Tag Archives: NATO

Drone attack on Kremlin may further escalate conflict with Ukraine

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

On the night of May 2, there were two unsuccessful drone strikes against Kremlin and Senate facilities in the Russian capital. The purpose of the operation was allegedly to assassinate Russian President Vladimir Putin. The reaction to the case has been serious, with members of the Russian parliament demanding that tough measures be taken to respond to the provocation on the battlefield.

The attacks were made with unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), but Russian defense forces managed to disable the equipment using electronic warfare techniques. Several videos, some of which unverified, circulate on the internet showing the moment when the UAVs were neutralized near Russian state facilities.

There were no reports of damage caused by the attack, as the quick action of the Russian security forces was efficient in preventing the success of the terrorist operation. It is believed that the main objective would be to reach the residence of the President of the Russian Federation, assassinating him which anyway would not be possible since at that moment Vladimir Putin was not in the place.

The Russian government blamed the Kiev regime for the attacks, which was promptly rejected by the Ukrainian authorities. Without showing any evidence, spokespersons for the neo-Nazi regime accused Moscow of having carried out a false flag attack whose aim would be to legitimize escalations of violence on the frontlines. As expected, some western media outlets have adopted this narrative, accusing Moscow in an unsubstantiated way. However, a deeper analysis of the case shows that this interpretation seems absolutely wrong.

The attack on the Kremlin was not a one-off event, but part of a larger wave of Ukrainian air raids into Russia’s pacified or undisputed sovereign space. In recent days, the regime reportedly attacked, in addition to the Russian capital, the regions of Bryansk and Krasnodar, having hit oil facilities in the latter, which caused fires in the city. As well known, for months Kiev has been launching sequential irresponsible incursions against Russia in what appears to be a desperate attempt to provoke violent Russian responses, thus justifying that NATO sends more weapons.

In this sense, it seems illogical to claim that Moscow would be interested in performing a false flag operation against its own capital to justify escalations, when it is the Western-Ukrainian side that shows interest in escalating. If it were in Russia’s interest to increase the intensity of its attacks on Ukraine, there would be already enough reason to do so, as Kiev has carried out several provocations in recent months.

The main problem, however, is that Russian patience may be running out. After the attack on Moscow, many Russian officials reacted by demanding quick, strong and incisive actions to retaliate. There is strong pressure for orders to be given to the Russian armed forces to destroy the entire enemy firepower as quickly as possible. Some politicians even suggest that direct actions against Ukrainian officials should be taken.

The day after the Kremlin incident, heavy Russian attacks took place across Ukraine, mainly in Zaporozhye, Odessa and Kiev. The intensity of the attacks is expected to increase even more in the coming days. Some advisers are urging Zelensky, currently visiting Europe, to stay out of Ukrainian territory indefinitely. In the same vein, the American Embassy in Kiev asked American citizens to leave the country as soon as possible.

The Ukrainian side believes that with the intense Russian attacks, it will have greater arguments to ask the West for help with new military packages. However, this calculation may be wrong. If Moscow maintains a high intensity of attacks, the tendency is that Kiev may be neutralized even before the new Western weapons are eventually used on the battlefield. Russia has been using only a small portion of its military power in the special operation, while Ukraine is fighting with everything it has. Even if it receives more sophisticated weapons from the West, Kiev certainly will not have any chance of maintaining the conflict for long time if the Russians decide to increase their combat mobilization.

Indeed, Moscow has its right of retaliation in the face of such a provocation, but the situation is much more serious than that. There are arguments for the Ukrainian State itself to be considered a terrorist organization, against which Russian forces would be authorized to use all available means of combat. This would lead to a formal change in the nature of the special military operation, pushing the conflict to new levels. In this hypothetical scenario, NATO should be considered an organization sponsor of terrorism for insisting on arming Kiev despite the crimes committed by the regime.

There is still not enough information to know whether this step will be taken, but it is one of the possibilities given the current scenario. What is known, however, is that some serious retaliation is certainly on the way.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

BREAKING: Russia may launch missile strikes on Kyiv tonight

This is from the twitter thread I’ve been following this afternoon. This is what others are reporting as covert intel. Well I found it right away by doing a search. Here you go.

🚨 BREAKING: Russia may launch missile strikes on Kyiv this night. Two nuclear warheads allegedly at the airfield but not armed on the planes at this time.

Osechkin’s source: “Orders have been sent to the air bases in Engels and Shaykovka to prepare a number of TU-22Ms for flight, missile strikes could be carried out on a number of administrative buildings in Kiev during the night.”

Osechkin: “The source also claimed that for the first time nuclear weapons may be used, at least two ‘items’ are already located directly at one of the aforementioned airfields.

P.S. Details will be provided later. It is important to understand that a long-range aviation source is risking his life, namely the risk of going to prison for life. And this is not a hype or a gimmick, today everything is very serious and it is not known how it will end. We are not talking about a monkey with a grenade, we are all dealing with (or rather confronting) a dictator with nuclear weapons. And if he decides to use nuclear weapons, we hope that the pilots and specialists of the ground services of the Air Force will not carry out this criminal order.”

I’m skeptical about the drone attack on the Kremlin as there’s evidence of a false flag in this pic. Who are those guys on the roof before the explosion?

My source for the pic is at this link: https://open.substack.com/pub/strangesounds/p/russia-needed-a-real-casus-belli?r=fh3ja&utm_medium=ios&utm_campaign=post

Prayed up and prepped up as always folks! This may be just another rumor but stay alert.

Russia warns of ‘retaliation’ for Ukrainian attack on Kremlin

The authorities have accused Kiev of targeting Putin’s residence with drones

Russia reserves the right to retaliate“anywhere and anytime it deems necessary” in response to the drone attack on President Vladimir Putin’s residence, the Kremlin has said.

Officials said two Ukrainian drones attempted to strike the Kremlin early on Wednesday morning, but the raid was thwarted.

The president was not hurt in the “terrorist attack,” and the Kremlin complex did not suffer any damage, Putin’s office said.

Putin’s spokesman Dmitry Peskov told RIA Novosti that the Russian leader was not in the Kremlin when the raid happened. He added that Putin was working at his Novo-Ogaryovo residence near Moscow on Wednesday.

The attack took place as Russia prepares for Victory Day celebrations on May 9. The centerpiece of the commemoration of the victory against Nazi Germany and its allies in World War II is the annual military parade on Red Square, just outside the Kremlin walls. Source: https://www.rt.com/russia/575708-russia-kremlin-attack-retaliation/

British radioactive weapons arrive in Ukraine

The measure could lead to an unprecedented escalation in the Ukrainian conflict.

Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant.

Ignoring all Russian advises, the British government confirmed on April 26th that its depleted uranium weapons are already on Ukrainian soil. Moscow’s officials, anti-war activists and experts have repeatedly warned that such an escalation in the conflict should be avoided, but London has not observed the advice and has further violated a red line by sending radioactive weapons to the Kiev regime. It remains to be seen what the consequences of this dangerous measure will be.

The confirmation of the delivery of weapons was made by the Minister of Armed Forces of the United Kingdom, James Heappey, during a speech to the British Parliament. According to Heappey, depleted uranium ammunitions were sent to Ukraine along with other projectiles suitable for use in Challenger 2 tanks. The minister also added that British officials will not try to track where these weapons will be used.

“We have sent thousands of rounds of Challenger 2 ammunition to Ukraine, including depleted uranium armour-piercing rounds (…) [These weapons] re now under the control of the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU) (…) [UK’s Ministry of Defense] does not monitor the locations from where DU rounds are fired by the AFU in Ukraine”, the Minsiter said during the statement.

When asked by some parliamentarians about the health dangers posed by these weapons, Heappey claimed that this threat would be “low”. Interestingly, he even mentioned that the risk assessment is based on monitoring UK veterans who have already used them on the battlefield. In fact, the minister seems to completely ignore that a series of recent studies point to the opposite, showing serious health problems both in the soldiers who manipulated this equipment and in the victims of the ammunition. The problems include several risks commonly attributed to radioactive substances, such as cancer, fetal deformity, deficiency of fertility, among others.

Commenting on the case with journalists, Doug Weir, an expert linked to the Conflict and Environment Observatory, stated that when DU penetrators strike a target “they fragment and burn, generating chemically toxic and radioactive DU particulate that poses an inhalational risk to people”. Several other scientists have expressed similar views after analyzing the results of these munitions in Iraq and other countries where NATO troops have used them. However, London and Washington continue to deny evidence of these dangers.

It must be remembered that Moscow has repeatedly asked London to reconsider its plan to send these munitions to Kiev. In a recent statement, spokespersons for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia stated that the British measure would be an absolute “imprudence, irresponsibility”. Furthermore, in March, the Russian Ministry of Defense warned that the use of such projectiles could “cause irreparable harm” to the health of Ukrainian soldiers and civilians as well as inflict “tremendous economic damage to the agro-industrial complex” in the region, citing the weapon’s impact during the previous experience in Iraq.

However, despite the warnings, the shipment of these weapons was already expected. In March, US and British troops held a training program with Ukrainian soldiers to teach them how to properly handle depleted uranium munitions. The plan was very well prepared and echoes NATO’s interest in taking the proxy war with Russia to the most dangerous levels of military escalation, ignoring any humanitarian, environmental or social concerns.

Legally, depleted uranium weapons are a complex issue. There is no international convention banning them as there is no consensus among specialists on how to define these weapons. These munitions are really radioactive, which is why some experts believe they should be considered nuclear weapons under the legal principle of analogy. However, its radiation is lower than that of natural uranium, which leads other specialists to reject this classification.

Some other experts believe that a viable solution to the problem of these projectiles would be to consider them chemical weapons, since they contain toxic substances, regardless of the level of radioactivity. But this creates a problem for the western powers that have them, since the US and the UK are signatories to the Chemical Weapons Convention, which would oblige them to destroy their depleted uranium stocks. Not by chance, both countries reject any initiative in this sense and prefer that these weapons remain without specific legislation, so that they can continue using them with impunity.

Indeed, given the absence of specific regulation, Moscow could consider the use of depleted uranium against its troops as a true nuclear attack, which would allow the Russians to react with their arsenal of mass destruction. This is unlikely to happen, as Moscow has repeatedly shown its interest in seeking the most peaceful and humanitarian solutions possible to the conflict, sometimes even ignoring violations against red lines just to avoid escalation.

However, regardless of what the Russian response will be, it is certain that damage to Ukrainian soldiers and the civilian population in the combat zone are inevitable. And the responsibility for that lies with NATO.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Could post-Erdogan Turkey become NATO’s Trojan horse in Greater Eurasia?

Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

On April 26 numerous local and foreign media sources reported that Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan had allegedly suffered a heart attack and was subsequently rushed to the hospital. He fell ill during a live TV interview the evening prior, an event his PR team described as the result of a “serious stomach cold”. Erdogan’s office then canceled the next two days of scheduled speeches and rallies, approximately two and a half weeks ahead of Turkey’s general (both presidential and parliamentary) elections, scheduled on May 14. By the next day’s afternoon, many English-language outlets and social media accounts from various countries reported that he had been hospitalized due to a heart attack.

The unsubstantiated rumors went on during most of the day, with some sources going as far as to claim that Erdogan had been “poisoned”. At the same time, official Turkish sources and mainstream media kept quiet on the matter for the most part, refusing to report, let alone speculate about Erdogan’s condition. This also contributed to the outburst of hysteria, particularly after it was announced that the president’s family had been called up to the hospital, largely implying that his condition was far from optimistic. The unfounded claims even reached the Chinese English-language mass media, which further amplified the rumors. However, Erdogan’s office tweeted that “[he] will be resting at home on the advice of our doctors”, adding that his condition was the result of a “minor inconvenience due to busy work”.

And yet, speculation was still going strong and even escalated in part due to reports by the English-language “War Monitor”and even certain Russian media that President Vladimir Putin had been rushed to the Kremlin late at night due to some sort of “unknown major contingency”, which many took as a supposedly “clear sign” that the speculation about Erdogan might have been true. Either way, the hysteria triggered angry rebuttals by Turkish government officials, with an official statement from the Turkish presidency’s office condemning the “baseless claims” regarding Erdogan’s health and announcing that “[he] will attend tomorrow’s [Akkuyu] nuclear power plant opening via videoconference”.

Many of the president’s avid supporters think that the rumors were started by his political opponents, allegedly in an attempt to portray Erdogan as weak and in fragile health. It’s not entirely clear what the motivation for this was and whether it was a not-particularly-elaborate attempt to hurt the Turkish president’s ratings or perhaps just a big misunderstanding. Either way, this has flared up the debate about the potential geopolitical issues stemming from the possibility of post-Erdogan Turkey emerging after the scheduled general election. Such an event would surely cause tectonic changes not just in Turkey’s internal political life, but also in Eurasian and Middle Eastern (geo)politics, affecting areas from Africa’s Libya to China’s westernmost province of Xinjiang.

Erdogan’s Neo-Ottoman ambitions, mixed with an attempt to harness the power of the so-called “political Islam” wherever that’s (or was) possible, has been undermining the emergence of Greater Eurasia for over a decade. This push towards expansionism started with the truly unprovoked and brutal NATO invasions of Libya and Syria, ever so euphemistically dubbed “civil wars” in the so-called “free press”. Erdogan’s role in Turkey’s involvement with both wars of aggression has been instrumental and continued even after the political West tried deposing the Turkish president himself in a July 2016 coup. Despite the resulting tense relationship between Erdogan and Washington DC, Turkey continued to play a vital role in US/NATO aggression against the Middle East.

Russia’s relationship with Erdogan’s Turkey during this time is so complex and multifaceted that not even a single book would cover it, let alone a separate analysis. Still, what should be noted in this regard are Moscow’s masterfully executed diplomatic initiatives that managed the virtually impossible task of compartmentalizing these extremely complicated relations, not only preventing direct confrontation between Russia and Turkey, but also maintaining their (still) largely cordial relationship, despite both countries being on opposing sides in essentially every single case. This has somehow continued even after the start of Russia’s special military operation (SMO) in Ukraine, again with Turkey virtually on the opposing side. However, the geopolitical “Great Game” hardly stops there.

Erdogan’s Neo-Ottomanism is also augmented by Ankara’s decades-old pan-Turkic effort that serves as an attempt to establish a bloc of its own. The political West has been supporting such policies since long before the Soviet dismantlement, as long as Turkey remains a firm member of the political West. And while Erdogan staying in power has undermined this support, its dormant state is only temporary. Erdogan himself has greatly (ab)used this to Turkey’s advantage, particularly against the Sorosite-led Armenia. However, if he were to leave (one way or the other), Washington DC will be more than happy to expand its support for “freedom and democracy” efforts in not only the Southern Caucasus, but (even more disturbingly) in Central Asia as well.

This would not only (re)ignite additional hotspots in countries such as Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan and/or even Kazakhstan (tried in late 2021/early 2022), but could very likely spill over to China’s Xinjiang province. In doing so, the US/NATO would cause destabilization of Greater Eurasia and, by extension, the multipolar world. Turkey’s role, particularly that of a potentially post-Erdogan one, would be of critical importance for the success of such an operation, while also causing further security issues in the Middle East.

NATO’s weapons leaking to black market – Western journalist

Seymour Hersh’s report validate what has been said by many Russian authorities months ago. 


Lucas Leiroz, journalist, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, geopolitical consultant. 

Confirming what several other analysts had already been reporting since the beginning of Western military aid campaign to Ukraine, an important American informant pointed out that several weapons sent by NATO are being sold on the black market. The result of this process is that weapons that should be used by the Ukrainian armed forces end up in the hands of foreign contrabandists, with no control over what will be their final destination.

The most recent report was made by the well-known and respected American journalist Seymour Hersh. Even though he is a Pulitzer Prize winner and former New York Times informant, Hersh has recently suffered several reprisals and “cancellation” attempts for leaking evidence of crimes committed by the US government, such as the terrorist attacks against the Nord Stream gas pipelines. In the same vein, he now said that Western-supplied weapons to Kiev were actually “flooding” the military black market in countries like Romania and Poland.

“Poland, Romania, other countries on the border were being flooded with weapons we [the US and allies] were shipping for the war to Ukraine (…) Often, it wasn’t generals, it was colonels and others, who were given shipments of some weapons, [who] would personally resell them (…) to the dark market”, he said during a recent show of his journalistic program “Going Underground”.

The most serious point of Hersh’s words was when he reported that the western media itself would be aware of these crimes. The journalist told his interlocutors that western newspapers were being prevented from publishing reports on this topic, since the central objective of the western media at this moment is to raise public support for NATO’s war against Russia. Hersh commented that, in a recent documentary called “Arming Ukraine”, the CBS team would be about to publicize all the crimes of corruption involving NATO’s weapons, however the authors were forced to rewrite the words to be spoken during the video.

Hersh also tells that the contained an interview with Jonas Ohman, founder of an important pro-Ukrainian NGO. Ohamn told journalists at the time that only 30% of Western military aid was reaching the frontlines, suggesting that there was a wide network of corruption surrounding these weapons. However, the group responsible for the promotion of the film removed Ohman’s speech. According to Hersh, CBS’ leaders explained to the documentary’s producers that this type of content could not be shown because “we’re on the side of Ukraine. We all hate Russia.”

Indeed, Hersh’s words only confirm what has been said by Russian officials since last year. A large amount of the arms sent to Kiev are leaked to serve the interests of criminal networks, which profit from illegal military trade at exorbitant prices. However, the main problem was not even mentioned by Hersh: the real destination of these weapons, which goes far beyond illegal groups in Poland and Romania.

In fact, these weapons are almost always put on the routeof terrorism, with the black market fueling criminal networks around the world. In October last year, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova had already said that “NATO military supplies intended for the Kiev regime end up in the hands of terrorists, extremists and criminal groups in the Middle East, Central Africa, Southeast Asia”.

It is important to remember that some African governments also reported last year that extraordinaryamounts of weapons had reached their territories, supplying terrorist groups, which confirms the words of the Russian authorities. In this sense, it is expected that new cases of armed insurrections by terrorist groups will occur in several countries in the near future, possibly using NATO weapons. This becomes particularly serious and worrying when we remember that common Western weapons, such as Stinger shoulder-launched missiles, in Hersh’s words, can “shoot down an airplane at considerable height.”

What remains to be seen is whether the providing of NATO weapons to the black market is a mere “accident” or whether the alliance’s officials really want to use the Ukrainian excuse to arm terrorist groups around the world. It is well known that the Pentagon uses the services of criminal and terrorist organizations around the planet to serve its interests, promoting rebellions against legitimate governments, occupying strategic territories and startingcivil wars. Ukraine itself is one of these cases, with local neo-Nazi militias having been supplied with Westernweapons for years to kill Russians in the Donbass. The same happens at some level on all continents, where there are paramilitary and terrorist groups working for American intelligence.

With so many reports that most of these weapons are not reaching Ukraine’s frontlines, it is possible that there really is a deliberate intention on the part of NATO’sintelligence to promote a global strengthening of criminal groups considered “allies”. This will allow Washington to maintain strong proxies in other regions of the planet, despite the imminent defeat on Ukrainian soil. This is something to be investigated in depth.

You can follow Lucas on Twitter and Telegram.

US to double its ‘defense’ budget

The US is left with a choice – further escalate, not only with Russia, but the rest of the world as well, or find an off-ramp. Otherwise, its inflation will surge so much that the “doubling” of the Pentagon’s budget will happen on its own.

Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

Back in late March, top American General Mark Milley, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said that the United States of America would be doubling its military budget in case the Kiev regime was defeated by Russia. At the time, Milley claimed that “not supporting Ukraine now would lead to a massive increase in future defense budgets”. He also added that “it would lead to a global conflict that has been avoided since World War II ended”.

“If that rules-based order, which is in its 80th year, if that goes out the window, then be very careful,” Milley said while testifying before the US Congress on March 23, further adding: “We’ll be doubling our defense budgets at that point because that will introduce not an era of great power competition. That’ll begin an era of great power conflict. And that’ll be extraordinarily dangerous for the whole world.”

Firstly, it should be noted that Milley’s remark about the so-called “rules-based (world) order” supposedly lasting 80 years is completely misplaced. The geopolitical situation in the last three decades has merely been a shadow of the post-WWII globalorder. With the US conducting virtually incessant aggression against the entire world, any notion that there are actual rules that equally apply to everyone is beyond laughable. However, his claim that Washington DC would need to double its “defense” spending is much more serious and consequential. Ironically, he’s threatening to do that while “warning” about a looming global conflict, one which is solely caused by the US itself, as it’s the only country on the planet with an openly stated strategy of “full spectrum dominance”. 

Milley testified before the House Appropriations Committee-Defense on the next year’s DoD (Department of Defense) budget, alongside Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin. The figure for the Pentagon officially stands at $842 billion, $69 billion more than the $773 billion the military requested for 2023. However, the total spending on national “defense”, including work on nuclear weapons (officially under the jurisdiction of the Department of Energy), pushes that up to $886 billion. This is without including the so-called “aid” for the Kiev regime, which stood at approximately $113 billion at the beginning of 2023. However, the updated figure is now getting closer to $150 billion and there’s no indication that it will stop growing any time soon.

General Milley has repeatedly described the conflict in Ukraine as “an important national interest” and “fundamental to the United States, to Europe and to global security”. It could be argued that it’s neither of those things, as the world, the EU and the US itself all have more pressing concerns. Unfortunately, this notion is extremely unlikely to lead to any peaceful settlement, especially as the US Military Industrial Complex (MIC) keeps getting its windfall. While some members of Congress have consistently been skeptical about the “aid” for the Kiev regime, the majority still have a strong preference for the official narrative. The skeptics usually cite “the US and Kiev regime’s failure to more clearly define their strategic goals” as the primary reason for the lack of “more adamant support”.

This clearly indicates that the only “strategic goal” is to keep the war going for as long as possible, which also explains the repeated calls for the perpetual increase of the Pentagon’s budget. However, Milley’s call for doubling it is a major escalation and it’s unclear how exactly Washington DC is planning to achieve such a monumental task. Global military spending for 2022 was around $2.1 trillion, meaning that the US is already at over 40% of the world’s total with its current budget. Doubling it, even over the next several years (also taking into account other superpowers would certainly respond to it) could push that figure close to 60%. In terms of the US federal budget, it would also require further cuts to investment in healthcare, infrastructure, education, etc.

As the military currently spends approximately 15% of the entire US federal budget, obviously, doubling it would mean the percentage would go up to (or even over) 30%. Such figures are quite close to what the former Soviet Union was spending in terms of its overall budget, which was one of the major factors that contributed to its unfortunate dismantlement. On the other hand, it also forces others to drastically increase their own military spending. If China were to follow suit, its military budget would then be close to $500 billion, with Russia’s military budget approaching $200 billion. This would cause a military spending “death spiral” that would be extremely difficult (if possible at all) to control, leading the world into an unprecedented arms race.

However, this “new” Cold War could potentially be far more dangerous than the “old” one, as there would be approximately half a dozen superpowers and great powers competing for influence and a bigger geopolitical footprint. On the other hand, if the rest of the world refuses to respond in kind, such a massive increase in US military spending would only push the multipolar world into greater integration, as it would be the only way to counter US aggression without doubling their own military budgets. Either way, the US is left with a choice – further escalate, not only with Russia, but the rest of the world as well, or find an off-ramp. Otherwise, its inflation will surge so much that the “doubling” of the Pentagon’s budget will happen on its own.

Poland’s new border fence and “Himars Academy” escalates tensions with Russia

Warsaw continues a policy of servitude to Washington.

Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher

Poland is erecting a wall on Russia’s Kaliningrad exclave, announced its intentions to open a “Himars Academy” for military training, and is allowing the deployment of these American weapons on its territory. These highly provocative actions serve as a confirmation that Poland has aggressive plans to escalate tensions with Moscow.

Polish Defence Minister Mariusz Błaszczak tweeted on April 18: “The first US-made HIMARS missile systems will reach Poland this year. We want to establish a Himars Academy where training on this type of rocket artillery system will take place.”

Washington considers Poland as nothing more than the first front line in any future confrontation between Russia and NATO in Europe. For this reason, Washington is transforming the country into its main European base, which is why in addition to the Himars system, Warsaw decided to build a fence on the border with Russia, something likely made under US instruction.

Warsaw claims the border fence is needed to stem the flow of illegal immigration after falsely claiming in November 2022 that the Kremlin was planning to facilitate illegal border crossings by Asian and African migrants as part of its “hybrid warfare”. However, this is quite obviously a fallacy since Poland does not face major migratory threats like Europe’s Mediterranean countries.

From a military point of view, the wall will not stop columns of tanks if a conflict broke out. Russians living in Kaliningrad are not defecting to Poland, and at the same time, the wall is not a protection against migrants from Afghanistan and Africa as it is easier to get to Belarus, as occurred during the last migration crisis.

Rather, migration is a ludicrous claim to justify the construction of the wall. Poland aspires to be the main American ally in Europe, which will dictate the geopolitics of the region. Building the wall is for this purpose, even if it is just a mere demonstration that Poland is making some kind of effort against Russia. However, the US does not have allies, and instead only has vassals.

Polish Interior Minister Mariusz Kamiński announced that Poland has begun construction of a “state-of-the-art” wall along its 199-kilometre land border with Russia, which will be completed by the end of the year and includes 3,000 surveillance cameras.

In typical cold Russian humour, the governor of the Kaliningrad region, Anton Alikhanov, offered Poland construction materials for the wall, promising to give “even a small discount.”

Poland will place American Himars missile systems near the border with Kaliningrad, while at the same time the country plans to open the Himars Academy for the army to learn how to handle these systems. Himars are not a defensive type of weapon, and therefore the purchase of these systems is an aggressive gesture against Russia.

Warsaw has already bought 20 systems for $414 million, but the US Congress has already agreed to deliver about 500 more highly mobile systems, worth about $10 billion. This is in line with Poland’s aggressive plan to completely isolate the Kaliningrad region.

Alarmingly, the installation of the Himars system near Kaliningrad poses a danger to civilian aircraft flying into the exclave, while on the other hand, it is primarily more dangerous for Poland as Russia will only militarise Kaliningrad even further. Given that Russia has a lot more capabilities than Poland and the US does not have infinite resources to dedicate to the country, leaders in Warsaw have only made their country’s defences even more vulnerable as Moscow will certainly respond to this latest provocation.

Adding to its provocative crescendo, Poland, along with Germany and a few other EU countries, are pushing for sanctions on Russian nuclear energy as the bloc looks for new ways to try and hurt Moscow’s finances because the current embargoes have utterly failed to deter the special military operation in Ukraine.

According to CNBC, Poland and the Baltic States also called for sanctions on Russia’s civil nuclear energy activities, diamond imports, and on oil imports on the Druzhba pipeline.

Although the EU has imposed 10 sanction packages on Russia since the war began, another round of sanctions is being prepared, but again, this is unlikely to deter Russia and will once again backfire on the bloc. Although it is likely that the new set of sanctions would feature nuclear energy, a spokesperson for the European Commission refused to comment on ongoing confidential discussions.

“The preparations for the 11th package are ongoing,” the spokesperson said, “to have it all done and ready it takes time.”

In this way, it is evident that Poland is desperately positioning itself to be the US’ main European military base, even though Russia does not pose a threat to the country. Rather, by highly militarising the border, establishing a Himars Academy, and pushing for more sanctions, Poland is fully emersed in an anti-Russia hysteria that is being transformed into policy.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

Inter-EU relations plummeting over Macron’s apparent China tilt

Somewhat surprisingly, despite increased NATO pressure, Macron has not only refused to take back his statements, but has even reiterated them, openly declaring that “being an ally does not mean being a vassal … [or] mean that we don’t have the right to think for ourselves.”

Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst

It’s hardly breaking news that the European Union is essentially a giant collection of vassals of the United States. Ironically enough, as the bloc effectively doubled in size since the (First) Cold War, its sovereignty has proportionately gone down. Washington DC largely accomplished this by propping up staunchly pro-US EU members. One such country is certainly Poland, as Warsaw consistently supports American interests in the EU. And while it could be argued that this is largely thanks to Poland’s virtually endemic Russophobia, the most recent episode with French President Emmanuel Macron’s visit to China clearly indicates that Warsaw’s foreign policy framework is as American as it could possibly be.

Late last week, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki slammed Macron’s “controversial” comments on Beijing, made just after he met his Chinese counterpart Xi Jinping. Morawiecki openly mocked the French President’s call for “strategic autonomy”, which also included follow-up comments about the EU “not being a direct US vassal”. Such rhetoric isn’t unheard of, particularly from France, but the question remains how exactly honest and straightforward it is. However, even a semblance of anything that could remotely be seen as “anti-American” is virtual “heresy” in Warsaw, which explains its harsh reaction to this. Morawiecki equated even just cordial EU-China ties with “cutting off relations with the US”. His exact words were:

“European autonomy sounds fancy, doesn’t it? But it means shifting the center of European gravity towards China and severing the ties with the US. Short-sightedly they look to China to be able to sell more EU products there at huge geopolitical costs, making us more dependent on China and not less. Some European countries are trying to make with China the same mistake which was made with Russia – this dramatic mistake.”

According to AFP’s reporting, Morawiecki also (implicitly) slammed both France and Germany for their allegedly “lukewarm” support for the Kiev regime and “warned” about China’s breakaway island province of Taiwan:

“You cannot protect Ukraine today and tomorrow by saying Taiwan is not your business. I think that, God forbid, if Ukraine falls, if Ukraine gets conquered, the next day China may attack – can attack – Taiwan… …I do not quite understand the concept of strategic autonomy if it means de facto shooting into our own knee. Western European nations have grown accustomed to a model based on cheap energy from Russia, high-margin trade with China, low-cost labor from Eastern Europe and security for free from the United States. Now their modus vivendi collapsed in ruins so what do they do? They want a quick ceasefire, armistice, in Ukraine, almost at any price. Some politicians in Western Europe are thinking, ‘Ukraine, why are you fighting so bravely?'”

Somewhat surprisingly, despite increased NATO pressure, Macron has not only refused to take back his statements, but has even reiterated them, openly declaring that “being an ally does not mean being a vassal … [or] mean that we don’t have the right to think for ourselves.” Macron’s recent “controversial” statements have sent shockwaves across the political West. And while they’re hardly a clear indicator of a major strategic shift in French foreign policy, as the country still supports the Kiev regime through weapons shipments that are killing the people of Donbass, they are quite an unpleasant surprise for Washington DC planners hopeful of sustaining their strategic siege of China in the Asia-Pacific, an effort that requires pan-Western support.

“The paradox would be that, overcome with panic, we believe we are just America’s followers. The question Europeans need to answer … is it in our interest to accelerate [a crisis] on Taiwan? No. The worse thing would be to think that we Europeans must become followers on this topic and take our cue from the US agenda and a Chinese overreaction… …If the tensions between the two superpowers heat up … we won’t have the time nor the resources to finance our strategic autonomy and we will become vassals,” Macron said at the time.

This and the fact that the French President said “the great risk facing Europe right now is that it gets caught up in crises that are not ours, which prevents it from building its strategic autonomy” is quite indicative of so-called “old” Europe’s desire to maintain at least some degree of strategic relevance. However, it’s quite difficult to take the “old” EU seriously in the matter of Taiwan when it’s been so religiously following Washington DC’s diktat on Ukraine for well over a decade. Despite clear and open frustrations with the US profiteering that has been “bleeding dry” the increasingly cash-strapped EU for over a year now, the bloc still continues its self-defeating subservience. As long as the EU participates in Washington DC’s crawling aggression against Russia, the desire to stop being US vassals will be nothing but that.

Kiev Planning Provocation in Sumy Region to Accuse Russia of Using Poisonous Substances – Moscow

From Sputnik News

MOSCOW (Sputnik) – Kiev is planning a large-scale provocation in the Sumy region with the aim of discrediting Russia and accusing it of allegedly using poisonous substances, Russia’s Joint Coordination Headquarters for Humanitarian Response said.

“According to available data, confirmed by several independent sources, under the leadership of the office of the President of Ukraine, a large-scale provocation is being prepared aimed at discrediting the Russian Federation in the international arena,” the headquarters said in a statement.

According to the statement, over the past two weeks, in the village of Okhtyrka (Sumy region), an alleged section of a forward line of defense of Ukrainian troops has been prepared.

Kiev plans to deliver the bodies and remains of dead Ukrainian soldiers from mortuaries to the equipped pseudo-positions, to later claim that the deaths allegedly occurred as a result of fire damage by “Russian artillery ammunition equipped with ‘poisonous substances,’” the humanitarian headquarters said.

The area in the Sumy region and the Ukrainian soldiers’ remains will be treated with a poisonous substance so that invited experts from Western countries can document the alleged “use of ‘chemical weapons’ by the Russian armed forces,” the humanitarian headquarters specified in the statement.

The release says that Kiev is planning the provocation in order to divert the attention of the international community from the facts of numerous war crimes committed by the Ukrainian forces and documented by the United Nations.

You can support this ministry and keep us on the internet using the links below.  Patreon is gone so now we have Cash App and Buy me a Coffee as our online options.  The new buy me a coffee link is below. 

Buy me a Coffee

Cash App ID: $jstorm212

« Older Entries Recent Entries »