European leaders today, their commentators and analysts, say that we must prepare for war against Russia. The Russians will not stop in Ukraine and will continue their adventure into Europe. Biden says the same. The German Foreign Minister says for her part that Putin’s imperialist plans are not limited to Ukraine. Incidentally, she implicitly recognizes with this that Russia has already won this war and that within a few months, it will end as victorious. And then after Ukraine, she will continue her expansion to the west. As you can see, a sense of inevitability of atomic war[i] and a degree of extreme belligerence on the part of the governments of the European Union (EU). Something that was not seen in the first two years of conflict. So it was bet that the economic war launched against Russia in the form of more than 500 sanctions would do his job. Russia would lose the war. A bet that has turned out exactly the opposite. Russia is not only winning in the military arena. Economically it has not suffered what was expected. The ruble is stronger. Its trade, now oriented to the East, is growing, and its participation in the BRICS has not caused it major damage. Russia also has the support of China, which today definitively appears as a great world economic power that is preparing to dethrone the United States.
That this verbal belligerence until now has been carried out by leaders of the small EU countries is not so serious. Let Emmanuel Macron, the President of one of the great European countries, say that if it has nuclear capabilities it means a situation of great risk. Such is the current situation.
However, what the Russians have said and has been reiterated by their President, is that they do not have any plans to invade anyone. Vladimir Putin has said that he would be willing to attack Poland only if it attacked them first, as he recalled in the well-known interview with journalist Tucker Carlson. He has also said that if NATO places combat soldiers in Ukraine, Russia will understand this as a declaration of war and will act accordingly. Faced with this avalanche of threats from European leaders and politicians, any leader of any country would respond exactly the same.
Let us suppose for a moment that this war announced by the EU leaders could be carried out with conventional weapons. Are Europeans ready for war? We are not, almost everyone says. Boris Pistorius, the German Minister of Defense, who said publicly since January of this year that they lack everything: planes, tanks, soldiers. In fact, Pistorius declared the need to prepare from the end of October 2023 in an interview with the German channel ZDF. Curious public declaration where one’s own weaknesses are confessed to the enemy. The Russians don’t need spies like that. The enemy leaders are giving them information about their own weaknesses. So, how is it possible to announce that you want to go to war where you do not have enough weapons to not only guarantee victory but simply to defend yourself? Hard to understand.
Russia has more conventional war power than the whole of Europe, even with the support of the US, as Josep Borrell, the European foreign commissioner, has recognized in recent days (3/11). And with the Russian arms industry receiving huge tax funds, it can in theory make the conflict last as long as necessary. NATO, no matter how much its leaders want it and the billions of dollars invested, will not be able to defeat Russia. A reality that the less delay European leaders take to accept, will save unnecessary deaths and Ukraine will be able to negotiate under better conditions. If the conflict continues, Russia will have better conditions for the final negotiation. Any dispassionate and objective observer understands this. Except, apparently, the European leaders.
This inexplicable stubbornness bordering on arrogance of the so-called West may have several possible explanations. Of course, the arms race in which the EU has launched to help its economy, especially for Germany[ii]. On the other hand, the US has pressured the EU from the first minute of the Russian invasion to continue the war and avoid any negotiation scenario to end it. And the Europeans have agreed to enter into this dynamic.
Another possible explanation for sending NATO soldiers to war is to act with the policy of fait accompli. If some European NATO countries openly entered the war, this would force the United States to also enter the conflict. A strategy that needs to be carried out now to work. They know that if Donald Trump wins the US elections next November, he will end the financing of NATO and this would automatically be the end of the war. So they don’t have much time. If this option is chosen, with all the risks of atomic conflagration that it implies, it should be carried out before the end of the European summer. That is, if Russia has not already completely defeated Ukraine by then, at least that is what Borrell, the head of EU foreign relations, thinks in recent statements.
A final and possible, although unlikely, explanation for Macron’s words is because he knew that all the rest of NATO members, including the US, would say that this is out of the question. Nothing would happen. In other words, it would have been a vulgar bravado product of desperation for “la grandeur de la France” as French nationalism says.
For the United States, in addition to the millionaire business of selling weapons by its military-industrial complex as well as gas, now having Europe politically and economically at its entire mercy, the war in Ukraine serves as a testing laboratory for new weapons. and of course for Artificial Intelligence (AI) used in new technologies for military applications, as Times magazine has said in recent weeks[iii]. In this regard, the Pentagon has just announced a contract with the company Palantir Technologies, for the development in Europe of a massive surveillance and control system, thus being a first for the use of AI in the military field.[iv]. Palantir has sold this to Ukraine for more than a year now for military and educational applications. They will be machines to determine if you are one of the good guys or the bad guys, in addition to shooting the bad guys of course. Drones with sensors for live image recognition among others with the support of satellite images and drones on the ground. With such systems, population control can thus be total. A chilling scenario where already battered public freedoms will gradually disappear in favor of “National Security” policies. The rest is already imagined by readers.
Not only the German Minister of Defense speaks of a possible war against Russia where some say it would be in 2025. The English military commander General Patrick Sanders has said that it is necessary to take steps in the direction of putting society on a war footing and that the public should be prepared to take up arms against Russia. Also the German Foreign Minister, who declares that “Russian imperialism will not stop in Ukraine.” Or the statements of President Macron, who has already said on several occasions that no solution should be ruled out to help Ukraine. Including sending French soldiers to the battlefield. Something that we now know was on the table of alternatives for some European leaders since June 2023, when they learned of the total failure of Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the war and became aware that military victory would not be possible. If this were to happen, we would thus have an officially declared NATO war against Russia, with Ukraine as an intermediary. And we say officially, because in practice NATO has been directly involved in the war with Russia for a long time, which until now has pretended not to have seen it, because if it recognized it, we would already be at war.
The direct participation of NATO soldiers in the war has been recognized by German Prime Minister Olaf Scholz. In a statement and recognizing the truth, he has said that they would not send German soldiers to the battlefront as the French and English already do by operating the missile launchers installed by NATO in Ukraine. Upon confession of parties, release of evidence as the lawyers say. In the German case, this participation would be to operate the launch of their Taurus missiles, the most powerful weapon they now have. The Polish Foreign Minister has also reported on the participation of foreign operatives on the battlefield, regarding a recent Ukrainian attack on the Russian city of Belgorod. All this in addition, in the context in which the information that the CIA has had for years and in places close to Russia, twelve (12) secret bases operating in Ukraine, comes to the public. So now all the richest countries in the EU plus the United Kingdom and the United States are directly participating in the war.
In the midst of all this, Pope Francis intervenes to state the obvious and demand humanism. NATO has lost the war in Ukraine and so when you are defeated, you have to have the courage to negotiate peace. Jens Stoltenberg, the head of NATO, replies that negotiation is not the same as surrender, although the Pope has been careful not to talk about surrender. And for the first time, Stoltenberg has said he is willing to negotiate. Personally, I little believe in this man’s spirit of peace. Never during this conflict has he even mentioned that possibility.
There are several contradictions that are not understood in the speech of European leaders with all this sea of statements. What do Germany and France have to gain or lose, for example, in a war against Russia, against which they know they have no armies to fight? It seems that Scholz and Macron’s rhetoric aims to create an illusion just to stay in power. If it were true that they have always felt threatened by Russia, because the EU has not had a defense policy and its own army for years? Why don’t the majority of NATO members contribute 2% of GDP to this, as is the basic agreement? Why have they mistakenly preferred to have NATO as a nuclear umbrella, that is, the United States, which contributes 68% of their financing, and have they abdicated their own defense system? And last but not least, who is going to pay for the more than 65 billion euros spent by the EU on this war? Readers guess.
Either that would demonstrate their lack of serious concern in defense, or then they accept being subjects of the United States as occurs in today’s European political reality. A world power surrendered to the interests of the empire. These leaders do not serve Europe and its legitimate interests.
If European leaders recognize in a more or less veiled way that they have lost the war, then what are they waiting for to negotiate? Putin has said from the first moment that they are willing to do it. So willing that in February 2022, Russians and Ukrainians meeting in Istanbul in negotiations on the war, had practically reached an agreement to sign peace. Agreement that blew up the US. It is specifically said that the English, through Boris Johnson, stood out in the boycott of said agreement. No talk of peace, Ukraine would resist to the last Ukrainian. This event has been conveniently silenced by the Western press in accordance with US strategic interests.
Every last Ukrainian? The war death rate according to military analysts everywhere, including former CIA agents[v], this figure is higher than half a million dead Ukrainian soldiers and something like 250,000 Russian soldiers. Far from the 30,000 dead Ukrainian soldiers reported by President Zelensky on the occasion of the two years since the Russian invasion. Civilian deaths are infinitely lower, thereby demonstrating that Russian troops have respected the laws of war that speak of respect for the lives of civilian populations. In fact, today if the Russians do not advance faster on the ground, it is precisely to prevent more civilian deaths according to some analysts. There is no doubt that they have made progress since the so-called Special Operation by Russia began. They have incorporated the entire eastern region of Ukraine, known as the Donbas, into Russia, in addition to securing the Crimean peninsula in their possession. Two regions with a high concentration of Russian-speaking Ukrainians. It does not seem likely that the Russians will abdicate these gains when negotiating peace.
Russian tanks will reach the Arc de Triomphe! Perhaps this is one of the biggest falsehoods in the propaganda of the European press these days. As is known, in a war the first victim is always the truth. From the first moment of launching this operation, the Russian military forces have been committed to defending the Russian-speaking populations of Eastern Ukraine, which had been massacred for 8 years after the two Minsk agreements where NATO once again deceived the Russians as is now confirmed. That and the denazification of Ukraine was a second objective. There has never been talk of the total occupation of Ukraine, much less of invading Europe. A region without natural resources or raw materials to sell. To conquer its important trade, a military occupation is not necessary. Market that China already has to a large extent. Therefore, a simply meaningless propaganda claim. And from a geostrategic point of view, because the Russian objective is to have Ukraine as a neutral ground between NATO and its borders. Just as it had been since its creation in 1991 when it became independent from Russia. The recent statements by Russian Prime Minister Medvedev demanding the total surrender of Ukraine now and its annexation to Russia, are in our opinion propaganda demands whose sole purpose is to begin negotiating “with the past.”
Let us remember at this point that although it is true that NATO’s conflict with Russia comes from the very moment of German reunification, where Gorbachev was promised that it would not advance “not one inch in the direction of Russia.” From then until today the reader can check the map of the European countries that were then in NATO, and those that are now, including the recent additions of Sweden and Finland. The mechanism for this has been either direct incorporation into NATO without belonging to the EU, as is the case of Turkey for example, or then by annexation first to the EU, and then to NATO, as has been the case of most.
All this, NATO being in theory a defensive alliance created to combat the countries of the Warsaw Pact during the times of the USSR. Defensive for Europe? It is not precisely Russia that has attacked Serbia, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya or Syria. NATO has done it. NATO’s objectives and the interests it really defends are clear, which are not exactly European interests.
Let’s say in passing that Ukraine is a candidate country for the EU. This one is looking forward to receiving it. However, it does not moderately comply with at least the most notable of the requirements demanded by the EU from countries that wish to join it: respecting national minorities. For years the Ukrainian government has bombed the largely Russian-populated Donbas region. Which does not seem to be a problem for the EU to break its own rules. The objective of surrounding Russia with EU countries after being incorporated into NATO is evident. What peace can be expected in Europe with these objectives encouraged by European leaders? Who in their right mind thinks that there can be stability in that region in the medium and long term? Could this be a stable region as it has been in previous decades, where no one shouted that the Russians were coming and trade with them clearly favored the EU? The US is largely responsible for this warlike mood of the EU against Russia. Simply because it is in their best strategic economic and military interest. He has successfully managed to sever the close economic relationship between Germany and Russia, a long-standing mantra in the US geopolitical strategy. And he has won the gas market by blowing up the underwater pipelines that carried gas from Russia to Germany. An imperial way to win a market. Of course no one in Europe has described this as a terrorist action. As always, two weights, two different measurements. With the gas pipelines destroyed and the gas sales contracts from the US to the EU finalized, it now tells the Europeans that it will not sell them all the gas they need. With cathedral-like cynicism they indicate that these are reasons to defend the environment! The truth is that they do it to maintain prices. Business first. How much truth John Foster Dulles, a former American minister, told us when he repeated that: “the USA has no friends. Only interests.”
But let’s continue. The denazification of Ukraine was the other major objective for the Russian invasion. Since the 2014 coup d’état against President Janukovic, democratically elected, in the so-called Euromaidan by opponents of Janukovic, supported with everything by the US – remember Mrs. Victoria Nulan[vi] cheering up the protesters on the streets of kyiv by giving away candy and bread to the protesters the day before the coup d’état -. Another “spring” with a CIA sign. And so together with the new government, hand-picked by Mrs. Nuland, Ukrainian fascist fanatics of their hero Stephan Bandera, murderer of millions of Polish Jews in the Second World War, assumed control in the Ministry of Defense and other government bodies, Today he has become a hero of the Zelensky government, for whom ceremonies are held in a monument that commemorates his figure. Ukrainian Nazis who have generated all the Russophile measures of the current government. All this in a country where 20% or more are Russian speakers and where 72% declare themselves to belong to the Eastern Orthodox Church[vii], which recognizes the bishop of Moscow. As is known, this is a fundamentally Slavic country of two cultures, two religions and two languages. Either they are obliged to respect each other if they want to maintain unity as a country, or they have to separate into two different countries so as not to annihilate each other. Curiously, this never happened from the creation of Ukraine until the 2014 coup.
The arrival of the coup plotters during the Euromaidan events overthrowing the Yanukovic government in 2014[viii], meant the beginning of a civil war. Since then, the mostly Russian inhabitants of the Donbas region, among others, were bombed and massacred, from 2014 to 2022, killing more than 15,000 people. No one, least of all the EU, ever took any action regarding this and when it signed as guarantor the Minsk I and Minsk II agreements to maintain its neutrality and respect for minorities, nothing changed and the EU did not say a word. We know now stated by Angela Merkel and François Hollande that it was only about buying time to prepare Ukraine for war. In a referendum in 2022, the inhabitants of Donbas declared their region to belong to Russia, which made this official that same year. These are basically the liberated territories and one of Russia’s central objectives declared at the beginning of the conflict. The avowedly Nazi battalions, such as the Azov battalion for example and others, have been practically annihilated. So for all intents and purposes, Russian objectives have been met. Enough in my opinion to start peace negotiations. Only the attitude of total belligerence and irrationality of the European leaders and in part of the Russian intelligence until now prefers the continuation of the war, with its deaths and destruction.
The paradoxical thing about this very serious situation in Europe is that the smallest countries are the most enthusiastic about going to war. Latvia, Slovakia, Finland and not so little Poland. The hatred of these people towards Russia is understandable because of the times when they were under the rule of the USSR. Only passions have never been good advisors. Much less in the decision-making process of leaders of countries that can contribute to leading humanity to its extinction. This is the fundamental thing that EU leaders are forgetting and that they don’t seem to care much about. With what right do they place the lives of all of humanity at risk? We have nothing to do in Latin America, for example, with this struggle of the national bourgeoisies for markets, raw materials and Power in that part of the world, the background of these tragic events. If our people were fully informed of this, the natural reaction would be to take to the streets to demand Peace right now, and join the people of Europe who are not fooled by the announcements of a Russian invasion. But the propaganda machine of the empire and its partners is powerful and extinguishes all dissent from what their truths are. They tell us and create a virtual reality so that we accept their crazy war policies.
We must not allow it.
By Patricio Serendero
[i] According to military analysts, a single missile equipped with 12 atomic warheads can wipe 650,000 km2 off the map. That is, like all of France for example.
[ii] For example, the German company Rehinmetall increases its stock price astronomically as a result of new million-dollar contracts.
[iii]
[iv] Alex Karp, the CEO of Palantir has offered this system in person to Zelensky in kyiv recently. For little David to defeat the giant Goliath, according to the aforementioned Times article.
[v] Several references to military affairs in this article are taken from interviews with Scott Ritter, former US Navy intelligence officer and member of the UN Atomic Weapons Review Commission. Also Larry Johnson, former CIA telecommunications officer, and Douglas Macgregor, former US Army colonel, public office holder and strategist of the US invasions in Iraq, among others. All of them with sufficient military knowledge for the military topic.
[vi] The now resigned US secretary and a true institution in US foreign policy serving under 6 presidents, was among others, the main architect of the strategy for the role reserved for Ukraine and the current NATO war with Russia. Her resignation shows that this strategy has failed.
[vii] According to a 2021 survey by the kyiv International Institute of Sociology.
[viii] It is interesting to see the official CIA site and its account of the coup against Yanukovic. He only talks about activists and students. This, because a majority supported the deposed president. Here the site:
