A study conducted to examine the anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination status of individuals who were diagnosed with leprosy revealed “a very high rate of anti-SARS-CoV-2 vaccination among individuals attending the Leprosy Clinic. 49 individuals (98%) were vaccinated.”
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.
As the UK directly participated in the creation of this Albanian monstrosity, the way this has backfired cannot be considered anything but a well-deserved poetic justice.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
Since the 1990s, the United Kingdom has been one of the staunchest supporters of Albanian expansionism (mostly fueled by their unrelenting narco-terrorist tendencies). At the time, London sent its intelligence services to Albania where they worked closely with their American, German and other NATO counterparts to set the stage for a terrorist insurrection in the southern Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohia. The KLA (Kosovo Liberation Army), an Albanian terrorist organization that was based on a volatile mix of radical Islamism and narco-terrorism, was formed with NATO’s direct participation, particularly the UK and US intelligence services.
This support reached its peak in early 1999 when NATO initiated its illegal bombing of Serbia and Montenegro (then the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia) in support of its favorite terrorist puppets. Just prior to NATO attacks, in the 1998-1999 timeframe, the Al Qaeda-linked Albanian KLA started attacking both the Serbian security forces and civilians in Kosovo and Metohia. These attacks were coordinated directly with NATO, as previously mentioned, particularly the UK and US intelligence. After 78 days of indiscriminate bombing by NATO, Serbia was forced to pull out of its southern province, leaving it at the mercy of Albanian terrorists and their NATO handlers.
Seemingly, the belligerent alliance promised that the territory will formally remain a part of Serbia, albeit administered by NATO. As per usual for the political West, their word was worth less than the paper it was written on. The promises were never kept and the “legalized” narco-terrorist KLA proclaimed independence in 2008. The political West immediately recognized this so-called “independence” and claimed that it was supposedly “in line with the international law” as it was a “special case”. This was one of the firsthand accounts of what the wanton “rules-based world order” is. The result has been that this illegal NATO-backed entity became a safe haven for all sorts of illegal activities.
Since then, as per usual, NATO’s support for various kinds of ultraradical groups and organizations has started backfiring. Namely, the Albanian narco-terrorist groups that were directly supported by NATO are now spreading like a plague among the most prominent members of the belligerent alliance, particularly the UK. Whether it’s drug smuggling, forced prostitution, gunrunning or radical Islamic terrorism (including the sending of fighters to NATO-backed terrorist groups in Syria and elsewhere), the UK is getting the “full service”. Hundreds of thousands of Albanians have moved to the UK since the 1990s and tens of thousands of them are still entering the country illegally.
This illegal immigration includes people from both Albania and the NATO-occupied Serbian province of Kosovo and Metohia. While the actual numbers are nearly impossible to determine, current statistics show that tens of thousands of Albanians in the UK are members of countless ethnic gangs that are engaged in all of the aforementioned criminal activities across England, particularly London. They usually enter the UK on small boats coming from France, representing roughly 30% of the total illegal arrivals in 2022, according to police estimates. Albanian asylum applications last year stood at approximately 16,000, which was a 300% increase in comparison to 2021.
The official data was released by the UK’s Ministry of the Interior, based on the data collected by the Migration Observatory. Still, the actual numbers could be several times higher. The data has also caused political upheaval in the UK and contributed to additional pressure on the government under Prime Minister Rishi Sunak. UK authorities launched yet another anemic campaign to “deter migrants” by placing banners in their countries of origin that read: “If you enter the UK illegally, you risk being detained and deported.” The banners were set up in Albania in late June and early July, but resulted in no more than ridicule from Albanian criminals.
Worse yet, various leftist and “human rights” groups protested the move, calling it “xenophobic” and “useless”. According to their “logic”, if the government wants to put an end to organized crime and suppress gangs, it must “create safer ways for refugees to seek asylum”. Still, these Albanian gangs have a lot of influence, even in police and justice departments. The UK’s National Crime Agency (NCA) revealed in mid-May that hundreds of lawyers are linked to a human trafficking network originating in Albania. These networks are also directly connected to drug smuggling, which itself is a major part of prostitution rings run by Albanian criminal organizations based in the UK and other countries.
According to the Epoch Times, Albanian narco-terrorists now dominate the UK’s cocaine market. In an interview with Tony Saggers, former head of the NCA’s Drugs Threat and Intelligence Department, the Epoch Times revealed that Albanian gangsters have considerable control over the UK’s booming drugs trade. Several months ago, even the UN warned that Albanian narco-terrorists are “exerting excessive control of the UK’s drug trade — with the ability to ship in huge illicit consignments of cocaine via southeast England seaports”. The UN’s Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) said in its 2023 report that migration from Albania has allowed gangs to set up in key cities across Europe and take over drug trafficking networks.
The UNODC also stated: “The important destination of the UK, where Albanian-speaking groups have also been assessed to exert considerable control across the drug market, is also supplied to a large extent via ‘roll-on, roll-off’ freight reaching ports in the southeast of the UK from nearby European ports.”
In a very similar manner to how NATO (particularly the UK) handled ultraradical groups such as Al Qaeda, causing a surge in terrorist attacks, as well as the emergence of numerous other similar terrorist groups, staunch support for Albanian extremism has resulted in almost identical disastrous consequences. The only difference is that these Albanian narco-terrorists have managed to gain a stronger foothold through various criminal activities, particularly drug smuggling, something that even Al Qaeda considered immoral. Still, as the UK directly participated in the creation of this Albanian monstrosity, the way this has backfired cannot be considered anything but a well-deserved poetic justice.
Source: infobrics.com
Image source: infobrics.com
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.
Nuclear War is on the Drawing Board of the Pentagon. Deploying “Conventional dual-capable and nuclear fighters”
By Manlio Dinucci
Dear Readers, Please forward this important article by Manlio Dinucci.
The World is at a dangerous crossroads.
US-NATO is preparing to wage nuclear war.
***
The United States has begun a training programme for the Ukrainian Air Force in the use of F-16 fighters. Several European NATO countries participate in this programme: Denmark, Holland, Poland, Norway, Belgium, and Portugal. Other countries have offered to help with the training. The same countries will supply Ukraine with F-16 fighters. They are conventional dual-capable and nuclear fighters.
An F-16 aircraft was used in the B61-12 nuclear bomb test firing, which the US is already deploying in Italy, Germany, Belgium and the Netherlands. Probably, the B61-12 bombs are also supplied by the USA to Poland: Polish F-16 fighters have been participating in NATO nuclear attack exercises since 2014.
Vladimir Kozin – chief expert of the Moscow Political-Military Studies Centre – declares, in an interview on Grandangolo TV programme, that there is a deep suspicion based on precise facts, that US nuclear weapons have also been deployed in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia, or could be rapidly sent to their territories and also to that of Poland.
These countries participate in the “Baltic air patrol“, close to Russian territory, with dual conventional and nuclear capability aircraft. In addition, US strategic bombers, certified to carry nuclear weapons, are engaged in “exercises” over the Baltic Sea and other areas adjacent to Russian territory,
After having unsuccessfully proposed negotiations to the USA and NATO to reduce the risk of a nuclear conflict in Europe, Moscow is deploying tactical nuclear weapons in Belarus in a position close to the US-NATO nuclear bases in Europe in agreement with Minsk.
To Grandangolo’s question:
“Do the tactical nuclear weapons deployed by Russia in Belarus have a range beyond Poland and therefore constitute a deterrent to US nuclear weapons deployed in Italy and other European countries?”,
Vladimir Kozin replies:
“Yes, Russian tactical nuclear weapons that will be deployed in Belarus and possibly in the Kaliningrad region and the Crimean Peninsula can achieve various military objectives in Poland, Italy and many other European NATO member countries.”
The US-NATO escalation against Russia brings Europe ever closer to the threshold of nuclear war. The political-media complex falls a curtain of silence on all this as not to alarm European public opinion and prevent it from reacting.
There’s no indication London will stop escalating, as it’s now at the forefront of the initiative to deliver F-16 fighter jets to theNeo-Nazi junta. Moscow is well aware of this and has made efforts to communicate with the UK, but to no avail. London’s rabid Russophobia seems to be clouding its judgment, leaving Russia with no other option but to just cut contact.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
There’s hardly a shortage of Russophobia in the political West, whether it’s the previously latent one or the much more blatant hatred unashamedly demonstrated in recent times. In most countries dominated by the United States this has become the “new normal” since February 24, 2022. However, of all Washington DC’s allies and satellite states/vassals, there’s one that makes even such endemically Russophobic countries like Poland or the Baltic states seem “moderate” – the United Kingdom.
In recent announcements, the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said that it could completely cut diplomatic ties with the UK over its extremely escalatory actions such as the delivery of ever more advanced and longer-range weapons to the Kiev regime. In a statement for Russia’s RT, published on Friday, the Russian MFA cited London’s significant and ever-growing meddling in Ukraine, as well as other actions aimed against Russia, particularly when it comes to arming and directly assisting the Neo-Nazi junta forces. Although the MFA stated that cutting ties with the UK might be an “extreme measure”, it was left without virtually any other option, so this move is being considered very seriously.
“The severing of diplomatic ties with the UK would be an ‘extreme measure’, but [Russia] could end up taking the step considering London’s significant involvement in the Ukraine conflict,” the Russian MFA warned on Friday.
On May 18, The Wall Street Journal published a report claiming that “UK special forces from the British Army’s SAS [Special Air Service] and SRR [Special Reconnaissance Regiment] regiments and the Navy’s SBS [Special Boat Service] units are operating very close to the front lines in Ukraine”. The WSJ presented the report in a way that indicates these actions constitute a supposed “split” in policy with the US, as Washington DC has allegedly “held back sending special forces to directly assist the Ukrainians on the front lines of fighting”. However, such claims are rather laughable, especially when considering numerous reports about American special forces and intelligence assets operating in Ukraine.
Worse yet, intelligence sources are adamant
that special services operators sent by the US are directly supporting the Kiev regime forces, including by directing their attacks on not just the Russian military, but also targets deep within Russia. The WSJ report implies that the only supposed difference between the US and UK special forces and intelligence assets is that those sent by London directly take part in hostilities on the frontlines while their American counterparts “only provide advisory services”. What’s more, the aforementioned UK special forces are believed to be directly involved in planning and assisting cross-border sabotage operations and terrorist attacks, including the latest oneagainst civilians in the Belgorod oblast (region).
When asked by RT about these controversial (to say the least) reports, the Russian MFA stated: “[Moscow] is well aware of consistent efforts by London aimed at providing military assistance to the Neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.”
“The UK’s support includes the supply of domestically produced and foreign military hardware to Ukraine, the training of Ukrainian troops in Britain and elsewhere in Europe, intelligence sharing, consulting support and likely participation in the operational-tactical planning by the [Ukrainian] military, including sabotage, other operations, direct provision of cyber-security, [and] deployment of mercenaries,” the Russian MFA said in an official statement, further adding: “We can’t rule out that the British participated in the planning, organization and support of terrorist attacks carried out by the Kiev regime on the territory of Russia, including through the provision of intelligence information.”
Deborah Bronnert, the UK ambassador to Russia, has been summoned several times by the Russian government that demanded explanations of London’s unadulterated enmity. However, the policy of escalating confrontation with Moscow, started under former prime minister Boris Johnson, seems to be going on unabated. According to various sources, during the first several months of Russia’s counteroffensive against NATO aggression in Europe Johnson even actively worked to prevent peace talk initiatives between Russia and the Kiev regime, some of which could have stopped the conflict from escalating and causing further bloodshed. Worse yet, the former UK PM also personally and repeatedly urged the Neo-Nazi junta frontman Volodymyr Zelensky “not to give an inch of compromise with the Russians”.
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 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.
Americans think they’re free and they argue about the constitution and politics nonstop. Yet nothing is further from the truth and America remains subservient to the Crown of England.
Another big lie that continues to circulate in America is that it was founded as a Christian nation. While many of it’s people may have been Christian, it’s founders were NOT. All of that and more is in today’s video and I’m positive it will make some of you quite angry at me. So be it, the truth is the truth whether we like it or not and opinions don’t matter, only facts.
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.
An NHS whistleblower, who wishes to remain anonymous, has come forward with allegations that the NHS hospitals were not overwhelmed during the Covid-19 pandemic, as was reported by authorities and the mainstream media.
The whistleblower also confirmed that the little care given throughout the pandemic amounted to negligence, and that the government and NHS bosses essentially instructed staff to let people die, or in some cases kill them through the ‘End of Life Care’ programme and falsely label the deaths as being due to Covid-19.
This individual referred to as Dr. John, has worked in minor injuries and illness centres as well as in a primary care role throughout the pandemic.
Dr. John claims that he has “seen this mess evolve from the very beginning of the pandemic” and that hospitals were actually extremely quiet and almost empty during the first lockdown.
“I used to see an average of 20 patients per day, that dropped to 1 – 2 patients during the first lockdown. I have even witnessed an elderly lady with horrific broken bones come into the hospital three weeks after her accident as she was too scared of catching coronavirus to visit the hospital sooner. In the end, the pain overcame the fear.
“I have also assessed people with chest pains in their homes who would not go for further assessment as they were so scared of ‘the virus’ they would rather chance a heart attack than the infection or the loneliness of going to the hospital alone.”
NHS statistics certainly back up Dr John’s claims.
We examined the data for A&E attendance in the months of April (Lockdown 1) and November (Lockdown 2) for 2020 and compared this with April and November in 2018 and 2019 which showed A&E attendance during the first lockdown was 57% down on the previous year, and A&E attendance during lockdown 2 was 31% down on the previous year.
2018 – April – 1,984,369 attended A&E / November – 2,036,847 attended A&E
2019 – April – 2,112,165 attended A&E / November – 2,143,505 attended A&E
2020 – April – 916,581 attended A&E / November – 1,485,132 attended A&E
This significant drop in attendance suggests that people were too scared to visit the hospital due to the fear propaganda perpetuated in the mainstream media.
Furthermore, Dr. John also describes how changes in care policies have led to patients not receiving proper follow-up care, resulting in negative outcomes for patients and their families.
He states that usual follow-up visits were not done and parents were removing casts from their children’s broken limbs, “I dread to think the state of some of their limbs,”.
He also mentioned that a change in care policies led to one 80+–year-old woman being permanently disabled.
He describes visiting an elderly patient who had only had a single face-to-face physio follow-up and a single follow-up via phone call following a hip operation. He found her in a bedridden state, unable to transfer to a commode, her dignity taken away.
“I recall visiting one patient a female in her 80’s. She’d only had a single face-to-face physio follow-up and a single follow-up via phone call following a hip operation. I found her laid in her mess on incontinence pads, her dignity taken because she was bed bound with a fixed rotated leg, unable to transfer to a commode. Her family were extremely upset”.
The demise of the NHS didn’t just affect Dr John’s patients though, it also affected him personally as he lost a family member to cancer during the alleged pandemic due to not being given the required care.
“He was given 7 years to live with his illness, he lasted just 1 year in the new NHS system.
“I’ve also witnessed the desperation of families witnessing their own relatives dying sooner than they should have due to the lack of professional care that should have been provided. It has been a very sad year in which I have witnessed the demise of the health service.
“I have also seen stroke patients sent home without being given any follow-up care. I also know of a triage policy in which staff were forced to send potentially seriously ill people home on the premise of giving them a call if their condition worsened”.
This testimony from an NHS staff member suggests that the public was being lied to regarding the official narrative of the NHS being overwhelmed during the pandemic.
It highlights the negative impact of misinformation and fear propaganda on the public’s perception of the situation, leading to people avoiding seeking medical treatment for fear of contracting the virus.
Additionally, it also highlights the negative impact of changes in care policies, leading to patients not receiving proper follow-up care and negative outcomes for patients and their families.
A fact that is also backed up by a document nicknamed ‘The Death Document’ that was published by NICE, an executive non-departmental public body, sponsored by the Department of Health and Social Care.
As well as a mountain of evidence that the UK Government authorised the essential “mass murder” of the elderly and vulnerable by Midazolam injection and then told the public Covid-19 was to blame.
Between 2 March and 12 June 2020, 18,562 residents of care homes in England died with COVID-19, including 18,168 people aged 65 and over, representing almost 40% of all deaths involving COVID-19 in England during this period.
This is a significant number considering that during the same period, 28,186 “excess deaths” were recorded in care homes in England, representing a 46% increase compared with the same period in previous years.
A number of decisions and policies adopted by authorities at the national and local level in the UK violated care home residents’ rights to life, to health, and to non-discrimination.
Suspension of regular oversight procedures for care homes by the statutory regulating body, the Care Quality Commission (CQC), and the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman.
These actions by authorities contributed to the high number of deaths among care home residents during the pandemic.
It is also stated that serious illness in Covid-19 presents pneumonia and accompanying respiratory insufficiency.
Therefore, typical symptoms include breathlessness, cough, weakness and fever. It is also noted that people who suffer deteriorating respiratory failure and who do not receive intensive care, develop acute respiratory distress syndrome with severe breathlessness.
Midazolam injection may cause serious or life-threatening breathing problems such as shallow, slowed, or temporarily stopped breathing that may lead to permanent brain injury or death. You should only receive this medication in a hospital or doctor’s office that has the equipment that is needed to monitor your heart and lungs and to provide life-saving medical treatment quickly if your breathing slows or stops. Your doctor or nurse will watch you closely after you receive this medication to make sure that you are breathing properly.
The warning states that this medication should only be given in a hospital or doctor’s office that has the necessary equipment to monitor the patient’s heart and lungs and provide life-saving treatment if needed.
The question is therefore raised as to why the “Death Document” published in April 2020 instructs doctors to treat Covid-19 patients suffering a disease hat allegedly affects the respiratory system with Midazolam, a drug that affects the respiratory system.
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.
Germany and Japan revive WWII alliance with new military cooperation.
Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher
On March 18, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Tokyo and promised Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida that their countries would strengthen military cooperation, even by sending German ships and planes to the Pacific region. Then, only three days later – and a day after Chinese leader Xi Jinping met with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin in Moscow – Kishida made a surprise trip to Kiev and met with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Kishida even visited the town of Bucha, the site of an infamous fake news campaign of alleged Russian war crimes.
The visit of the Japanese prime minister to the Ukrainian capital was undoubtedly timed to be immediately after the visit of Scholz to Tokyo and to nearly coincide with the Xi-Putin meeting, a clear expression that Japan is now fully behind the Western bloc in opposing Russia and China.
In a joint statement, Germany and Japan said that they will work on establishing “a legal framework for bilateral defence and security cooperation activities,” including on ways to protect critical infrastructures, trade routes and to secure future supply of sustainable energy.
For his part, Kishida said that the agreement with Germany was to “counter economic coercion, state-led attempts to illegally acquire technology and non-market practices,” an obvious reference to China.
With Japan embroiled in several disputes with China, and Germany pursuing a policy of aggression against Russia, it is rather surprising that they are teaming up to expand their hostile efforts considering their limited capabilities for global power projection, especially when compared to Russia and China.
None-the-less, First Deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Emine Dzheppa, said the country was “happy to welcome” the Japanese premier in a way as if his visit was a gamechanger.
“This historic visit is a sign of solidarity and strong cooperation between Ukraine and Japan,” she tweeted. “We are grateful to Japan for its strong support and contribution to our future victory.”
This is obviously just another opportunity for a photoshoot. Japan has increasingly become hostile against Russia and China, and by Kishida visiting Kiev to take his photo alongside Zelensky, he is signalling to the West that Japan is prepared to do its part for Ukraine if they will do their part against China.
Tokyo’s decision will please the US, however, it is Germany’s reaction that is most telling. Although Kishida’s visit to Kiev was certainly a surprise to the unsuspecting public, undoubtedly Scholz would have been notified about the impending trip, perhaps from even before he arrived in Tokyo.
None-the-less, despite Germany and Japan having seemingly revived their World War II era alliance, it will do very little to deter China from defending its interests in the East and South China Seas or Russia from its military operation in Ukraine. This is for the simple fact that they, even in alliance, do not have the capability to challenge either country, let alone if Russia and China were in military alliance.
Although Japan is rapidly militarising, it is incalculably behind the Russian and Chinese militaries. The German military is in an even more pathetic state. Germany once had a very powerful military that was capable of instigating two world wars, but today the Bundeswehr only has 264,400 personnel, including 183,200 soldiers and 81,200 civil servants.
For comparison, even in 1989 the Bundeswehr numbered 486,000 personnel. After the reunification of the country in 1990, the great disarmament began.
Today, the German military has been exposed for having a severe lack of combat readiness, in terms of personnel numbers and the condition of military equipment. Germany not only faces serious problems in ensuring the combat effectiveness of its army, but also in the production of new military equipment and weapons. Although additional funds have been allocated for this, German experts still doubt that this will help.
Following the Russian intervention in the Ukraine conflict, the Bundeswehr made serious efforts to support the Ukrainian military. From January 2022 to March 13, 2023, arms, ammunition, and military equipment worth 2.7 billion euros were delivered to Ukraine. In addition, the Bundeswehr was forced to reinforce weaker NATO allies directly bordering Russia. About 1,000 German soldiers were sent to Lithuania and formed a fighting group with Lithuanian and Polish troops.
Yet, despite the pathetic condition of the German military, Scholz has promised to send forces to help Japan confront China. Although the statement is bold, it does raise the question on how many ships, soldiers, tanks and planes the Bundeswehr can send to the Pacific several thousands of kilometres away when a war is waging just a little more than a thousand kilometres away in Eastern Europe.
Sending such a force could signify a German presence in the region. But to say that a thousand or so German soldiers could possibly make a difference against the People’s Liberation Army of China is ludicrous, even if alongside Japan and the US. In this way, although the German-Japanese alliance is not a credible threat to Russia and China, it is an expression of intention that they will collectively pressure and provoke the two countries.
Drago Bosnic, independent geopolitical and military analyst
It is now virtually common knowledge that the political West’s attempts to destroy the Russian economy through sanctions have failed spectacularly. However, what the Western mainstream propaganda machine is fighting tooth and nail to accomplish is suppressing the fact that the sanctions war has also backfired and is now ravaging Western economies, especially those whose prosperity was largely based on access to cheap Russian energy. This is particularly true for Germany, the European Union’s industrial powerhouse which is now suffering the consequences of its suicidal subservience to Euro-Atlantic Russophobia.
However, what’s much less commonly acknowledged is the fact that there are many countries that don’t seem to be too dependent on Russian energy, but are in fact suffering as a result of the sanctions war against Moscow. This is especially true for the United Kingdom, whose political establishment is one of the most fervently Russophobic in NATO. With London being one of the Kiev regime’s key backers, it would be expected to see the former colonial superpower much less dependent on any commodities coming from Russia. Still, Moscow’s status as the world’s premier energy superpower makes this extremely difficult (if not impossible) to achieve.
In order to tackle the mounting energy security issues, exacerbated not only by anti-Russian sanctions, but also by the economic fallout of the COVID-19 pandemic, the UK is now resorting to finding loopholes to circumvent its own sanctions against the Eurasian giant. The escalation of the Ukrainian crisis has led to a dramatic reshaping of European (and, indeed, global) energy markets, with the political West declaring its intention to cut dependency on Russian energy imports. Expectedly, the UK was at forefront of this effort and was even hailed as “one of the most successful countries” in achieving this after it officially stopped importing Russian oil and coal, while also imposing an outright ban on Russian natural gas.
By October last year, London’s imports of Russian energy were officially cut to almost nothing, with approximately $2.5 million of oil purchases and virtually no coal or natural gas from Russia. However, recent revelations cast serious doubt on these numbers, indicating that the UK’s claims mostly boil down to simple semantics. According to reports by various sources, the UK is not importing oil (directly) from Russia, but it still keeps importing Russian oil. This is possible thanks to third countries (India being one of them) that are now re-exporting Russian-sourced oil to the UK and others in the political West. This has provided a very convenient back door for imports of Russian oil into the country, while also being quite lucrative for third parties.
According to Kpler, India’s Jamnagar refinery, operating on the west coast of Gujarat, imported 215 shipments of Russian crude in 2022, which represents a 400% increase in comparison to 2021. At the same time, British companies have imported approximately ten million barrels of diesel and other refined oil products from Jamnagar since February 2022, which is an increase of more than 250% of what they bought from the Indian refinery during the previous year. The data indicates that this can only be explained by a much larger share of Russian oil being refined and then exported to the UK and elsewhere.
More importantly for Britain, this move is blunting the disastrous effects of energy shortages in the UK, a problem that is now affecting many other countries that have been forced to impose sanctions on Russia, often coerced into it by London itself. British companies have simply replaced imports directly from Russia with imports from third-party refineries that are buying Russian crude. Although there’s nothing illegal in such a framework, it’s still quite indicative of the UK government’s hypocrisy. London has been exerting tremendous pressure on others to stop importing Russian energy (Hungary perhaps being the best example of this), while secretly doing just the opposite.
Prior to Moscow’s counteroffensive against NATO aggression, India wasn’t particularly known for importing Russian energy, while it was even less common for its oil refineries to process Russian crude. Indian companies have always been oriented towards exporting refined oil to Europe, but their supplies to the old continent have skyrocketed as the demand is still there and someone needs to fill the gap. This is quite profitable for India, as prices in the EU are quite high, while Russia is supplying the Asian giant with record amounts of discounted crude. Meanwhile, British companies are turning a blind eye to this fact, as they need guaranteed energy supplies, so everybody seems content with this arrangement – except Kiev.
Oleg Ustenko, one of Volodymyr Zelensky’s advisers, is accusing the UK companies of “exploiting weaknesses in the sanctions regime”.
“The UK must close the loopholes that undermine support for Ukraine by allowing bloody fossil fuels to continue flowing across our borders. About one in five barrels of the crude oil that they process is Russian. A big chunk of that diesel they produce now will be based on Russian crude oil,” Ustenko stated.
It remains to be seen if the UK will ever respond to these demands, as they don’t seem to be particularly important to London. It’s quite clear that even if one of the Neo-Nazi junta’s top overlords were to proceed with closing the existing loopholes, the idea that the UK won’t find new ones is downright laughable, as it would’ve never tried bypassing its own sanctions in the first place.
Ahmed Adel, Cairo-based geopolitics and political economy researcher
The Prime Ministers of Japan and the United Kingdom signed an agreement on January 11 to formalise a military alliance between their two countries. The agreement, signed by Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, stipulates joint military exercises, permits the deployment of troops in their countries, and determines the legal status of these personnel while they are abroad.
At the signing ceremony, Sunak said: “In the past 12 months, we have written the next chapter of the relationship between the UK and Japan – accelerating, building, and deepening our ties. We have so much in common: a shared outlook on the world, a shared understanding of the threats and challenges we face, and a shared ambition to use our place in the world for global good, ensuring our countries prosper for generations to come.”
As for challenges and threats, London and Tokyo believe they come mainly from China and Russia, and to a lesser extent North Korea.
James Crisp, a correspondent for The Telegraph, wrote: “Rishi Sunak and Fumio Kishida, the Japanese prime minister, signed a defence agreement in London that will provide the bedrock for large-scale drills to face down Xi Jinping, Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-un.”
For her part, Hikariko Ono, Kishida’s press secretary, said “Unfortunately, we’ve been seeing that China and Russia have been conducting joint military drills very frequently.” She then criticised North Korea’s missile tests.
More alarmingly for Moscow-Tokyo relations, the Telegraph reported that the new deal will allow Japanese troops to be based in the UK where they could help train Ukrainian soldiers alongside other nations, as well as British troops to be stationed in Japan. Despite the fact that the individual military power of China, Russia and North Korea far exceeds that of Japan, none of these countries are threatening an invasion or making territorial claims – in fact, it is Japan that has a longer history of attacking or threatening these countries.
However, Japan can attempt to justify its militarisation as it does neighbour three nuclear powers, two of which are ranked #2 (Russia) and #3 (China) according to Global Fire Power’s 2023 Military Strength Ranking. Proving that China, North Korea, and Russia also pose a threat to the UK is even more difficult considering the vast geographical distances.
Not long ago, under the David Cameron government (2010-2016), relations between London and Beijing were described as being in a “Golden Age” because of close economic ties. When Donald Trump entered the White House in 2017, Britain quickly submitted to his anti-China policy. Like Washington, the British attacked the communist ideology of China’s ruling party and alleged human rights violations. Sunak also emphasised the common values of the British and Japanese ruling classes, which are conservative liberalism and anti-communism.
However, it was not just the interests of defending Western values that prompted London to sign a new military agreement with Tokyo. The military cooperation agreement with Japan confirms that the UK intends to reclaim a strong presence in the Asia-Pacific region. It can be said that this has been somewhat successful in the military front as British warships and aircraft repeatedly and provocatively pass through the South China Sea and Taiwan Strait, and then into Japanese ports.
London also intends to expand its economic presence in the Asia-Pacific region. The British government has repeatedly signalled that they want their country to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP).
In this way, a new military alliance is being formed with the clear objective of opposing some sovereign states. It is recalled that Tokyo signed a defence alliance with Australia in 2022 and it is likely that the Japanese government will sign similar agreements with other Western countries.
The US encourages close military ties between Japan and Britain as it serves its wider strategy to oppose and contain China and Russia in the Pacific region. It is for this reason that the AUKUS (Australia, UK, and USA) formation was established in September 2021, which was preceded by the foundation of QUAD (Australia, India, Japan, and USA) in 2017.
Washington encourages enhanced defence cooperation between London and Tokyo. A greater British military presence in the Asia-Pacific region and a Japan with a more powerful military means that the US will waste less resources. It will also advance the US’ strategy to confront and contain China and Russia.
However, if stability and security worsen as a result of the British-Japanese military agreement, regional countries, particularly those in Southeast Asia, will begin opposing such an alliance. This could have the opposite effect from Washington’s anticipated hope of having Japan and the UK cooperate in policing the western Pacific, especially as regional states are unwilling to cut ties with China and Russia.
