Lame-duck Obama’s brave new world

Lame-duck Obama’s brave new world
By Pepe Escobar

Fresh out of his latest Congressional election shellacking delivered by the minority who bothered to vote in the United States, the formerly most powerful leader in the world, US President Barack Obama, will star in a thriller this weekend, appearing in the same room with China’s Xi Jinping, Japan’s Shinzo Abe and – fasten your seat belts – Russia’s Vladimir Putin.

What a drag – the Bomber-In-Chief must be musing. The global economy is mostly a disaster. China, even growing at “only” 7% a year, keeps eroding his “indispensable nation” aura. Japan has decided to copy the Federal Reserve and embark on its own kamikaze version of quantitative easing. Numerous Southeast Asian nations keep freaking out about a few rocks in the South China Sea.

And last but not least, Obama’s nemesis, pesky Vlad “the Hammer” Putin, has just been crowned Most Powerful Leader in the world – even if for the most stupid reasons (“unpredictable” head of a “rogue state”) [1] – while he, the Nobel Peace Prize leader of the exceptionalist, indispensable nation, is now nothing but a pitiful lame duck.

The get-together, extended to Monday and Tuesday, will be the highlight of the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in Beijing – actually, outside of Beijing, so presumably unpolluted blue skies may also have a chance at the photo op. This is APEC’s 25th birthday. And the 20th birthday of the Indonesian summit in Bogor – I happened to be there – which, under Bill Clinton’s flowery charm, set the 21-member APEC nations a goal of “free” and open trade and investment by 2020. “Free” as in US corporations dictating the rules, of course.

What the whole planet really wants to know about APEC is whether The Lame Duck with meet The Bear face to face, one on one. The White House remains mum. The Kremlin did not rule it out. Well, there’s always Plan B: the Group of 20 summit on November 15-16 in Brisbane, Australia.

What the whole planet already knows is that the new slimy show premiering on Capitol Hill on January 2015 has a top priority: the Republicans will do everything in their power to make the lame duck cry for mercy over and over again. So what will this mean in terms of Obama’s self-styled “Don’t Do Stupid Stuff” foreign policy doctrine, which that 2016 juggernaut known as “The Hillarator” has already derided as a “non-organizational principle”? Just extra layers of cosmic stupidity, or something more substantial?

That old axis of evil
Let’s start with The Caliph, aka Islamic State (IS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi. Obama already said, after his shellacking, he is going to seek Congressional authorization for his coalition of the cowards bombing IS – aka Islamic State of Iraq and Syria, Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or Daesh, the jiahdi outfit’s Arabic acronym

Now that’s not a dumb move. If Republican-ruled Congress says “yes”, they will be responsible for the fiasco (and it’s already a fiasco). If they say “no”, the fiasco can be attributed to their irresponsibility.

Republicans are immersed in their own internal split – the boots-on-the-ground favored by the establishment against the non-interventionist Tea Party. So in the end, the lame duck may profit from it after all.

Iran is a much dicier proposition. It all depends on a nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the UN Security Council plus Germany) being reached in a little over two weeks, on November 24. That’s a taller-than-the-Himalayas order, although feasible. The Obama administration is desperate for a deal – as the leak of a “secret letter” from Obama to Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei attests. But a deal under Washington’s terms, which for Tehran is unacceptable. [2]

The new US Senate only takes over in January. Obama has already stressed he won’t ask the Senate to ratify the deal. Once again, the problem is what deal? Obama’s idea of a grand design in the Middle East is to use a “responsible” – according to US standards – Tehran to balance the Sunni-Shi’ite divide and get rid of the current proxy wars, the whole thing arbitrated by Washington. This is a pipe dream. But it’s what the lame duck wants.

Needless to say, Republicans – for whom Tehran never left the “axis of evil” – will try to bomb the dream, pipelines and all, for instance by passing legislation preventing the lifting of key sanctions. Sparks will fly. Tehran won’t accept a nuclear deal where Washington just says “take my word for it, we will lift sanctions”; this has to be in the letter of the agreement. After all they have vast experience of dealing with gun-crazy Republicans in power.

Nothing will change on Russia – even as the Obama administration needs Moscow to get a deal with Tehran. The relentless demonization of Putin and the resurgence of the same old Cold War meme, “The Russians are Coming”, are guaranteed to keep propelling stupidity 24/7 to intergalactic spheres.

Capitol Hill will go on overdrive. After all, Russia demonization is a bipartisan sport in Washington. The only “solution” would be regime change. Not only is Putin not going anywhere, but he’s ratcheting up his defiance of the Empire of Chaos. This implies increased problems with Germany, where Chancellor Angela Merkel keeps appeasing the Americans while German businesses want increased trade with Russia and Eurasia as a whole.

Another China win-win?
On trade, here’s where APEC collides with the two-pronged US version of an economic NATO: the proposed Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with Europe and the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) with Asia.

What the Obama administration is fighting for is nothing less than a totally unregulated global marketplace. Imagine the “free” market – as Bill “Bubba” Clinton was already parading in Indonesia two decades ago – setting all sorts of standards on everything from working conditions to the environment. In theory, that’s exactly what Republicans love. So here Obama would be right in their alley, which implies an easy Senate ratification.

It’s actually way more complicated. Republicans simply cannot stomach an Obama victory. That means this upcoming Senate won’t give him the fast track he needs to clinch the TPP deal.

That happens to be exactly what China wants. Beijing will use APEC to promote the road map for its own, anti-TPP trade deal, the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). TPP involves 12 APEC members – but not China. And even inside TPP there’s a monster revolt; Tokyo is battling the US because they Japan is sure its auto industry and agriculture may be devoured by US corporations.

So we’re right into a titanic Transformer-style Battle of the Deals. In fact any deal is problematic, as China, Japan and South Korea may want, in principle, broader economic cooperation. But on trade, in so many levels, they are fiercely competing against each other – as in the auto industry and agriculture, for instance – not to mention that heavy historical baggage between Japan and China and Japan and South Korea.

The Chinese charm offensive at APEC in Beijing is all about “innovative development”, “building infrastructure investment” and “comprehensive connectivity”. It’s all a mirror image of the extremely ambitious New Silk Roads proposed by President Xi to connect Eurasia.

Beijing is proposing a new “connectivity framework” into three key areas – “physical connectivity, institutional connectivity, and people-to-people connectivity”. But still no one knows how this will work out in practice towards Asia integration. Washington doesn’t care; it just wants a “free” unregulated mega-market for US corporations.

Beijing sees Asian economic integration as APEC facilitating an FTAAP by 2025. Needless to say, the US and a few vassals aboard the TPP have been adamant that no regional deal jeopardizes TPP. Washington was betting on TPP being signed before APEC. It didn’t happen. So Plan B is to boycott FTAAP until TPP is signed. And that Beijing won’t allow. The lame duck will have to duck a lot on his one-on-one with Xi in Beijing.

Finally, what about the Obama-Capitol Hill battle on the climate-change field? For the absolute majority of Republicans, climate change and global warming are nothing but an evil conspiracy. End of story.

The lame duck and Capitol Hill at least may agree on – what else – the Global War on Terror. Pentagon supremo Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel recently said the US should get ready for endless wars, as “tyranny”, “terrorism”, national security challenges and – surprise! – climate change pose a substantial “threat”.

Since 2002, the Pentagon has been saying to anyone who was bothered to listen that Endless War is the only deal in town – or the universe, for that matter. The lame duck might even fraternize about it with his Republican nemeses over the odd round of golf. What a wonderful (lame duck) world this would be.

1. Putin Vs. Obama: The World’s Most Powerful People 2014, Forbes, November 5, 2014.
2. Obama Wrote Secret Letter to Iran’s Khamenei About Fighting Islamic State, Wall Street Journal Online (subscription).

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge (Nimble Books, 2007), and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at


Nazi NATO, Atrocities Committed in Eastern Ukraine, But No War Crimes Tribunals? Why?



A friend who lives in Ukraine sent me this message a few hours ago:

“I got a call from Donestsk the other day asking me if I knew anything about a bomb that sucks the air out of a room or building and tears people up in the process. Granted it was only part of what happened. A fireball followed.

The survivors had left the room and had two structural walls between them and the detonation site. It was probably a small bomb/missile, but the only type I know of as a possible explanation is a thermobaric or vacuum bomb. Have you heard of any other weapon that can do this?

Also, there is a rumor about SCUD missiles, which Ukraine was supposed to have demolished 20 years ago. People say that they are being deployed to Donbass. Do you know anything about this?”

A genocide is going on, but it’s supported by the West, and so Americans and Europeans aren’t learning much about it from the standpoint of its victims (the residents of Ukraine’s southeast). Perhaps that’s why there aren’t calls for war-crimes trials about the genocide.

Here’s the background (for those who don’t already know it):

Southeastern Ukraine had voted overwhelmingly in 2010 for the President who was overthrown by a violent coup on 22 February 2014, and so the coup-imposed Government is trying to kill them, to clear the land from them but keep their territory; it calls those people “terrorists” for their rejecting this coup-imposed Government, but the reason they reject it isn’t only because it was imposed in a violent coup against the man for whom they had overwhelmingly voted, but also because this new Government is trying to get rid of the people who live there, to clear the land from them, to get them off of Ukraine’s voter-rolls. This new coup-imposed Government wants to remain in power, through future ‘democratic’ ‘elections,’ without needing to worry about these voters, enough of whom will then be gone so that this Government can stay, no matter whom its personnel are.

Ukraine, even before the February 2014 coup, was the most far-right country in all of Europe and the former Soviet Union, but now, with so many of the voters in its least-conservative region (the southeastern) gone, this extremist rightwing Government will probably last. However, they want to get rid of yet more of them, just to play it safe.

So, the civil war between the Government and those residents is continuing. That Government has already held elections within the areas it’s not bombing, elections in order to claim that they’re not the same government as the violently coup-imposed one — that they’re a democratically elected government instead. However, it has the same people, who are the politicians that received their electoral support in the northwestern half of Ukraine. There was little or no voting held in much of the southeast. So, this is actually a sectional war, an ongoing civil war, with the northwest bombing the southeast. The oligarchs in the northwest want their land, but want to get rid of the people who live on it. And this is being called “pro-Western.”

Ukraine’s civil war started on May 2nd. That was when the newly installed post-22-February-2014-coup-imposed Ukrainian Government made unequivocally clear, via a shocking massacre, that the people who live in the regions which had voted overwhelmingly for the former Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovych, needed to be either dead, or otherwise gone — but, in either case, absent from Ukraine, and gone from Ukraine’s voter-rolls. The pro-Western, anti-Russian, Ukrainians who carried out this massacre inside the Trade Unions Building in Odessa on May 2nd, by burning alive the people who had been encamped there circulating literature against the new Ukrainian regime that Obama in his February 2014 coup in Kiev had imposed upon Ukraine, called themselves the “Right Sector.” And here is their preferred way of killing people, which they had practiced at and even before their coup, but now yet more systematically during this May 2nd massacre (and, this time, you can see it in the context it’s viewed at youtube):

ODESSA 5/02: The Untold Truth of Kulikovo Field [Part 1 ]


Published on May 6, 2014

The first part of Odessa 5/02 documentary film, compiled of the extensive amount of video footage done on that day by various witnesses and investigated throughout an independent view point. Soon we’ll post the second part that will include further footage, few interviews of survived witnesses as well as the Right sector searches inside of the building later that night. Thank you all, friends, for a positive feedback! We encourage you to rip this video using and re-upload it to your channel in order to spread this material and protect it from being deleted by Youtube.

Odessa 5/02 The Untold Truth of Kulikovo Field-Operation: Genocide [Part 2]




The second and the last part of Odessa 5/02 documentary. The extensive amount of materials has been used to create this film, relying on footage filmed by various witnesses and investigating throughout with independent point of view.


The people who did what’s shown in that picture are called “Right Sector,” because they belong to the far-right Ukrainian political party of that name, who constitute one of two racist-fascist, or nazi, parties that Obama installed into control over Ukraine in February of this year.

Ukraine’s other nazi party is called “Svoboda” or “Freedom,” a name that the CIA had given to them them in 2004 (based on the appeal in the West of the concept of “Libertarianism” or “Freedom”) in order to avoid PR problems with their original name, which was overtly fascist, the “Nationalist Social” Party, inverted from Hitler’s “National Socialist,” or the original German, “Nazi,” Party. Another reason for the name-change was that the U.S. had waged war during the 1940s against Germany’s nazis and other fascists, and so the U.S. as of 2004 didn’t want to be publicly known as pro-nazi (pro racist-fascist) (though that’s what it evidently has become). The Bush-Obama Administrations wanted to hide the fact that they had hired nazis for the years, building up to both the February coup and this May massacre. At least in the U.S. and Europe, they hid it (though a few scholars noticed it).

The person who largely funded the massacre was a Ukrainian oligarch, Ihor Kolomoysky, who hired in Washington Joe Biden’s son Hunter Biden and a few other bright young people associated with high U.S. officials. (Joe Biden is a big supporter of Ukraine’s coup-regime.) For all these people it was a potentially very lucrative business deal, having to do with gas-deposits in southeastern Ukraine, and possibly also with stock-investments in ‘defense’ firms. But for the lower-level nazis who carried out the dirty-work, this was done as much for the fun of it as it was for the pay of it ($5,000 per corpse, paid by Kolomoysky).

Indeed, the crowd outside the burning Trade Unions Building cheered just moments after a pregnant woman in one of the upper floors was raped and screamed and was then promptly strangled to death with an electrical cord. Immediately after this rape-murder, someone (perhaps the rapist’s buddy) stuck a big Ukrainian flag out the adjoining window, and that’s when the crowd cheered. And when people jumped from upper floors to the hard ground below to escape the flames and the choking smoke, they were immediately batted to death by eager nazis waiting below with bats, so that medics would be able to save as few of them as possible.

The Right Sector’s leader is Dmitry Yarosh, who is a rabid hater of all ethnic Russians (which is why Obama and congressional Republicans support him — he gets the job done for them [and for their campaign donors] in Ukraine). In fact, Yarosh is on the wanted-list by Interpol for his having incited fundamentalist Islamic Chechens to wage a war to separate the Chechen region of Russia from the rest of Russia. (Yarosh loves separatists in Russia, but hates separatists in his own Ukraine.) TIME  Magazine said, in its 4 February 2014 interview with Yarosh, that “His ideology, it seems, is just too toxic to let him in the room,” and that the U.S. State Department thus told him to keep quiet, though he was undoubtedly crucial to the ultimate success of their coup on February 22ndTIME’s interviewer wrote, “He has clearly grown tired of being the movement’s anonymous enforcer.” Immediately after February 22nd, Yarosh was the enforcer whose troops terrorized members of Ukraine’s parliament or “Rada” to approve the new government, which had been secretly selected early in February by Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and Asia, Victoria Nuland, telling America’s Ambassador in Kiev whom to appoint. The person at the new Government’s top was to be Arseniy Yatsenyuk, or “Yats” as she called him; and “Yats” promptly set about to assemble a government of mainly nazis but also some fascists (or non-racist right-wing extremists). Yarosh’s Right Sector continued to be the main enforcers in the new Government, because they really love to torture and kill people. (Most of the merely conscripted soldiers don’t; many go AWOL once the see what they are doing.)

Months later, here is what Yarosh’s people did to ethnic Russians in Ukraine’s southeastern region, who were trying to protect themselves and their families by serving in the newly formed separatist army against Yarosh’s and Obama’s new nazi Ukrainian regime:

[21+] Remember the fallen [eng subs]



Published on Sep 14, 2014

LPR militia “Ghost” brigade found shallow graves of 8 of their comrades after several weeks they were taken captive, tortured and executed.


Different videographer, different part of Ukraine, different event, different time, same modus-operandi — torture, then burning to death — and same basic reason: these people wanted to save themselves and their families from being treated this way by nazis whose passion is hatred of ethnic Russians. However, the people who were destroyed in the first picture were civilians, but the people who were destroyed in the second one were volunteer fighters against nazis, and were presumably armed when caught.

Here is how the great American war reporter George Eliason, who now lives in that region, describes that particular scene:

“When these groups, or some of the Ukrainian National Guard forces, take prisoners, torture and murder has generally followed. … When murdered prisoners are found, their pants as shown in this photo are at their ankles. It has been confirmed that the Ukrainians are sodomizing war prisoners with spray foam. This causes their lower intestine to burst and the abdominal cavity to be filled with hardening foam. The pain is extreme.” Eliason adds that they use other tortures, too: “War prisoners are still being dragged behind vehicles until there is little left to recognize [whom or even what] they were.”


The intense hatred that Ukraine’s nazis have toward ethnic Russians is clear; it’s also the reason why many ethnic Russians are escaping en-masse into Russia, for refuge. (That serves Obama’s needs just as well as killing them does; he simply wants those voters not to remain inside Ukraine, because otherwise his regime won’t be able to win Ukrainian national elections; he wouldn’t achieve nazi, anti-Russian, stability there; so, the U.S. would lose control over Ukraine. Obama and the Republicans want to place nuclear missiles there, right next door to Russia, much like the Soviet leader wanted to do to the U.S. during the Cuban Missile Crisis.) Eliason’s report includes video taken on November 5th of a team of nazi troops laughing and making merry as they prepare to release their rapid-fire rocket-launchers randomly onto Donetsk, to maim and kill as many people, and destroy as many buildings, as possible. Then, too, Eliason links to the news report by the independent journalist Graham Phillips in Donetsk, who managed to video at the morgue one of the nazis’ kills, a Donetsk child.

In the first still here, from Graham Phillips’s video, is seen a huge gash on the corpse’s right arm and another on the right side of what had been the right side of the former-child’s chest; the second picture shows a huge gash in its left side, as well as two shrapnel holes into what had been the child’s chest:


(18+) Novorossiya News #22 – Ukraine Shells Donetsk, Children Killed


Published on Nov 6, 2014

It seems that a big piece of shrapnel ripped straight through from one side of this child’s chest to the other.

On June 1st, the press secretary to Yarosh, Borislav Bereza, posted to Facebook the new Government’s plans for the southeast. An English translation was posted of it on November 6th. Here are excerpts from that translation:

“What I am going to say is brutal, but honest. … There is only one solution to the problem [in the southeast] — a full-scale military operation.

Phase one — a locality is surrounded, through loudspeakers population is notified to leave the territory in 1-3 days, after which all remaining will be declared accessory to the enemy. …

Phase 2 — the city will be subject to massive attack with heavy weaponry.

Phase 3 — … the final phase of the operation [like Hitler’s ‘Final Solution’]. Targeted strikes against the city. …

You will say it’s harsh? It’s absolutely necessary.


Otherwise in a couple of months it [opposition to Obama’s February coup in Ukraine] will metastasize in other regions [where Yanukovysh received, say, only 70% to 80% of the vote]. Therefore an urgent surgical operation is needed [to remove the malignancy, the spots where he received more than 80%]. Those who want to be human shields for the occupants [in the regions that in 2010 had voted over 80% for the man whom Obama’s coup in 2014 overthrew] are not brainwashed citizens of Ukraine, but are traitors helping a foreign invader [Russia]. These people have always been eliminated. … There are no other solutions to the problem in Eastern Ukraine. … If [the newly elected but only in Ukraine’s northwest, President, Petro] Poroshenko wants to go down in history as a person who brought peace [like Hitler’s Thousand-Year Reich was to be a reign of peace] to the country and preserved its territorial integrity, then he will give that order.”

Poroshenko gave that order.

On June 4th, NATO headlined, “Press conference, by the acting Minister of Defence of Ukraine Mykhailo Koval following the meeting of the NATO-Ukraine Commission in Defence Ministers session.” Minister Koval met privately with NATO chiefs, and held a public press conference afterward. He opened by noting that, “The Defence ministers of the allied countries who spoke at the meeting unanimously supported Ukrainian authorities, Ukrainian Armed Forces and security forces engaged into antiterrorist operation in the east of Ukraine.” In other words: NATO endorses the ethnic cleansing.

He said that he had, “informed colleagues about practical steps taken by the antiterrorist operation command aimed at extermination of criminal groups in the east of Ukraine.”

He said that though “Ukrainian authorities ordered the participants of the antiterrorist operation that no civilian person should suffer as a result of that operation, it is extremely difficult to conduct all these operations, and I should tell you the commanders of the antiterrorist operation give commands to liquidate some groups.” He didn’t specify what “groups,” but at least one of them was obvious: ethnic Russians.

Ukraine was not yet (and still is not) a NATO member-nation; nonetheless, he said: “We today received the most important, the total support of the whole Alliance. As I told you 21 ministers spoke and all supported us. It is very important for us.” So, he was reaffirming that NATO gave them a go on the ethnic-cleansing operation.

On June 11th, an “Anti-Maidan” or anti-ethnic-cleansing, site posted to youtube excerpts from previously unpublished press-conference Q&A-session statements by Koval, made perhaps at that NATO event. This was titled “Secretary of Defense [Mikhailo Koval] About Concentration Camp for Eastern Ukraine People.”

He was shown saying:

“There will be a thorough filtration of people. There will be special filtration measures put in place. We will filter out people, including women, who are linked to separatism, who were committing crimes on Ukrainian territory, crimes related to terrorist activities. We have a lot of information regarding this, and we have a formidable framework to combat this, and respective power structures will carry out this operation. Besides, this is a serious issue, related to the fact that people will be resettled to other regions.”

On June 16th, the pro-Government Kyiv Post reported that the property of the people in Ukraine’s Donbass, the southeast, will be confiscated, and “Land parcels will be given out for free to the servicemen of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and other military formations, as well as to the employees of Interior Ministry and the Security Service of Ukraine that are defending territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country in eastern and southeastern regions of Ukraine.” That’s their euphemism for the ethnic cleansing, and mass-theft. In other words, Obama’s rulers of Ukraine are offering their soldiers the opportunity to grab legally the property of their victims. Ukraine doesn’t have the money to pay for all the soldiers that are needed to do this ethnic cleansing; so, those soldiers are being promised war-booty, instead. Sort of like paying them by tips: but with the bigger tips going to the killers with the most (or biggest) scalps.

When people in the area of the ethnic cleansing managed to shoot down one of the regime’s planes and its 49 soldiers who were in the process of perpetrating it, Prime Minister Yatsenyuk himself vowed revenge, by using clear nazi language: ”They lost their lives …  in a situation facing a threat to be killed by invaders [i.e., by the residents, not by those troops from the northwest that they shot down] and sponsored by subhumans [presumably meaning Russians],” he said. “First, we will commemorate the heroes [the exterminators] by wiping out those who killed them and then by cleaning our land from the evil.” However, of course, that’s what he was already doing (“cleaning” the land), which is the reason why that plane was shot down in the first place: those troops were invaders and killers, instead of heroes.

TV commercial was running on Ukrainian TVs this summer, in which the chief local agricultural pest (the Colorado beetle), which Ukraine’s far-right frequently uses in order to symbolize the country’s Russian-speakers, is portrayed destroying crops and then being exterminated as the solution to the problem in Ukraine. The symbolism used there is immediately understandable to Ukrainians, though (and this is one reason it’s used, since they are advised by our CIA) not so easily understandable to people outside that country. Propaganda like this helps to rouse the racist nationalist sentiment to make them “exterminators,” heroes to their fellow-racist-nationalist haters of people whose native language is Russian. (At first, the nazis tried to outlaw the speaking of Russian, but that didn’t work out because Russian is the predominant language in Ukraine.)

The United States Government is united behind this ethnic-cleansing campaign. America’s news media refer to it in the same way that the client-nation, Ukraine, does: as an “Anti-Terrorist Operation,” or “ATO” for short. Our people are killing only “terrorists,” like we are doing inside Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Pakistan, and other Islamic-majority countries. (But there, at least, we have been trying to target actual terrorists, not the general population of the area. So, while that might have been wrong to do, or perhaps even counter-productive, it isn’t blatantly a war-crime.) The dominant myth says that we have somehow been attacked by non-Islamic, even Christian, “terrorists.” They want to live; too bad for them, then. And there is no UN, no EU,, no one actually but the Russian Government, that cares — and even Russia can’t fight the whole world, to stop what used to proudly call itself “the Free World,” when Russia wasn’t part of that — and now nothing in the West seems any longer even to be that. Everything in the West seems to be now only a charade of that.

But it is Russia, and not the United States, that is being condemned and sanctioned. Furthermore, U.S. President Obama and the European leaders who participated in this genocide or “ethnic cleansing,” have slammed Russia with even steeper economic sanctions, to punish Russia for the downing of a civilian airliner that one or two Ukrainian Air Force warplanes actually shot down, targeting directly into the pilot’s stomach and leaving a huge hole from the approximately one thousand bullets fired directly into his belly.

All of this — from the “false flag” coup, to the “false flag” airliner-shoot-down — were like Hitler’s burning of the Reichstag building and blaming of it upon “the communists.” Except, this time, it’s being blamed on “the Russians.” And, this time, it’s the U.S. that’s leading the nazi and the lesser fascist forces, rather than warring against them. This time, Washington created the nazi and fascist attacks. And Europe, the IMF, and NATO, have been following along and adding muscle to Obama’s crimes.

But, after all, Obama is a ‘liberal,’ and he won the Nobel Peace Prize. Hitler wasn’t so successful. But Hitler created the ideology, which Obama only applies in Ukraine. This is Hitler’s posthumous victory, in what seems to be (at least from the ideological standpoint) an ongoing World War II, which we can only hope won’t morph into World War III (inasmuch as Obama and NATO are actually targeting Russia here).

On November 7th, the website “Ukraine Crisis Updates: Unfiltered news from ordinary people in Ukraine,” bannered “USA to train Ukrainians to fight people of Donetsk in cold weather,” and reported, from Lviv, which is a particularly far-rightwing Ukrainian city:

“United States government is getting ready to train Ukrainian military and punitive battalions in winter combat techniques before the end of the year. The goal is to make Ukrainians more efficient in killing people of Donetsk and Lugansk in cold weather.

Training will take place in Starichi educational center in western Ukraine – sources say. Starichi is localted in Yavrov military polygon in Lviv region.

American government will train a group of Ukrainians who will serve as instructors within Ukrainian military. They will spread knowledge on how American government thinks is the best way to kill people of Donetsk. Candidates to become Ukrainian instructors should be selected by November 10.

It is not yet known who will finance the training.”

Three days earlier was posted there “Video of Ukrainian army shooting up school and police station in Donetsk.. ..for fun,” and the viewer sees them laughing while they fire their rifles into buildings hoping to kill occupants. This action was videoed on the same day, November 4th.

An article posted there August 31st, “Ukrainian Kids Being Taught to Hate,” shows numerous photos of classrooms and of crowds marching under nazi and often even under German Nazi banners, sometimes even displaying photos of Adolf Hitler, and an accompanying link shows a classroom in which children with Russian names are told to change their names. A Svoboda member of parliament says of ethnic Russians, “These creatures who go here, they deserve one thing: death.” in another link, she says: “Ukrainian kids must be called Ukrainian names. In the whole world, kids are named according to a sovereign nation’s rules. They don’t name children in a Jewish way in America! If parents don’t teach children Ukrainian identity, I as a politician have to do it for them.”

That site is operated by some residents of northwestern Ukraine who are appalled at what their Government is doing, and who want to get word out to the world about what is being done. None of the articles are signed. But these people are very courageous to be doing what they are doing. Considering the portions of Ukraine in which they live, they probably live in fear of their neighbors finding out. People in the West are supposed to be kept ignorant of such realities — war-crimes that are sponsored by their own governments.

Here is more on Ukraine’s training of children to hate Russians. The stiff-arm salutes by those children shown in that video should not be to Adolf Hitler or to Ukraine’s local one Stepan Bandera, but instead to Barack Obama; but, considering that these kids also want all Blacks out of Europe, they’re no likelier to “Heil” to him than America’s Republicans are — no matter how much Obama’s policies might be pushing their agenda. And some of Ukraine’s leading nazis are even Jews. Rationality about ethical matters is not to be expected from conservatives, any more than the sanitary purity of untreated sewage would be. However, the vast majority of America’s Democrats still support and admire President Obama; so, they’re conservatives, too. That’s how conservative America has become.

NATO has no reason for existence anymore except to stir World War III against Russia. It is a war-criminal operation, straight-out. It needs to end, now; and only Europe can do it, but Europeans must first demand it. Russia doesn’t threaten Europe. America does. There are other things that also do, such as Islamic extremism that’s sponsored by Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and the United States — when they’re not bombing it so as to boost U.S. and European arms-makers. The U.S. is a much bigger threat to Europe than either Iran or Russia are. But the truth is being kept from European publics, just as it is being kept from Americans.

Cameron Says Britain’s EU Membership Not Carved in Stone

David Cameron and Angela Merkel: Is this the end of their affair?

Fond gazes: Angela Merkel and David Cameron in February

Fond gazes: Angela Merkel and David Cameron in February


UK Prime Minister David Cameron stated that Britain would not stay in the European Union “come what may”, specifying that the immigrations issues of the country should be considered to keep it in the bloc.
MOSCOW, November 10 (Sputnik) — UK Prime Minister David Cameron vowed on Monday that Britain would not stay in the European Union “come what may”, saying Brussels needed to address immigration concerns of the British public if it wanted to keep London in the bloc.
Speaking at a meeting of the Confederation of British Industry, a UK economic pressure group, Cameron said that, “Britain’s future in Europe matters to our country.” He added, however, that it was not working properly for Britain at the moment, “and that is why we need to make changes”.

He said further that, simply saying, Britain would stay in the European Union and stick with Europe “come what may” “is not a plan and that won’t work”.

The European Union must put additional controls on migration, Cameron said. He called for reforms in the welfare system, which has been in the spotlight in the United Kingdom due to the abuse of welfare benefits by the increasing flow of migrants.

The speech was aimed at allaying the concerns of British business, which fears to lose a free market estimated at 500 million people in the event of an in-out vote on the EU membership.

Cameron’s Conservative party has adopted a firmer stance on migration ahead of the May 2015 general election. The ruling party is currently losing to the most eurosceptic party in Britain — UK Independence Party (UKIP) — that has been gaining ground both domestically and in the European Parliament recently.

Cameron has claimed he would hold a referendum on the British membership in the European Union in 2017 if he wins the May national election.

Mr Cameron believed he had wooed his German maiden and won her over to Britain’s point of view. Then came his plan to introduce EU migrant quotas. Now he must remember that Mrs Merkel is a political realist first and foremost.

There are two ways to understand the relationship between David Cameron and Angela Merkel. One way is very German. The other is classically British. The irony is that many people in Britain take the Germanic interpretation, while most in Germany see things through a British lens.

The Germanic interpretation comes from the operas of Richard Wagner’s Ring Cycle. Siegfried, the hero, is a handsome young man who does not know fear. He passes through a ring of fire to win the love of Brünnhilde, a warrior-goddess who renounces her immortal heritage to be with him. Listen to the story of modern Anglo-German relations sometimes told by Downing Street today and you’ll be left in no doubt over who is playing which role.

Rather less romantic is the vision of foreign policy articulated in 1848 by Britain’s greatest foreign secretary, Viscount Palmerston: “We have no eternal allies, and we have no perpetual enemies. Our interests are eternal and perpetual, and those interests it is our duty to follow.” If ever there was a way to understand the inscrutable Mrs Merkel’s ultra-realist approach to European diplomacy, this was it.

Mrs Merkel looms large in British politics because of reports in the German press that she has warned Mr Cameron over his attempts to curtail the European Union’s right of free movement. From that legal right springs large-scale European migration to Britain, the UK Independence Party, and Mr Cameron’s biggest political problem.

But if Mr Cameron thinks he can put quotas on EU nationals’ right to enter Britain, Mrs Merkel suggested at a Brussels summit last month, he may have to take Britain out of the EU. She also bluntly told the Prime Minister to pay an extra £1.7 billion to the EU, a demand that Mr Cameron equally bluntly said makes it harder to justify Britain’s continued membership of the union.

Are we seeing the end of the affair, the final failure of Mr Cameron’s long attempt to woo his German counterpart? It’s easy to understand why he began that attempt, since his promise to recast Britain’s relationship with the EU is surely doomed without her support.

From afar, it is easy to see Mrs Merkel as some sort of German empress or even Queen of Europe. Chancellor since 2005, she dominates German politics just as Germany dominates the modern EU. Her approval ratings are close to 80 per cent and she has co-opted almost every major German political party into her ruling grand coalition.

Yet Mrs Merkel’s dominance is deliberately unspectacular, even unambitious. Having amassed great political power, she rarely uses it; there is no grand Merkel agenda of domestic reform or diplomacy. She makes deals, not speeches, and puts compromise ahead of controversy. Like the thrifty Swabian housewife she likes to invoke, she has built up political capital but hates to spend it – especially on behalf of foreign leaders.

The curious domestic caution of such a strong leader has caught Britain by surprise in the past. Earlier this year, Mr Cameron believed – not unreasonably, since she told him so – that Mrs Merkel was backing his attempt to prevent Jean‑Claude Juncker becoming head of the European Commission.

But when German politicians and newspapers united in support of Mr Juncker – partly in reaction to Mr Cameron’s aggressively bold position — Mrs Merkel tacked with the wind, leaving Mr Cameron to a very public defeat. The message was clear – or should have been: no matter how strong their personal relations, there are limits to how far Mrs Merkel can and will go to accommodate Britain.

Yet Mr Cameron and some of those around him have a history of overestimating the influence of his personal charm over Mrs Merkel, and its political importance. Perhaps the sharpest example came in February this year, when Mrs Merkel was due in London for a state visit. Days before the event, one of Mr Cameron’s team briefed a friendly columnist that Mrs Merkel was in the bag. The Chancellor, it was said, couldn’t do enough for a prime minister she fondly regards as a sort of “naughty nephew”. She would come to London to announce her wholehearted support for his renegotiation campaign. Siegfried had won his maiden!

This romantic tale was read with both confusion and concern in Berlin, and led to a painful lesson in Palmerstonian realism. In London, Mrs Merkel offered only limited, conditional support, carefully deflating No 10’s optimism. Anyone expecting her to satisfy “all kinds of alleged or actual British wishes” was “in for a disappointment”.

As well as overstating the importance of personal chemistry, Mr Cameron’s team have sometimes shown a tin ear for German domestic politics. Almost his first promise as Conservative leader – to pull Tory MEPs out of the European People’s Party group in the European Parliament – offended the Chancellor, whose Christian Democrats are the backbone of the group. The scab was torn off the wound again this year when those Tory MEPs formed a parliamentary alliance with the Alternative for Germany (AfD), the country’s first Eurosceptic party and fierce critics of the Chancellor.

In both cases, the German irritation at Mr Cameron was the same: he was putting domestic politics and party management ahead of diplomacy. Yes, there’s more than a hint of hypocrisy in that. But dominant politicians can make rules without following them.

That tension between the domestic and the diplomatic is the origin of Mrs Merkel’s recent frostiness with Mr Cameron. She is concerned at how far he will go to placate Conservative MPs and Ukip voters.

Last month, when it first emerged that Downing Street was planning a “game-changing” speech on European immigration, alarm bells started ringing in the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. Diplomats told ministers that altering the right to free movement would not be acceptable to other European governments – especially Mrs Merkel’s, which sees Personenfreizügigkeit as a cornerstone of the EU.

But Mrs Merkel’s latest warning is not a final ultimatum; the Chancellor is, it turns out, not some operatic diva given to dramatic gestures. Rather, it was a reminder to Mr Cameron that while she prefers Britain to stay in the EU, she can and will only follow him so far down his current path.

A close reading of those latest German reports shows that they amount to saying only that Mr Cameron’s present course makes it “possible” that Britain could end up leaving. That’s a serious warning, but still a far cry from saying that exit is inevitable or desirable. If Mr Cameron and Mrs Merkel are partners in a diplomatic waltz, she has given him a gentle shove to keep him on course. She has not walked off the dance floor – yet.

Just as she did on her visit to London, Mrs Merkel is trying to lower British expectations of what is possible from a new European deal, and to gently encourage Mr Cameron not to raise the stakes too high. Ever the deal-maker, the Chancellor is not telling the Prime Minister that their negotiation is over, merely asking him to come up with a more realistic offer. That means focusing on changing EU migrants’ access to welfare to reduce the incentive to come to Britain, not banning them outright.

Is it just possible that Mrs Merkel’s warning will help Mr Cameron persuade Conservative MPs and Ukip voters to accept more realistic goals for his renegotiation? Could Mrs Merkel’s interventions actually help Britain’s Siegfried find a European dragon small enough to slay? The Prime Minister’s “Big Speech” on Europe next month will be read as closely in Berlin as at Westminster.

So the dance continues, but so too does the gulf in perception between the two sides. Mr Cameron may have strapped on his magic referendum-sword and set off on a quest to decide Britain’s European destiny, but Mrs Merkel is not a maiden to be wooed. She is the ultimate political realist, always willing to strike a deal, but never at any price. She doesn’t do quests or grand strategy. She has To Do lists, ticking off tasks as they arise, and always according to circumstance. Her support is never categorical or unqualified.

The theatrical types around Mr Cameron might ponder the conclusion of the Ring Cycle: Siegfried ends up dead and the kingdom of the gods goes up in smoke. When dealing with Mrs Merkel, realism is surely a better course than romance.

NATO has no money, capability to buy out Russia-bound Mistral warships – source

RIA Novosti/Alexey Filippov

RIA Novosti/Alexey Filippov

NATO doesn’t have the necessary funds to meet the demands of US lawmakers and purchase French-built Mistral warships in order to prevent Russia from getting the vessels, a military source said.

“NATO’s budget is too small to not only purchase Russia-ordered Mistral helicopter carriers, but to even compensate France half of the penalties in accordance with the contract,” a military source in Brussels, Belgium told TASS news agency.

NATO’s military and civilian budget for 2014 amounts $ 1.6 billion, while the penalty for non-delivery of the two Mistral helicopter carriers to Russia could reach $ 3 billion, the source explained.

“Moreover, NATO simply doesn’t have a structure that that could receive the ships. The Alliance has almost no military equipment of its own. So there would be no use in the helicopter carriers even if the money to purchase them is found,” the source said.

The idea of buying the Mistral vessels is “absurd from a military point of view” because the ships are “custom-built in accordance with Russian standards, which makes their use by NATO highly problematic and will require additional, expensive refitting,” he stressed.

The source has called the proposal by the US senators “a purely political project, in which NATO as an organization is physically unable to participate.”

“The main irony in this situation” is that even if several NATO member states will be able to allocate the necessary funds and purchase the ships – it’s not France, but Russia, which will get the money, he said.

“The contract has been paid and the redemption price will go to Moscow,” which today is “probably” more interested in money than in Mistral and “does not look too concerned” about the problem with delivery.

“The fact that this logic isn’t obvious to the US congressmen may only cause disappointment among allies and laughter among the Russians,” he concluded.

The comment comes in response to Friday news that eight US lawmakers forwarded a letter to NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, urging the Alliance to purchase the Mistral vessels.

An aerial view shows the Mistral-class helicopter carrier Vladivostok constructed for Russia at the STX Les Chantiers de l'Atlantique shipyard site in the port of Montoir-de-Bretagne near Saint Nazaire

Reuters/Stephane Mahe


“Sensitive to the financial burden that France may incur should it rightly refuse to transfer these warships to Russia, we renew our call that NATO purchase or lease the warships as a common naval asset,” the letter said as quoted by The Hill website.

“Such a decisive move by NATO isn’t without precedent and would show President Putin that our rhetorical resolve is matched by our actual resolve and that this Alliance will not tolerate or abet his dangerous actions in Europe,” it added.

NATO headquarters confirmed that it received letter, but provided no official comments on the possibility of the purchase of the ships.

Russia and France signed a €1.12 billion ($1.6 billion) contract for building two Mistral-type ships in June 2011.

Under the deal, Russia was supposed to receive the first of the two warships, the Vladivostok, in October this year.

However, the delivery has been postponed due the pressure on France by the US and EU, which imposed several waves of sanctions against Moscow over its accession of Crime and the crisis in Ukraine.

The second Mistral-class helicopter carrier, the Sevastopol, is scheduled to be handed over to Russia in 2015.

Mistral deal: France says delivery of warships to Russia still on hold

The French Navy’s Tonnere multi-purpose amphibious assault ship of the Mistral class at the Toulon seaport. (RIA Novosti/Alexander Vilf)

The French Navy’s Tonnere multi-purpose amphibious assault ship of the Mistral class at the Toulon seaport. (RIA Novosti/Alexander Vilf)

The Mistral-type helicopter carriers can accommodate up to 30 light helicopters in its hangar and on deck, although Russia plans to arm the Vladivostok and the Sevastopol with 16 heavy aircraft.

Each ship can also carry up to 450 combat troops (or 900 for short missions) in addition to the crew, complete with amphibious transports, armor and a command center.

Conditions have not yet been met for France to hand over the Mistral-class warship to Russia. According to the contract, it is due to be delivered on November 14, Paris said.

“The conditions today are not met to deliver the Mistral,”French Finance Minister Michel Sapin told RTL radio in an interview.

He added that the conditions the French government wants to see are “that in Ukraine the situation becomes more normal, and things cool down.”

The Russian agency responsible for foreign arms trade said on Thursday that France so far hasn’t sent any official notice that the Mistral contract may not be fulfilled.

Earlier on Wednesday, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said France had invited a new group of Russian Navy seamen and officers for training courses on handling Mistral-class warships, a move indicating that despite its ambivalent rhetoric France is continuing to fulfill the terms of the contract.

Launching the stern of the first Russian Mistral type dock assault helicopter carrier "Vladivostok" at the Baltic Shipyard. (RIA Novosti/Igor Russak)

Launching the stern of the first Russian Mistral type dock assault helicopter carrier “Vladivostok” at the Baltic Shipyard. (RIA Novosti/Igor Russak)

France may hand over the first of two Mistral helicopter carriers to Russia on November 14, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin said. He announced that Moscow had received an invitation to take delivery at France’s Saint-Nazaire shipyards.

“Rosoboronexport [Russia’s state owned arms exporter] has received an invitation to arrive in Saint-Nazaire on November 14, where 360 Russian sailors and 60 specialist trainers are already,” Rogozin said.

On that day, Vladivostok – the first of two Mistral-class helicopter carrier ships – should be handed over to Russia. The Deputy PM also assumed the second carrier, the Sevastopol, would also be in dock.

“We act from the fact that France must protect its own reputation as a reliable partner, including on issues of military cooperation,” he said. France has always stressed that for them this would be “the litmus test of their national pride and sovereignty,” the Deputy PM added.

On Tuesday, French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said that France will decide on delivery of the Mistral-type helicopter carriers to Russia only in November.

“The French president stated earlier that if the political situation does not improve, he will not permit delivery of the helicopter carriers,” Le Drian said. “The president will make a decision by November.”

Launching the stern section of a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship at the Baltic Shipyard in St. Petersburg. The ship will be christened the Sevastopol. (RIA Novosti/Alexei Danichev)

Launching the stern section of a Mistral-class amphibious assault ship at the Baltic Shipyard in St. Petersburg. The ship will be christened the Sevastopol. (RIA Novosti/Alexei Danichev)

Rogozin emphasized that so far everything is proceeding according to plan.

French shipbuilders in the Saint Nazaire shipyard have said, according to RIA Novosti, that the helicopter carriers are ready for delivery.

There has been no official statement from the French authorities yet.

Russia and France signed a €1.12 billion ($1.6 billion) contract for building two Mistral-type ships in June 2011.
Under the deal, Russia was supposed to receive the first of the two warships, the Vladivostok, in October this year.

However, delivery has been postponed due to the conflict in Ukraine, the impetus behind the international community’s pressure on France to cancel the contract.

Western allies have been pushing Paris for months, saying that France has to make sacrifices to meet its commitment to oppose Moscow through sanctions over the crisis in Ukraine.

The second Mistral-class helicopter carrier, the Sevastopol, is expected to be handed over to Russia next year.

The Mistral-type helicopter carriers can accommodate up to 30 light helicopters in its hangar and on deck, although Russia plans to arm the Vladivostok and the Sevastopol with 16 heavy aircraft. The ship can also carry up to 450 combat troops (or 900 for short missions) in addition to the crew, complete with amphibious transports, armor and a command center.

German Foreign Ministry plays down intel report claiming Ukraine militia downed MH17

A picture taken on November 7, 2014, shows parts of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 at the crash site in the village of Hrabove (Grabovo), some 80km east of Donetsk. (AFP Photo/Dimitar Dilkoff)

A picture taken on November 7, 2014, shows parts of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 at the crash site in the village of Hrabove (Grabovo), some 80km east of Donetsk. (AFP Photo/Dimitar Dilkoff)

The German Foreign Ministry maintains the media interpretation of an October statement by the president of national intelligence agency alleging self-defense militia downed MH17 flight in Ukraine was incomplete and taken out of context.

The Russian embassy in Berlin received an official response to note #3693 from October 27 regarding Germany’s Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND intelligence agency) President Gerhard Schindler’s allegations that local militia in eastern Ukraine shot down the Malaysia Airlines flight in July.

“The media interpretation of the report of the Federal Intelligence Service (BND) president delivered to the Bundestag Committee overseeing intelligence activities on October 8 is incomplete and arbitrarily taken out of context,” the note says.

Gerhard Schindler, President of the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) (AFP Photo)

Gerhard Schindler, President of the German Federal Intelligence Service (BND) (AFP Photo)

German diplomats insisted that the BND’s analysis and evaluation was based “on information obtained from intelligence and from open sources,” which included data from the interim report of the Dutch investigation commission conducting the inquiry. The report delivered by Schindler “evaluated multiple valid scenarios with regard to their plausibility and probability,” the note said.

The ministry stressed that according to the decision of the International Civil Aviation Association (ICAA), investigation of the MH17 flight crash was handed over to Dutch authorities, authorized to exclusively deliver all information on the issue.

According to information made public by Germany’s Der Spiegel daily on October 19, Schindler delivered a statement in Bundestag on October 8 in which he claimed the militia in Ukraine’s Donetsk Region fired a rocket from a BUK defense missile system which it had captured from a Ukrainian base. It shot down the Malaysian Boeing as it was flying from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, killing all 298 passengers and crew aboard.

Putin accuses Ukrainian troops of shelling MH17 crash site

Russian President Vladimir Putin, who met on Monday with Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak on the sidelines of an APEC summit in China, has also spoken on the issue of flight MH17.

Having expressed condolences to the families of the perished passengers and Malaysian state, Vladimir Putin confirmed that Moscow insists on a complete and objective international investigation of the MH17 catastrophe in accordance with the corresponding UN resolution.

A picture taken on November 10, 2014, shows parts of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 at the crash site near the village of Hrabove (Grabovo), some 80 kms east of Donetsk. (AFP Photo/Dimitar Dilkoff)

A picture taken on November 10, 2014, shows parts of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 at the crash site near the village of Hrabove (Grabovo), some 80 kms east of Donetsk. (AFP Photo/Dimitar Dilkoff)

At the same time Putin disagreed with the Malaysian PM, who demanded greater access to the crash site “fully controlled by the local militia.”

“The reference that the crash site is fully controlled by so-called pro-Russian separatists is absolutely inconsistent, because it is not them, but the opposite side that is constantly shelling that territory,” Putin said. He noted that it is this shelling that prevents investigators from working properly at the crash site.

He welcomed the fact that Malaysian experts have finally got access to fully-fledged participation in the investigation.

“I’m sure your experts will contribute the necessary to the adequate investigation off this tragedy,” Putin told Razak.

An international team of investigators managed to recover more human remains from the MH17 crash site in eastern Ukraine, the Dutch prime minister announced in late October.

Still, investigators are intending to continue with the search operation and hire local contractors to collect plane debris beyond their reach, Reuters reported last week.