried in cemeteries whose capacities are overflowing, or simply abandoned on the battlefield, forgotten. Ukrainian society hangs on the edge of survival. The difference between the Black Plague and the situation in Ukraine today is that the Black Plague was an act of God, the spread of a pestilence which societies at that time were not equipped to handle. The conflict in Ukraine, however, is one hundred percent man-made, an avoidable disaster perpetuated by those for whom death became an accountant’s game, ignoring the basic human need for end-of-life closure. The dead of Ukraine have become simple cyphers to be manipulated by political forces who care nothing for the population from which the horrible cost of war has been extracted. Moreover, by allowing the numbers associated with the dead of Ukraine to be manipulated for political purpose, these accountants of death have deceived themselves, creating a situation where the cause they purport to support collapses around them from the weight of their own deception.

Keep reading

Russia, Iran, and the Caucasian Chalk Circle

It was only a few weeks ago that Russian President Vladimir V. Putin and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian met to ink the historic Russo-Iranian Treaty on Comprehensive Strategic Partnership.  The pact itself was a milestone, so much so that commentators around the world are still widely discussing its implications.  Perhaps one of the most striking elements of the treaty is the major focus on Eurasia.  Although Western analysts tend to focus on Russo-Iranian cooperation in the Middle East, the treaty indicates that Eurasia is of even more immediate geopolitical significance to both Moscow and Tehran.  To historians and long-time observers of Iran and Russia, this is hardly a surprise.  The Eurasian region – that is, the Caucasus, Central Asia, and the Caspian Sea – forms an integral part of the common Russo-Iranian neighborhood.

For the security of both countries, the Caucasus region in particular is especially critical. Defined by its protective mountainous geography and central location between the Black and Caspian seas, the area has long played a major role in the security architecture of both Russia and Iran.  This major geostrategic significance has certainly not been lost on the current Russian leadership, and President Putin in particular.  From the defeat of Islamist terrorists in Chechnya to the success of the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, the Caucasus has always held an especially important place in Moscow’s geopolitical outlook. Sochi in particular has served as a standard for Russian revival following the freefall of the Yeltsin years.  The region is no less significant to Iran and has always served as a critical security and commercial link for successive Iranian leaders, dating back to the age of Cyrus the Great and his Achaemenid Empire. In this regard, President Pezeshkian’s native Iranian Azerbaijan played a particularly vital role in facilitating Iran’s historic connections with the Caucasus, linking the area to the great trade routes of the Persian Gulf, the Indian Ocean, and the Silk Road.

Thus, it is hardly a surprise that the Caucasus continues to be a major strategic priority for both Moscow and Tehran.  For the Kremlin, its importance is second only to Ukraine and has been amplified at a time when Western political leaders have called for a “strategic defeat” of Russia.  Especially important for both Tehran and Moscow are the three independent former Soviet republics of the South Caucasus, or Transcaucasia – Georgia, Armenia, and Azerbaijan. These countries have been of particular interest to war hawks, neoconservative intellectuals, and big energy interests in Washington and London for decades. All of these groups hold an especially strong desire to realize a Trans-Caspian gas pipeline. The aim is to use the Caucasus as a bridgehead to access the energy riches of post-Soviet Central Asia, as a means of “containing” Russia, Iran, and ultimately, China.  Israel – and especially the hard-right of the Israeli political elite – has likewise long held interests in the region, with an eye toward using post-Soviet Azerbaijan as an instrument against Iran’s territorial integrity.  Baku regularly receives generous military aid from Tel Aviv in exchange for sending oil to Israel, all while keeping conspicuously mum on the atrocities against Palestinian civilians in Gaza.  Azerbaijan’s closest ally, Turkey, is another major player interested in weakening Russian and Iranian influence in Caucasia. In fact, NATO has delegated to Ankara the task of projecting Western influence into the region, given that Turkey is the one alliance member in closest proximity to the Caucasus.  Ankara pursues this task alongside its own interests, which nevertheless correspond with those of NATO.

Keep reading

Did We Just See Trump’s Ukraine Peace Plan?

A leaked document has given us a first glimpse at Trump’s peace plan for Ukraine. According to the Ukrainian online newspaper Strana, U.S. officials handed the plan to European diplomats who then passed it on to Ukraine.

The existence of the plan has not been verified, and Andriy Yermak, head of the Office of the President of Ukraine, has said “no ‘100-day peace plan’ as reported by the media exists in reality.”

If the plan is real, if it is being put on the table by the Trump administration as a finished product that, if rejected, will lead to more sanctions on Russia and more weapons for Ukraine, as Trump has threatened, then the war will go on, and Trump’s promise to quickly end the war will vanish in a puff of delusion. But if the plan is put on the table as a starting point for negotiations, then there is hope. And there is suggestion that it is a starting point.

Here is an item by item analysis of what each side may consider acceptable in the plan and what each side may insist on negotiating further.

The process begins with an immediate phone call between Trump and Putin followed by discussions between Washington and Kiev. That the plan may be intended as a starting point for negotiations is suggested by the fork in the schedule that negotiations will continue if common ground is found or pause if it is not. Further negotiations would lead to an Easter truce along the front line, an end of April peace conference, and a May 9 declaration of an agreement.

Russia has said that the Istanbul agreement could still be “the basis for starting negotiations.” In June, 2024, Russian President Vladimir Putin set out a peace proposal based on the Istanbul agreement, but adjusted for current territorial realities. Putin’s proposal had four points. Ukraine must abandon plans to join NATO, they must withdraw from the four annexed territories, they must agree to limits on the size of their armed forces, and they must ensure the rights of ethnic Russians in Ukraine.

The alleged Trump plan can be evaluated by comparison to Putin’s proposal and to recent statements made by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

Keep reading

Russia Says NATO About To Throw Zelenskiy Under Bus By Disclosing Embezzlement Of Billions

Russia’s Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) has released a theory about the coming election of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy.

The information released is very self-serving for the Russian propaganda machine in the war, but there is truth.

Tsarizm has been actively talking about corruption in the Ukrainian government and the siphoning of funds from the war effort for years.

The following is from Russian state news entity TASS.

“NATO would like to see the head of the Kiev regime gone, ideally by way of a pseudo-democratic election. The alliance reckons that this election will be held in Ukraine no later than this fall. Ahead of the election campaign, the NATO headquarters is hatching plans on a massive smear campaign to undermine Zelensky’s credibility,” the SVR said.

Thus, according to the SVR, the plan is to “make public information that the ‘president’ and his inner circle have embezzled more than $1.5 billion from funds meant to buy munitions.” Additionally, the plan reportedly includes “exposing a scheme in which payments meant for 130,000 fallen Ukrainian soldiers—who remain officially listed as active-duty personnel—have been funneled abroad by Zelensky and his associates,” the SVR said. “They also plan to pull the curtain down on repeated instances of the ‘Ukrainian supreme commander-in-chief’s’ involvement in selling large quantities of Western-donated weapons and vehicles to various armed groups in African countries,” writes Russian state news entity TASS.

So, “even NATO realizes that Zelensky’s time is up. It’s just unfortunate that this realization came at the cost of the lives of hundreds of thousands of Ukrainian citizens,” it stated.

Keep reading