OMNI
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
NEWSLETTER/ANTHOLOGY, #14,
March 19, 2022
Compiled by
Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Ecology
Omnicenter.org/donate/
WHAT MOTIVATED RUSSIA’S ATTACK
ON UKRAINE? In What Ways and to what
Extent Was It Provoked by the US and the West?
What are the consequences of US bigotry against Russia and Putin? What
did the US contribute to the rise of right wing in Ukraine? Many other
questions are raised and answered by the following critics.
CONTENTS US, NATO, RUSSIA,
UKRAINE ANTHOLOGY #14
Katrina
vanden Heuvel. End the Invasion and Stop
the Killing.
HISTORY
Jeremy Kuzmarov. Russia’s Invasion Was Provoked: CIA’s William
Burns.
Dr. Gerald Horne. “What’s to Be Done in Eastern Europe.” US: Regime
Change in Russia.
Tomgram/Tom Dispatch. “William Astore.”
William Astore. US Cold War, US Arsenal
“When Did the Ukraine War Begin?” US Empire, NATO, 2004 Orange
Revolution, 2006 Decision, 2014 Coup in UK and
Maidan Massacre,
Minsk Protocols.
Oliver Stone and Igor Lopatonok. Ukraine
on Fire. How and When the
War Started (before the 2014 coup, before the
2004 Orange Revolution).
Abel Tomlinson. “Ukraine Manufacturing Atrocities to Draw in NATO.”
Fournier, “No Flies Polls.”
Remembering US Aggression
Nelson Peery, Black Fire, the Bloody US Pacification of the Philippines. Brian
Terrell, “US Policy Toward Russia and Its Neighbors.” US
Aggression, Truman Doctrine, Carter
Doctrine, NATO, Sanctions, Selling
Weapons, Nuclear Weapons Treaty.
END THE WAR
Vanden Heuvel (above)
AFSC. Diplomacy, Refugee Protection,
Humanitarian Assistance
About Face. DemilitarizeU.
UNITED NATIONS
UN Wire. Support Refugees
BE INFORMED
No Chemical/Biological Warfare
US/Russian Counterclaims re Biowarfare.
NO HUMAN SHIELDS
Population Fund vs. Alleged Russian
Attack on Hospital.
UNHCR.
Human Rights Violations in Belarus.
Contents US, Russia,
Ukraine, Nos. 1-5, 2014-2015
Contents Russia’s Invasion
of Ukraine #13
TEXTS
End the Invasion Crisis
Katrina vanden Heuvel. “Putin’s Invasion.” De-escalation and negotiation are the
only way out of this crisis.
Twitter. FEBRUARY
24, 2022. https://www.thenation.com/article/world/putin-invasion-ukraine-war/
A column of
armored vehicles approaches the Perekop checkpoint on the Ukrainian border on
February 24, 2022. (Sergei Malgavko / Tass via
Getty)
Support
Progressive Journalism. The Nation is reader supported: Chip in $10 or more to help us
continue to write about the issues that matter.
[Since 2013 when I began collecting pro-peace articles
regarding US, Russia and Ukraine, I have found several brief and accurate yet
comprehensive essays which I could stand on.
Here’s another, by Ms. vanden Heuvel, found online. I recommend a later version in The Nation (3.21-28, 2022). But
it is not available online right now at least.
What follows is the Feb. online version, pictures deleted. --Dick]
War is a tragedy, a crime, and a defeat. The Nation condemns the decision of Russian
President Vladimir Putin to abandon the path of diplomacy by attacking and
undertaking “special military operations” in Ukraine. These actions violate
international law and fuel a dangerous escalation of violence.
We urge all parties to
immediately cease hostilities, de-escalate, and seek a diplomatic solution to
mitigate the risk of full-scale war and an unthinkable direct conflict between
the world’s two largest nuclear powers.
The Nation has consistently called on all
parties to the crisis in Ukraine to seek resolution through diplomatic means,
respecting international law and international borders. Putin’s actions are
indefensible, but responsibility for this crisis is widely shared. This
magazine has warned repeatedly that the extension of NATO to Russia’s borders
would inevitably produce a fierce reaction. We have criticized NATO’s wholesale
rejection of Russia’s security proposals. We decry the arrogance that leads US
officials to assert that we have the right to do what we wish across the world,
even in areas, like Ukraine, that are far more important to others than they
are to us.
NATO expansion provided the context for this crisis—a fact
often ignored by our media. There is rank irrationality and irresponsibility in
offering future NATO membership to Ukraine—when successive US presidents and
our NATO allies have demonstrated that they do not have the slightest intention
of fighting to defend Ukraine. Instead, Putin’s demand that Ukraine remain
outside of NATO—essentially that the status quo be codified—was scorned as
violating NATO’s “principle” of admitting anyone it wanted.
One immediate result
was to encourage parallel irresponsibility in Ukraine. President Volodymyr Zelensky promised voters when he ran
for Ukraine’s presidency in 2019 that he would pursue a path to peace and end
the war in the Donbas. Upon taking office, however, his government refused to
implement the provisions of the 2015
Minsk Protocols—signed by Russia, Ukraine, France, Germany, and the EU—that
essentially would have guaranteed Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial
integrity in exchange for Ukrainian
neutrality.
Now, sadly, Russia’s
illegal actions will embolden the hawks and armament-mongers on all sides.
Already, armchair strategists are calling for doubling the US military budget,
to grasp the “strategic opportunity” to bleed Putin in Ukraine, while pushing
the Europeans to build up their military forces.
Amid the drums of war,
we should not lose sight of the human horror that will follow, the massive
displacement, the impact of sanctions not only on Russians but also on citizens
in Europe, the United States, and elsewhere.
Ukrainians in the East
are already suffering. If Russia occupies the separatist republics, it will
find itself confronting perpetual strife and upheaval, fueled by the US and
NATO. And if it attempts to occupy the whole of Ukraine, it may face a
prolonged guerrilla war far more costly than the Soviet debacle in Afghanistan.
The West’s “punitive” sanctions will hurt Russia, oligarchs, and ordinary
Russians—but also Europe, the United States, and the global economy’s
bystanders. Oil prices—already soaring past $100 a barrel—are a harbinger of
that. A revived and more dangerous Cold War will ravage domestic budgets here
and in Europe—and sap resources and attention needed to address pandemics, the climate
crisis, and debilitating inequality.
What is needed is not a
rush to arms and to hawkish bluster but a return to intense negotiations—at the
UN, at the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe, and among the
signatories to the Minsk Protocols. It is time to recognize that there remain
options that, if pursued in good faith, could bring the current crisis to a
peaceful conclusion.
We believe the crisis
can and should ultimately be resolved by a declaration of Ukrainian neutrality
and the withdrawal of Russian forces from the Donbas. To that end, we applaud
the restraint shown by both France and Germany, and are particularly supportive
of President Emmanuel Macron’s efforts to end the crisis. NATO or the OSCE
might valuably take the initiative to open negotiations on creating a resilient
new security architecture in Europe, one that engages Russia rather than
threatens it, and reassures its neighbors rather than militarizes relations.
That might sensibly include an end to NATO expansion, and a return to the
Conventional Forces in Europe and Intercontinental Ballistic Missile treaties.
To President Biden, we
say: American interests in Ukraine will never outweigh those of Russia; the US
and NATO cannot and will not win a war on the ground against Russia in its own
backyard; sanctions are unlikely to prevail and may indeed damage the American
economy.
We urge President Biden
and his administration to encourage and, if need be, help facilitate the hard
but necessary work of diplomacy that is being undertaken by our allies in Paris
and Berlin.
[The print version’s
conclusion helpfully summarizes four of the actions for peace proposed in the
article: 1)ceasefire and withdrawal of Russian forces, 2) (made possible by) declaration
of Ukrainian neutrality, 3)all nations welcome refugees, 4) US sincere push for
these goals via negotiations (financed by billions of dollars not for bombs). --D]
Katrina vanden Heuvel TWITTER
Katrina vanden Heuvel is editorial director and publisher
of The Nation.
If you
like this article, please give today to help fund The
Nation’s
work.
The
Invasion Was Provoked
By Jeremy Kuzmarov on Mar 17, 2022 01:55 pm
Burns scornfully smears as Russian propaganda evidence that the
U.S. deceitfully provoked the invasion to generate a new Cold War
CIA Director Bill Burns testified before the Senate Intelligence
committee in early March that Russia and Vladimir Putin were “losing the information war
over its war in Ukraine.”
"In all my years I spent as a career diplomat, I saw too
many instances where we lost information wars with the Russians," Burns
said, but “this is one information war that I think Putin is losing….In this
case, I think we have had a great deal of effect in disrupting their tactics
and calculations and demonstrating to the entire world that this is
premeditated and unprovoked aggression built on a body of lies and false
narratives."
George Orwell must be rolling over in his grave with Burns’
performance. While hypocritically excoriating Russia for promoting a “body of
lies” and “false narratives,” Burns admitted to using the very same tactics in
an information war in which both sides were twisting the truth.
The U.S. Big Lie centers on the claim of unprovoked Russian
aggression. […]
The post CIA Director William F. Burns–Capo
of World’s Biggest Spreader of Lies and Misinformation–Is Spreading
The Big Lie that Russia’s Invasion of Ukraine was “Unprovoked” appeared first
on CovertAction Magazine. Read in browser »
The Invasion in US Imperial History
From
crisis to catastrophe...imperialism's agenda Mar 14, 2022.
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|
|
Tomgram: “William
Astore, Making Sense of the New Cold War Dreamscape.” From Old Cold War to New Cold War
|
|
|
|
||||
|
|||||||
When did the Ukraine War begin?
Editor. Mronline.org
(3-12-22).
Viewing the
Ukraine war as starting with the current Russian invasion leads to very
different conclusions than if you consider that the starting point of this war
was the 2014 U.S.-orchestrated coup in Ukraine. The coup, which
had elements of an authentic popular revolt, has been used by outside powers to
pursue geopolitical
When did
the Ukraine War begin? Pressenza (March 8, 2022 ).
Empire, History,
State
Repression, WarUkraineNewswire
The
conception that the war started on February 24 of this year is like viewing the
“invasion” by the U.S. and its allies of Normandy in June 1944 against the
“sovereign” and “democratic” Vichy French as the start of World War II. Never
mind that the Vichy government was a puppet of the Nazis; that the
opportunities to negotiate had long been rejected; that the war had been raging
for years; and that the only option for stopping the Nazis was militarily.
The U.S. imperial army
NATO, it should be understood, is an army in the service of the U.S. empire. Viewing it simply as an
alliance of nominally sovereign entities obscures that it is commanded as a
tool of U.S. foreign policy in its stated quest of world dominion; that is, “full
spectrum dominance.” The “alliance” members must fully integrate their militaries
under that command along with purchasing U.S. war equipment and offering up
their own citizens as troops.
After the implosion of the
Soviet Union and the supposed end of the first cold war, instead of NATO being
disbanded, the opposite occurred. There was no “peace dividend” and no honoring
of the promise that NATO would not expand any further. Instead, NATO stampeded east
towards the borders of the Russian Federation adding fourteen new members of
former USSR republics and allies.
Even before the 2014 coup,
the U.S.’s fateful decision in 2006 to
draw Ukraine into NATO posed an existential threat to Russia. By December
2021, according to “realpolitik” international relations scholar John
Mearsheimer, a U.S.-armed Ukraine had become a de
facto member of NATO, crossing a redline for Russia. Mearsheimer concludes, “the
west bears primary responsibility for what is happening today.”
Failure of peaceful negotiations
Speaking
before the UN on March 2, the Venezuelan representative identified the breach of the
Minsk Protocols, with the encouragement of the U.S., as the precursor of the
present crisis in Ukraine.
After the 2014 coup in
Ukraine, the Minsk Protocols were an attempt at a
peaceful settlement through “a ceasefire, withdrawal of heavy weapons from the
front line, release of prisoners of war, constitutional reform in Ukraine
granting self-government to certain areas of Donbas, and restoring control of
the state border to the Ukrainian government.” Moscow, Kyiv, and the eastern
separatists were all parties to the agreements.
The Russian perception of
negotiations with the western alliance in the runup to the invasion, as
reported by the New York Post, was described using
insensitive terminology as “like the mute with the deaf” by Russian Foreign
Minister Sergey Lavrov on his meeting with his British counterpart. (NOTE:
the NYP, even in the updated version of the article, refers to
Lavrov as the “Soviet” Foreign Minister, forgetting that the USSR hasn’t been
around for over 30 years.)
Following the latest round
of “sweeping”
U.S.-imposed sanctions on Russia, their Foreign Ministry announced, “we have reached the line where the point of
no return begins.” Such sanctions are a form of warfare as deadly as bombs.
Upsides of war for the U.S. and the downsides for everyone else
. . . .
How this war will end
Regardless of
how one sides–or not–in the new cold war, it is instructive to understand the context of the conflict.
This is especially so when views outside
the dominant U.S. narrative, such as those of Russian outlets Sputnik and RT that
hosted U.S. intellectuals like Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Chris Hedges, are being silenced.
This
article addressed how this war began. How it will end or even if it will end is
another story. The world is spiraling into a new cold war, emanating from a region formally at peace under socialism.
Expressing a view from the
standpoint of the Global South, former Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da
Silva commented: “we do not want to be anyone’s enemy. We
are not interested, nor is the world, in a new cold war…which is for sure
dragging the whole world into a conflict that could put humanity in danger.” If
there is a lesson to be learned, it is that the end of endless war will come with end of the U.S. imperial project that
provoked this crisis.
To
read the entire article go to:
Oliver Stone’s Ukraine on
Fire Documentary
free online: https://rumble.com/embed/vubrga/
Ukraine.
Across its eastern border is Russia and to its west-Europe. For centuries, it
has been at the center of a tug-of-war between powers seeking to control its
rich lands and access to the Black Sea.2014’s Maidan Massacre triggered a
bloody uprising that ousted president Viktor Yanukovych and painted Russia as
the perpetrator by Western media. But was it?“Ukraine on Fire” by Igor
Lopatonok and Oliver Stone provides a historical perspective for the deep
divisions in the region which lead to the 2004 Orange Revolution, 2014
uprisings, and the violent overthrow of democratically elected
Yanukovych.Covered by Western media as a people’s revolution, it was in fact a
coup d’état scripted and staged by nationalist groups and the U.S. State
Department. Investigative journalist Robert Parry reveals how U.S.-funded
political NGOs and media companies have emerged since the 80s replacing the CIA
in promoting America’s geopolitical agenda abroad.
FALSE CLAIMS, NATO, NO FLY ZONE
Ukraine
Manufacturing Atrocities to Draw in NATO (WW3)
|
) |
|
||
|
||||
The
U.S. has a deep history of manufacturing
atrocities or flat making shit up to justify warfare escalations. Several
such stories coming out of Ukraine have been proven false & Ukraine leaders
admitted ( https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/03/technology/ukraine-war-misinfo.html)
that false stories are part of their information warfare strategy. There
are videos of Ukrainian civilians demanding Ukraine military divisions to stop
placing military weapons & headquarters in civilian areas.
Ukraine’s
leaders are begging for no fly zone NATO
involvement (World War 3). The best way to get that to happen is to stage
an atrocious chemical attack or attack on nuclear power plant, or on hospitals
and so forth, as could have been predicted. Let’s pray that this agenda
does not succeed.
From
Prestigious Journalist Joe Lauria:
"Russia’s
U.N. Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia told the U.N. Security Council on Monday that
Ukraine had cleared out a maternity hospital in Mariupol and set up gun
emplacements there. That was four days before the hospital was hit, with 17
injuries and no deaths...
Russia
would have everything to lose with such an (chemical) attack, while Ukraine and
the State Department would have the strongest argument yet for NATO
intervention....
If
Ukraine finds a way to draw NATO in, the consequences could be
unimaginable."
Great
article from Joe Lauria
https://consortiumnews.com/2022/03/11/on-a-knifes-edge-in-ukraine/
ENDING THE WAR
See vanden Heuvel’s editorial above.
AFSC WEEKEND READING, 3-12-22
Tell Congress: Diplomacy, not
weapons, in Ukraine: The invasion of Ukraine must be stopped–but U.S. military aid
is not the answer. The U.S. and international community must avoid flooding the
region with weapons. Instead we must invest in diplomacy, refugee protection,
and humanitarian assistance.
BE INFORMED
DEMILITARIZEU
ABOUT FACE, 3-12-22
Dear Dick,
We are in solidarity with all
people who find themselves in harm's way for a war that was preventable. May
all those seeking shelter and safety from all horrible violence be greeted with
open arms.
As veterans, we know that war is
not a game and that we have to seriously engage with nuance to come up with
real solutions for justice and peace as real people's lives are at
stake. Our transformative organizing strategy requires that we center the
people who are the most affected by the conflict and work together to end war.
This DemilitarizeU we hosted this past
Saturday is the first step in this strategy, and I encourage you to watch it
now:
I am proud of our organizing
strength to bring together Ukrainian and
Belarussian experts and activists to inform us about what is hype and what
is helpful. These panelists are bringing us perspective even as their families
and loved ones take shelter from bombs. I am so grateful that they shared time
with us, and hope you will be able to take
some time to better understand this conflict by watching this video.
They address hot topics you've
heard about like - what does this conflict have to do with oil? What role does
white supremacy play in this conflict, in Ukraine, and in the US? What were the
key moments that led this to happen? What is the right thing to do at this
moment to de-escalate?
Thanks for being someone we can
count on to enact our transformational organizing strategy to work together for
justice. Take this first step by watching the video, and stay up to date as we
develop a response to this situation through relationships with anti-war
activists all around the world.
In community, Shawna Co-Director: About
Face: Veterans Against the War
(PS - please donate today to keep
excellent sessions like demilitarizeU going!)
About Face: Veterans Against The War P.O. Box 3565 New York, NY 10008
NO NO FLY ZONES
[See Ben Burgis, No to No-Fly Zone in #13.]
NO FLIES POLLS
From: Steve
Fournier <guytouquet@comcast.net>
To: "guytouquet@comcast.net"
<guytouquet@comcast.net>
Sent: Saturday,
March 12, 2022, 10:15:13 AM EST
Subject: rant
No Flies on US!
Do you have to remind yourself from time to time that, in
spite of the implausibility of current events, we are not all characters
in a work of fiction? Isn't it more likely that a wolf could eat your
grandmother and dress up in her pajamas than that people in the USA could be in
favor of war with Russia? Are we supposed to believe real-life American
news-reporters would ever seriously suggest such a thing?
Imagine phoning somebody at random and asking whether he or she
supports or opposes a no-fly zone over Ukraine. First, if the person you phoned
was educated in the USA, there's a better than fifty percent chance that your
respondent doesn't know where Ukraine is. And if you used the phrase
"no-fly zone" without a detailed explanation of what that is, you
were almost certainly misunderstood. After all, a no-fly zone could be a place
where there aren't any flies or maybe a spot on a baseball field or even a
place where we're all pretty hip, and there's no flies on us. The
pollsters don't tell us whether they're asking people whether they know what a
no-fly zone is before they ask whether they're in favor of it or not.
News reporters rarely define their terms and indulge freely and
frequently in metaphor, abbreviation and acronym. If they were striving for
meaninglessness they couldn't be more ambiguous and empty in their expression.
As your favorite anchorman probably didn't tell you last time she dropped the
no-fly-zone abbreviation, Ukraine is a big country, bigger than Germany, bigger
than France, so big that policing its airspace would require most of the US Air
Force. People who claim to advocate such a measure must know that it could
never happen. Do Americans really want to send their air crews and warplanes to
a place most of them couldn't find on a map? Could they simply be giving the
poll-taker what seems the more acceptable answer, in line with what's likely to
be the consensus of opinion? Maybe they're hearing the question as "Are
you in favor of a no-fly zone over Ukraine or are you a traitor?"
When you're told by news-mongers that seventy percent of
Americans are in favor of a no-fly zone over Ukraine, it's probably advisable
to be skeptical. Some people simply decline to believe any report on any
subject from any source, and that may be taking skepticism a bit too far, but
the idea that polls tell us much about what people really think is certainly
open to challenge. We're in an age of deception and distraction, unprecedented
in the contagion of lies, fads and fictions. Polling statistics don't say much
about public opinion in the resulting atmosphere of ignorance and bigotry.
"This guy hates your guts!" That's what the US media
and government are telling each side in the conflict between Ukraine and
Russia. It's not true, but, eight years of US goading have finally produced
results. The conflict, involving tanks, missiles, artillery and
bloodshed, is billed as a sporting event here, with all Americans ostensibly
supporting the same team, and the promoters in media, business and government
taking in a bundle. It may be that there is widespread consent for this
atrocity among Americans, but we should not worry that it is any sort of
informed consent. If Americans ever caught on to what's really happening to
their country and the world, public opinion could shift very suddenly.
“Let them kill as many as possible”- United States Policy Toward Russia
and its Neighbors. Brian
Terrell.
Posted Mar 07, 2022 by Brian Terrell
Originally published: CODEPINK (March 2022 )
Strategy,
WarGlobal, Russia, Ukraine, United StatesNewswire
In April 1941, four years
before he was to become President and eight months before the United States
entered World War II, Senator Harry
Truman of Missouri reacted to the news that Germany had invaded the Soviet
Union: “If we see that Germany is winning the war, we ought to help Russia; and
if that Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and in that way let
them kill as many as possible.” Truman was not called out as a cynic when he
spoke these words from the floor of the Senate. On the contrary, when he died
in 1972, Truman’s obituary in The New York Times cited this statement as
establishing his “reputation for decisiveness and courage.” “This basic
attitude,” gushed The Times, “prepared him to adopt
from the start of his Presidency, a firm policy,” an attitude that prepared him
to order the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki with “no qualms.” Truman’s same basic “let them kill as many
as possible” attitude also informed the postwar doctrine that bears his name,
along with the establishment of NATO, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization
and the CIA, the Central Intelligence Agency, both of which he is credited with
founding.
A February 25 op-ed in The Los Angeles Times by Jeff Rogg, “The CIA has
backed Ukrainian insurgents before- Let’s learn from those mistakes,” cites a
CIA program to train Ukrainian nationalists as insurgents to fight the Russians
that began in 2015 and compares it with a similar effort by Truman’s CIA in
Ukraine that began in 1949. By 1950, one year in, “U.S. officers involved in
the program knew they were fighting a losing battle…In the first U.S.-backed
insurgency, according to top secret documents later declassified, American
officials intended to use the Ukrainians as a proxy force to bleed the Soviet
Union.” This op-ed cites John Ranelagh, a historian of the CIA, who argued that
the program “demonstrated a cold ruthlessness” because the Ukrainian resistance
had no hope of success, and so “America was in effect encouraging Ukrainians to
go to their deaths.”
The “Truman
Doctrine” of
arming and training insurgents as proxy forces to bleed Russia to the peril of
the local populations that it was purporting to defend was used effectively in
Afghanistan in the 1970s and ‘80s, a program so effective, some of its authors
have boasted, that it helped bring down the Soviet Union a decade later. In a
1998 interview, President Jimmy Carter’s
National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski explained, “According to the official version of history, CIA
aid to the Mujaheddin began during 1980, that is to say, after the Soviet army
invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979. But the reality, closely guarded
until now, is completely otherwise: Indeed, it was July 3, 1979 that President
Carter
signed the first directive for secret aid to the opponents of the pro-Soviet
regime in Kabul. And that very day, I wrote a note to the president in which I
explained to him that in my opinion this aid was going to induce a Soviet
military intervention… We didn’t push the Russians to intervene, but we
knowingly increased the probability that they would.”
“The day
that the Soviets officially crossed the border,” Brzezinski recalled, “I wrote
to President Carter, essentially: ‘We now have the opportunity of giving to the
USSR its Vietnam war.’ Indeed, for almost 10 years, Moscow had to carry on a
war that was unsustainable for the regime, a conflict that brought about the
demoralization and finally the breakup of the Soviet empire.” MORE
https://mronline.org/2022/03/07/let-them-kill-as-many-as-possible/?utm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=let-them-kill-as-many-as-possible&mc_cid=c558881edb&mc_eid=ab2f7bf95e
The claim
that Ukraine as a sovereign nation has a right to join NATO today is like saying that Germany, Italy and Japan had the
right as sovereign nations to form an Axis in 1936. Founded to defend the West
from Soviet aggression after World War II under the judicious “let them kill as
many as possible” leadership of President Truman, NATO lost its ostensible reason to exist in 1991. It doesn’t appear
to have ever realized its purpose of mutual defense against outside aggression,
but it has often been used by the U.S. as an instrument of aggression against
sovereign nations. For 20 years, the war of attrition on Afghanistan was waged
under NATO auspices, as was the destruction of Libya, just to name two. It has
been noted that if NATO’s existence
has a purpose in today’s world, it can only be to manage the instability that
its existence creates.
Five
European countries host U.S. nuclear
weapons on their own military bases kept ready to bomb Russia under NATO
sharing agreements. These are not agreements between the various civilian
governments, but between the U.S. military and the militaries of those countries.
Officially, these agreements are secrets kept even from the parliaments of the
sharing states. These secrets are poorly kept, but the effect is that these
five nations have nuclear bombs without the oversight or consent of their
elected governments or their people. By foisting weapons of mass destruction on
nations that don’t want them, the United States undermines the democracies of
its own purported allies and makes their bases potential targets for preemptive
first strikes. These agreements are in
violation not only of the laws of the participating states, but also of the
Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that all NATO member states have ratified.
NATO’s continued existence is a threat not only to Russia, but to Ukraine, to
its members and to every living being on the planet.
[PERFORM PEACE] It is true that the
United States is not solely to blame for every war, but it bears some
responsibility for most of them and its people may be in a unique position to
end them. Truman’s successor as President, Dwight D. Eisenhower, may have been
thinking particularly about the U.S. government when he said “people want peace
so much that one of these days governments had better get out of the way and
let them have it.” The security of the world at this moment of heightened
threat of nuclear destruction demands
the neutrality of the countries of Eastern Europe and reversing the expansion
of NATO. What the United States can do for peace is not imposing
sanctions, selling weapons, training insurgents, building military bases around
the world, “helping” our friends, not more bluster and threats, but only by
getting out of the way.
NO TO RUSSIAN AND US AGGRESSION
What can U.S. citizens do to support the people of Ukraine and those Russians whom we
rightly admire, those who are in the streets, risking arrest and beatings for
loudly demanding that their government stop the war? We do not stand with them
when we “Stand with NATO.” What the people of Ukraine are suffering from Russian aggression is suffered daily by
millions around the world from U.S.
aggression. Legitimate concern and care for the hundreds of thousands of
Ukrainian refugees is meaningless political posturing and to our shame if it is
not matched by concern for the many millions
left homeless by U.S./NATO wars. If Americans who care would go to the
streets every time our government bombs, invades, occupies or undermines the
will of the people of a foreign country, there would be millions of people
flooding the streets of U.S. cities- protest would need to be a full-time
occupation for many, even as it now seems to be for so very few of us.
MEMORY:
Concluding with Some history of US Invasions
ON THE US
BLOODY PACIFICATION OF THE PHILIPPINES, COLONY & LATER NEOCOLONY 3-17-22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||||
From NELSON
PEERY’s book BLACK FIRE (1984):
If
the Americans had never committed genocide against the Indians; if they had
never incited wars of annihilation between the native peoples of the land; if
there had never been a Trail of Tears; if America had never organized and
commercialized the kidnapping and sale into slavery of a gentle and defenseless
African people; it it had never developed the most widespread brutal,
exploitative system of slavery the world has ever known; if it had never
sundered and torn and ground Mexico into the dust; if it had never attacked
gallant, defenseless Puerto Rico and never turned that lovely land into a
cesspool to compete with the cesspool it created in Panama; if it
had never bled Latin America of her wealth and had never cast her exhausted
people onto the dung heap of disease and ignorance and starvation; if it had
never pushed Hiroshima and Nagasaki into the jaws of hell—if America had never
done any of these things—history would still create a special bar of judgment
for what America did to the Philippines....
[Message clipped] View entire
UNITED NATIONS
UN CHARTER FORBIDS NATIONAL AGGRESSIONS.
JUST
TO SAY 'VIOLATES INTERNATIONAL LAW' IS MEANINGLESS
AND
SAYS NOTHING TO EDUCATE OR WIN SUPPORT.
A
BILL OF PARTICULARS IS NEEDED: THE HOW AND THE WHY
OF
THE VIOLATION.
THE UNITED STATES HELPED IMPORTANTLY IN
DRAFTING THE U N CHARTER.
THE UNITED STATES SENATE RATIFIED IT BY AN
OVERWHELMING MAJORITY.
IN CHAPTER 1. ARTICLE 2, #4, THE U N CHARTER FORBIDS, EXCEPT AS AND WHEN
AUTHORIZED BY THE SECURITY COUNCIL,THE USE OF FORCE AGAINST ANOTHER STATE, EXCEPT IN CASE OF DEFENSE
AGAINST ARMED ASSAULT.
AND
THIS USE OF FORCE VIOLATES A NORM PRESCRIBED BY OUR
OWN
CONSTITUTION.
[The UN is following its fundamental
principles. Let’s welcome investigation
of all allegations of crimes and what the General Assembly concludes. Dick]
NO CHEMICAL OR BIOLOGICAL WARFARE
|
|
NO HUMAN SHIELDS
|
|
|
|
DECREASE THE SUFFERING, ASSIST
THE REFUGEES
UN Wire, 3-11-22
Guterres urges support as Ukraine refugee numbers swell
The global
community must work together to support everyone affected by Russia's illegal
invasion of Ukraine, United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres says as
the UN High Commission for Human Rights warns the number of people fleeing to
other countries may surpass previous estimates of 4 million. The UN High
Commission for Human Rights says casualties likely exceed official tallies as
"intense hostilities" delay reports in some regions, while UNICEF
notes that more than 1 million children are among those who have fled Ukraine
so far.
Full Story: Reuters (3/11), CNBC (3/10), Global News (Canada)/Reuters (3/9), ThePrint (India)/Asian News International (3/11)
See OMNI’s newsletters 2014 and 2015.
RUSSIA (UKRAINE) NEWSLETTER #1
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2014/03/russia-ukraine-newsletter-1.html
March 21,
2014.
Compiled
by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Ecology.
In this
newsletter: The US superpower, imperial propaganda system is inciting
fear and hatred of Russia, as in Cold War days against the Soviet Union, but
alternative views are readily available in numerous independent print or online
magazines. If we are to have peace in the world we must be able to see
the world as others see it, particularly as “enemies” see it.
CONNECTION
BETWEEN US ENCIRCLEMENT
OF CHINA AND RUSSIA: See OMNI’s
newsletters/blogs on US Imperialism Westward Pacific/E. Asia
Contents Russia Newsletter
#1, 2014
Dick, US Empire
and Corporate Media: Arkansas Democrat-Gazette
Patrick
Smith, US/New York Times Spin
Stephen
Cohen, Anti-Russia Is Old Anti-Soviet
Alternative
Analysis
The
Nation Editorial
Alterman,
Cold War Hysteria Revived
How
Russia/Ukraine Look in Beijing
Charles
Pierce, Dick Cheney’s View
Luke Harding, US Refuses Crimea Poll
Ray
McGovern, Putin Says No to Regime Change on Its Border
Bruce
Gagnon, Danger of War Following US-led Coup for Gas and Oil
Pilger,
Other Coups, Same Superpower
Robert
Freeman, Ukraine and WWI over Energy
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
NEWSLETTER #2
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2014/04/russiaukraine-newsletter-2.html
April 10,
2014.
In this
newsletter: The US superpower, imperial propaganda system is inciting
fear and hatred of Russia, as in Cold War days against the Soviet Union, but
alternative views are readily available in numerous independent print or online
magazines. They need your financial support. If we are to have
peace in the world we must be able to see the world as others see it, to
qualify and test official dogma.
Contents
Russia/Ukraine #2
Alternative
Perspectives
Who Is
Threatening Whom?
Dick,
Google Search: US Bases Surrounding Russia
Steve
Weissman: US Participated in Coup That Toppled Yanukovytch
Stephen
Cohen, Cold War Again?
Two
Essays from Bruce Gagnon
Bruce
Gagnon, Boxing in the Bear (with Francis Boyle and Chandra Muzaffar)
Gagnon,
Preparing for War with Russia
Franklin
Spinney, What Is the Real Price of Starting a New Cold War?
US
Corporate Old Cold War Media
Ira
Chernus: Showdown with Russia Sells Newspapers
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
NEWSLETTER #3
May 16,
2014.
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2014/05/russiaukraine-newsletter-3.html
Out of the ignorance and complacency engendered by the
avoidance of reality comes hatred and war.
The opening of a Jewish prayer from the Sabbath
service: “Disturb us, Adonai, ruffle us from our complacency; make us
dissatisfied. Dissatisfied with the peace of ignorance, the
quietude which arises from a shunning of the horror, the defeat, the bitterness
and the poverty, physical and spiritual, of humans. Shock us, Adonai,
deny to us the false Shabbat which gives us the delusions of satisfaction amid
a world of war and hatred.”
"To
initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime, it
is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes
in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole." --
Robert H. Jackson, Chief U.S. Prosecutor, Nuremberg Military
Tribunal
“It has been a mainstay of this book that successful
antiwar movements are those that have been able to make direct links
with those in the flight path of US aggression and to bring
their struggles and concerns directly into the US political
arena. Indeed, direct comprehension of their urgent struggles has often
been a radicalizing factor in antiwar campaigns.”” Richard
Seymour, American Insurgents: A Brief History of American
Anti-Imperialism (2012). p. 193.
J. William Fulbright during the height of the Cold War
attempted to extend his Exchange Program to the Soviet Union, but
his plan to acquire a part of WWII Lend Lease money the Russians were repaying
was scuttled by US Sovietphobes. See The Price of
Empire. Another Arkansas native, Betty Bumpers, wife
of then Senator Bumpers, created the women’s organization, Peace Links, to
exchange women from the US and Russia and other
countries.
Contents
Russia/Ukraine Newsletter #3
Contexts
Davies,
Historical Background of US Coups
William
Blum, New Cold War, Same Old US Aggression
Bellant,
Far Right Forces in Russia
Amy
Goodman, Ukraine Between Old Cold War
Peter
Hart, Distorting Putin
Dick, Fulbright’s
Exchange Program for Official Enemies
Veterans
for Peace Opposes US Troops to Ukraine
Michael
Gordon, US Ratcheting Up the Threats, Deploying Troops in E. Europe
Cockburn,
Crisis into Catastrophe?
Hooper,
Solution Appalling?
McMullen,
Russian Greed?
Mayer,
Decline of US Empire?
Moss,
Whose Advice to Trust?
Wittner, US Should
Use Its Military?
Lieven,
The Way Out?
Forum of
3 Essays on US and Ukraine in Z Magazine April 2014
Norman Solomon: Obama, International Law, US Double-Standards,
and
Blaming Putin
Chandra Muzaffar, US Behind Ouster of
Democratically Elected President
Ajamu Baraka, US Ukraine Policy Marred by
Contradictions and Double
Standards
Parry, Obama Only
One Able to Prevent War
NATO
Kucinich
on NATO
McGovern
on NATO
MEDIA
Two
Essays by Robert Parry on Anti-Russian US Corporate Media
Obama Admin. and US Mainstream Media Sing the Old Imperial
Song
Neocon and Media Support of US Propaganda Campaign
Two
Essays by Peter Hart in EXTRA! also on US Corporate Media
With Official Enemies, Too Much Is Not Enough
Drill for More Oil and Gas Here, and Sell to Russia’s Customers
Gordon, NYT
Parry,
Bias of NYT
RUSSIA/UKRAINE
NEWSLETTER #4
July
22, 2014.
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2014/07/russiaukraine-newsletter-4.html
What’s at
stake:
Contents
Russia/Ukraine Newsletter #4 HISTORICAL CONNECTIONS
Polner,
Manipulated Crisis
Moss,
Another Cold War?
Watkins,
Comparing Annexations
Johnstone,
Understanding Putin
Blum, US
Media War Against Putin and Russia
US or Russian Exceptionalism?
NATO’S
Eastward Expansion
THE
CRISIS 2013-
Pilger,
the Larger Coup in Washington, D.C.
Gagnon,
US and NATO Intervention
Parry,
Kerry’s State Department’s Fiasco
Dahlburg,
Poroshnko\Ukraine Signs Up with EU
Moeri, Be
Critical of Imperialisms
Zunes,
Non-violence
Four
Articles Via HAW
Fuerst,
Germany
Contents Russia/Ukraine
Newsletter #4
http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2014/07/russiaukraine-newsletter-4.html
HISTORICAL CONNECTIONS
Polner,
Manipulated Crisis
Moss,
Another Cold War?
Watkins,
Comparing Annexations
Johnstone,
Understanding Putin
Blum,
US Media War Against Putin and Russia
US or Russian Exceptionalism?
NATO’S
Eastward Expansion
THE
CRISIS 2013-
Pilger,
the Larger Coup in
Gagnon,
US and NATO Intervention
Parry,
Kerry’s State Department’s Fiasco
Dahlburg,
Poroshnko\Ukraine Signs Up with EU
Moeri,
Be Critical of Imperialisms
Zunes,
Non-violence
Four
Articles Via HAW
Fuerst,
Germany
US
MAINSTREAM MEDIA
Contents: Russia Newsletter #5 2017
http://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2017/03/russia-newsletter-5-from-violence-to.html
Who’s
the Threat? Surrounding Russia. Think Peace.
Dick, Finland
and US Sign Military Accord
Blum, Who’s the
Threat?
Carden, US
Interventionist Orthodoxy and Ukraine
Herman, US
Double Standards, the Orthodoxy, and Ukraine
Katrina vanden
Heuvel, Break Through Orthodoxy to Peace Zone
Noam Chomsky,
Try to Understand the Other Point of View
Trump
and Russia
Stephen Cohen, “Against Kremlin-Baiting
Chris Hedges,
Hacking by Russia?
CONTENTS
RUSSIA’S INVASION OF UKRAINE #13
https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2022/03/omni-russiaukraine-newsletter-13-march.html
Abel Tomlinson, Ukraine Peace Protest Follow-Up
Bryce Greene, Russia Was Provoked
Scott Ritter, Harms of US
Russophobia
Attempt to Shut up Prof. Mearsheimer
at U of Chicago
Medea
Benjamin and Nicolas J.S. Davies, US Support for Ukrainian Neo-
Nazis
Lucas
Leiroz, Understanding Ukrainian Nazism
Steven
Starr, Russia’s Fear of NATO’s Encroachment and Nuclear
Weapons
Ben
Burgis, No to No-Fly Zone
March 1 to 7: International Week to Stop War with Russia
Moon of Alabama, Disarming Ukraine, Day 7
Oliver
Boyd Barrett, Ukraine, Planetary Crisis, Threatening Nuclear War
Rachel
Hu and Chris Garaffa, Ukraine, US, NATO Expansion, China,
Russophobia
Contents
Russia and Ukraine #12
END OMNI US, NATO, RUSSIA, UKRAINE,
WWIII NEWSLETTER/ANTHOLOGY #14
No comments:
Post a Comment