Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

Does anyone still seriously think that Russia and Israel aren’t allies

Israel’s latest bombing raid on Syria is confirmation that the Putin-Netanyahu Summit in Sochi was a lot more successful than some Alt-Media voices have led people to believe.

Andrew Korybko

Published

on

9,869 Views

There’s no use for anyone to seriously deny it anymore at this stage – Russia and Israel are allies in Syria, and Tel Aviv’s latest bombing raid proves it. None of Russia’s impressive world-class and state-of-the-art S-400 anti-air defense units were activated to stop it, but this shouldn’t be a surprise for those who have even an elementary understanding of contemporary Russia-Israeli relations. While it’s true that Moscow used to oppose Israel during the days of the Cold War, that all changed ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and the two sides are closer nowadays than at any time in their history. The author wrote about the specifics of this high-level but largely unspoken-about partnership in a series of articles earlier this year that are listed below, which he recommends that the reader at least skim through if they’re totally unfamiliar with this topic:

21 March: “Israel And Russia Are NOT On The Verge Of War. They Are Allies!”

22 March: “What Russia Said To Israel After The Palmyra Raid

6 June: “Russia’s Mideast Energy Diplomacy: Boom Or Bust?

27 June: “Syria’s 10-Day Countdown Begins

10 July: “A Syrian ‘Ceasefire’ For Whom?

The prevailing idea is that the Russian “deep state” (permanent military, intelligence, and diplomatic bureaucracies) is joined at the hip with Israel because of its ethnic diaspora in the latter which connects them both, and that this in turn set the firm foundation for the multidimensional development of this relationship into the eventual military and strategic spheres. It might be strange to countenance the idea of Israel being Russia’s ally in Syria when Tel Aviv worked together with the US and other countries to create the very same terrorism inside that triggered Moscow’s intervention, but it’s here where it’s worthwhile to quote a relevant passage from the author’s 27 June analysis:

“Moscow is strictly abiding by its anti-terrorist military mandate in Syria and isn’t interested whatsoever in doing anything more than fighting Daesh, but it’s just that there was a prevailing unstated perception surrounding its commitments to the country that made many people believe that it was there to implicitly oppose all of the US and “Israel’s” geostrategic objectives.

 While there’s veritably an overlap between Russia’s mission in defeating Daesh and therefore destroying Washington and Tel Aviv’s initial plans in Syria, the fact that Moscow already achieved most of that original mission and its purported “adversaries” have since adapted their strategies in response to instead promote the “federalization” (internal partition) of the country as their “Plan B” shouldn’t be taken to mean that Russia will also expand its responsibilities in order to once again oppose those two actors.”

There is no scenario, whatsoever, that Russia will directly oppose Israel in Syria, and to the contrary, it welcomes its occasional “surgical strikes” there because they play into Moscow’s strategy to indirectly counter Iran. Nobody in Russia will ever openly say it, and all public statements by official representatives claim the complete opposite, but Russia is developing a growing sense of distrust towards Iran and vice-verse, and this has been hitherto unfolding in Syria largely away from the media eye. A keen observer, however, would rightly note that each of Israel’s attacks in the Arab Republic were done under the pretext of attacking some sort of Iranian or Iranian-allied unit or infrastructure, and that Russia never lifted a finger to oppose or condemn it.

The reasons for this are several, but the most important has to do with Russia’s foreign policy progressives wanting to take advantage of their country’s dominant position in Syria in order to establish and strengthen new international partnerships, all with the intent of fulfilling their envisioned 21st-century geostrategic role in becoming the supreme balancing force in Eurasia. This strategy and the “deep state” faction driving it were described more in detail in the author’s Oriental Review analysis titled “Russia’s Foreign Policy Progressives Have Trumped The Traditionalists”, which can be summarized as Russia clinching non-traditional partnerships such as the one with Israel in order to “balance out” the traditional ones that it has with countries like Iran.

This doesn’t mean that Russia is “anti-Iranian” per se, but just that the grand strategy of the two civilization-states contradicts one another on certain fronts such as the one related to Tehran’s hoped-for post-war role in Syria vis-à-vis its hated Israeli rival, which as anyone who has even cursory knowledge about this knows is designed to strengthen Iran’s overall position against Israel through its own forces and those of its allied militia Hezbollah. Russia, however, doesn’t seem to agree with this policy because it believes that it will only “trigger” more Israeli raids into Syria which could eventually contribute to more destabilization in the country and inadvertently endanger the safety of Russia’s forces there, whether through direct action or the indirect facilitation of terrorism.

Although it may pain many in the Alt-Media to read, Russia’s actions in passively allowing Israel to bomb what it claims (whether accurately or not) are Iranian-related infrastructure and troops (whether its own or allied) in Syria indicate that Moscow believes that Tehran “deserved it”, or put more gently, that Iran is “provoking” Israel through its presence in western and southern Syria and that Tel Aviv is therefore “justified” in militarily responding to it with “surgical strikes”. This explanation shouldn’t be taken as the author’s personal endorsement of this policy, but just as an empirical observation acquired from analyzing all of the Israeli bombing raids on Syria over just this year alone. The implicit cooperation, albeit even if passive, that Moscow extends to Tel Aviv in this regard might also have to do with its decision makers wanting to keep Iran on the overall strategic defensive so that the existing support that Russia provides to it acquires a relatively more heightened importance by comparison.

For better or for worse, Russia believes that Iran needs it more than the reverse, and that no matter how begrudgingly it might do so, Tehran will continue to cooperate with Moscow no matter what happens because it has no possibility to replace it in the strategic spheres of nuclear energy cooperation and the Syrian peace process, et al. Moreover, as the troika of Israel, the US, and Saudi Arabia (conceptualized by the author as “Cerberus”) pile on the pressure against their rival and ceaselessly work to encourage their partners to do so as well, the Russian vector of Iranian economic policy will continue to look more attractive as a “pressure valve”, especially in view of the planned North-South Transport Corridor that both sides are working on together with India and Azerbaijan. So long as Russia isn’t directly (key word) hostile to Iran, whether in Syria or elsewhere, and continues to rely on Israel as its “cat’s paw” out of both Moscow and Tel Aviv’s self-interested reasons in doing so, there’s little reason to expect Tehran to “play hardball” in downscaling its existing cooperation with Russia.

Moreover, to touch upon the aforementioned geostrategic contradictions between Russia and Iran, if Iran were to successfully fulfill its grand strategic vision of establishing a “Resistance Arc” between itself, Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon, then Russia would lose its newfound role as the supreme balancing force in this pivotal space. Rather, Moscow reasons, it’s better for Russia to remain the most powerful actor here in order for it to cut deals with all partners that could potentially play out to its larger benefit, such as in this case possibly participating in the Israeli-Cypriot-Greek pipeline to Europe. This was described in the author’s earlier-mentioned work about “Russia’s Mideast Energy Diplomacy: Boom Or Bust?”, and the idea is that joint Russian-Israeli cooperation in countering Iran’s growing post-war role in Syria might be the condition for Moscow’s involvement in this energy project. It could also be reasonably speculated that Russia expects wealthy Israeli businessmen (likely those of Russian background) to invest in their former homeland as part of this quid-pro-quo arrangement in order to help Moscow deal with the Western sanctions against it, which Tel Aviv crucially declined to partake in.

Again, it can’t be emphasized enough how none of this should come as a surprise for objective observers, but it’s just that the Alt-Media Community has been treated to an incessant barrage of “wishful thinking” over the years in coming to actually believe that Russia is somehow “against” Israel in general, and particularly in Syria. A perfect example of this which took place only recently was the premature triumphalism about the purported failure that the Netanyahu-Putin Summit in Sochi allegedly was, though the wisdom of hindsight has now disproven all of that commentary since it’s very likely that the two leaders discussed what would soon thereafter be the Israeli raid on Homs. This allows one to view the oft-repeated analysis that Putin snubbed Netanyahu, and the even more regularly repeated though constantly debunked theory that Russia set up an S-400 “air bubble” against Israel in Syria, as nothing more than an Alt-Media “echo chamber” amplified by Iranian-friendly voices.

The intention in pointing this out isn’t at all to “defend Israel” or “denigrate Iran”, but just to draw attention to the psychology of groupthink which has taken over Alt-Media and frequently leads to the creation of unrealistically high and almost always false hopes, thereby calling into question the professional accuracy of some of the leading forces who constantly promote such views despite being contradicted on countless occasions by the cold hard truth of reality. It’s tacitly understood that there’s a certain “political correctness” involved in denying Russia’s very close and comprehensive strategic partnership with Israel, especially if one is speaking on Mideast-based media platforms that are traditionally friendly or at the very least respectful towards Moscow, but this will have to change if pundits and aspiring analysts genuinely desire to reflect the objective reality of what’s happening in the world and why…unless, of course, they’re content with putting their reputation on the line in order to advance a certain narrative.

DISCLAIMER: The author writes for this publication in a private capacity which is unrepresentative of anyone or any organization except for his own personal views. Nothing written by the author should ever be conflated with the editorial views or official positions of any other media outlet or institution. 

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Paul Kindlon
Member
Paul Kindlon

Russia has -along with Hezbollah and Iran- destroyed Israel’s big plan for Syria. Israel has lost because of Russian involvement. The war over the past 2 years has been literally run by Russian top staff. Where battles were fought and how they were fought –all determined by Russians with Russian technology backed up by the Russian air force. Let’s wait more than 24 hours before we analyze what just happened with this air strike.

Shannon
Guest
Shannon

Agreed – great comment. Syria, Hezbollah, Iran — these are Russia’s allies. The Netanyahu government consists of the Kremlin’s useful idiots. Color that up with all kinds of beautiful “strategic partnership” language if you want.

GlennaMDelp
Guest
GlennaMDelp

until I looked at the bank draft which was of $6661 , I be certain that my brother could truley taking home money in their spare time from their computer. . there aunts neighbour has been doing this 4 only 13 months and recently paid the mortgage on their cottage and got a great new Mini Cooper . view it now
http://www.GoogleFinancial523CashJobsFinderLoad/Home/Wage…...

LeslieWShaw
Guest
LeslieWShaw

Google is paying 97$ per hour! work for few hours and have longer with friends & family!
On tuesday I got a great new Land Rover Range Rover from having earned $8752 this last four weeks.. Its the most-financialy rewarding I’ve had.. It sounds unbelievable but you wont forgive yourself if you don’t check it
!sr54d:
➽➽
➽➽;➽➽ http://GoogleFinancialJobsCash434MarketBoard/GetPay$97/Hour ★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★✫★★:::::!sr144l..,…..

TecumsehUnfaced
Guest
TecumsehUnfaced

Let’s consider that the Israeli attack came through Lebanon, with which Russia has no agreement. Also, consider that the Russians probably recognized this attack was a probe and decided to wait until they could inflict a really crushing defeat. Russians are very patient.

RS
Guest
RS

Russia needs to avoid US/Israel provocations. After the Syrian/Iran victory, Hezbollah(arguably the worlds most battle tested army) will address the Israel issue with the highest trained army and ??? 150K missiles? Not the bottle rockets of old this time. Not a good time to be occupying Gaza. Russia needs to avoid escalation, but they know all this better than me.

lickeyleaks
Guest
lickeyleaks

1 Russia lets Israel do what it wants,we all know Israel & US are in bed together and if Russia attacked Israel planes ect,it would unleash US “Fire & Fury” programme which RF does not need in Syria,it would make matters worse all round.
2 Iran,as above,the same reasons + RF also wants to keep Iran’s anger up against Israel for the future…

Dario
Guest
Dario

apparently the author is obsessed with proving this supposed alliance between Russia and Israel … he ignores the innumerable reasons that explain Russia’s lack of response.

Marija
Guest
Marija

which are?

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal
Marija
Guest
Marija

Could you be more specific which point explains Russian lack of response to Israeli attacks? Because there is none.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

To begin with the article talks about SYRIA’S capabilities to protect its airspace. BTW, it is FIRST the responsibility of the SYRIAN Government to make a response. NOT Russia. ASSAD is the President of Syria. Putin is the President of RUSSIA and he will NEVER usurp the responsibilities of the Syrian Government nor its sovereignty.

Assad ALREADY responded to aggression from Israel in March of this year. http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-03-17/syrian-army-claims-it-shot-down-israeli-jet
https://sputniknews.com/middleeast/201703201051787165-syria-assad-israel-air-defense/

It may be that Assad has already responded to the Israeli attack this month though the reports are unconfirmed. http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/unconfirmed-syrian-forces-shoot-down.html
https://southfront.org/syrian-air-defense-force-fired-s-200-missile-at-israeli-warplanes-over-lebanon-reports/
http://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/syria/1.811219
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-08/israel-launches-air-strikes-syria-and-assads-waiting-game

Brian De Paolo
Guest
Brian De Paolo

As this war tames down and infrastructure is priority…Russia will be sitting on the fence…they know and we know that any action against Israel will bring in the US war hawks…and they have bases all over the area….What if Israel bombs Iranian troops…now thats a problem. I feel Russia tolerates Israel…for a reason…in time Syria, Iraq, Turkey, Iran will be Russian friendlies as I think Russia is also creating this alliance…its no secret who owns the media in the west and who would misconstrue any actions to be geared at Russia….with NATO on there doorstep and the Asian pivot to… Read more »

RS
Guest
RS

American njews?

Jan Blatt
Guest
Jan Blatt

Well I would like to know what Syrian government thinks of this. It’s long time ally allowing Israel to bomb it’s troops whenever it wants. Perhaps even giving permission. Remembering that Israel was supporting Isis and the other terrorists trying to overthrow it, and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocents, this news has burst some of us newly Russian supporters bubble. The belief that many of us had, that Russia was doing the right thing by it’s ally because it was the right thing, was probably wishful thinking and naivety. Posted a similar comment on Duran facebook, page.… Read more »

Bente Petersen
Guest
Bente Petersen

actually not worth comments !!!!

STEVONATRON
Guest
STEVONATRON

There’s a lot of people convinced Russia are the good guys in world politics today. Indeed, I was hoodwinked for some time until I started looking into the truth about Alexander Dugin and Putin’s admiration for his views. As the article above claims, I strongly suspect Russia are in cahoots with Israel and are therefore not in favour of world peace.

Matt Hol
Guest
Matt Hol

bulsit

seby
Guest
seby

Russia is also aware that the USA has been bombing and assisting the mercenary terrorist army against the sovereignty of Syria. Are we to assume because they haven’t nuked Washington DC they are in cahoots with them?

Russia engage in realpolitik, which can involve keeping your enemies even closer than your friends. They do not have the luxury of the author from his comfy chair parading monty python like inquisition charades as political analysis!

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

I agree completely, as my own comment shows. Thanks.

Norman
Guest
Norman

Don’t worry about Bibi. He’ll get his when it’s due.

Herbert Dorsey
Guest
Herbert Dorsey

This author is grasping at straws to make his case. The real reason Russia hasn’t downed U.S. or Israeli jets illegally bombing Syria is that Russia is bending over backward to avoid a war with either superpower. Israel has submarines that can launch intermediate range nuclear armed missiles just about anywhere.

Marija
Guest
Marija

So why doesn’t Israel then level Damascus and have it over with?

Since Russia will be sitting avoiding hot war

Herbert Dorsey
Guest
Herbert Dorsey

A good question. Perhaps Israel learned from its 2006 invasion of Lebanon that air strikes alone will not bring victory. Hesballah routed Israel then, even though Israel was bombing all over Lebanon.

Tony
Guest
Tony

If you’ve noticed, Israel can only bomb targets near the Israeli and Lebanese borders. The Israeli aircraft fire long range weapons and don’t even have to enter Syrian airspace most of the time. Also the Syrian Air-Def network has been significantly weakened during the last 6 years by the loss of many AD bases and equipment

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Actually that has just changed this month significantly for the better and may explain why Israel had to strike using Lebanese air space:
https://thesaker.is/russia-and-syria-create-joint-air-defense-system/
http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/for-israel-and-us-russia-has-closed.html

Marija
Guest
Marija

Your answer does not address the question

JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Generally, the articles that The Duran posts are thoughtful and well-argued. That is the reason I return here. However, this article is an impressive exception to that rule and that standard. Perhaps The Duran published Mr. Korybko’s piece to check to see if its readers are paying attention or to get a little blood flowing in its readership, or worse, this may be an attempt to appear “fair and balanced.” In any case, let’s not mince words: Guys, this analysis is stupid and publishing it is stupid. Russia supports its own interests. Where they coincide with Israeli interests it supports… Read more »

Marija
Guest
Marija

” On the contrary, recently at Sochi, Putin turned down Netanyahu’s
desperate efforts to drive a wedge between Russian and Iranian
interests.”

Remind us of the evidence for that?

Gonzogal
Guest
JNDillard
Guest
JNDillard

Thanks Gonzogal! You saved me some work!

Marija
Guest
Marija

What do you mean Russia allowing Israel si a long standing policy hence that is why Russia and ISrael aren’t allies? Do you hear yourself?

and what I wrote above

“So links that say “israeli interests are well taken care of “shows that
Russia does not cooperate with Israel? Then Israel is allowed to bomb
Syria few days later and that additionally proves Russia and Israel are
not allies despite Putin calling Israel an ally which was published by
Russian media? “

Marija
Guest
Marija

So links that say “israeli interests are well taken care of “shows that Russia does not cooperate with Israel? Then Israel is allowed to bomb Syria few days later and that additionally proves Russia and Israel are not allies despite Putin calling Israel an ally which was published by Russian media?

Can you people be any more pathetic?

pogohere
Guest

The last para is classic Korybko: verbose–it’s one sentence– and a defense of his own position. It’s a shame because he is intelligent and diligent. It seems events have moved beyond his ken, as is true of many analysts who have been helpful in the past.

Sergey Tokarev
Guest
Sergey Tokarev

Quite possibly, this article has been generated by software. It is a proof that AI can’t replace people yet.

FlorianGeyer
Guest
FlorianGeyer

The mere fact that Israel is prodding to cause a response is reason enough not to do so until the situation in Deir Ezzor, Idlib and the Syrian Kurdish areas are resolved.
I feel that Israel will be the last terror nation to fall in this war against Zioniat thievery .
Soon there will be more information and witnesses to the Israeli/US collusion with ISIS and Al Nusra that the Western MSM will not be able to ignore.

Instant gratification may be nice but is often short lived. Waiting until the time is right is far more pleasing.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

An extremely interesting article on Syria’s lack of immediate “response” to the Israeli strike:
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-08/israel-launches-air-strikes-syria-and-assads-waiting-game

FlorianGeyer
Guest
FlorianGeyer

Yes. All the Israelis want in for the SAA or Russia to give the jewboys a bloody nose that will cause a major conflagration and divert much needed resources from clearing the terror gangs from Syria.

A worry of course is if Israel creates a false flag attack and blames that on Hezbollah.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“A worry of course is if Israel creates a false flag attack and blames that on Hezbollah.”

They are trying! Either Hezbollah or the Syrian Government…all you have to see is their comments this week about the site they bombed. Between that and the fake OPCW/UN statements this week shows they have not given up and want to do anything to bring on a full out onslaught.

FlorianGeyer
Guest
FlorianGeyer

Every time the SAA gains the upper hand the same US/Israeli, Nato playbook with silly stories about gas, attacks on peaceful Israel, mass murder etc is used again and again. Its rather like watching an old ‘B’ movie.

Unbelievable 🙂

Sadly all to many citizens in the US,Canada and other NATO countries actually think that the US is a force for good. Opinions are changing BUT only with people who have the ability to analyse and see through the fog of US propaganda.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Well said!

Marija
Guest
Marija

Excellent article. It gives much needed education to all of us who look to get truly informed and educated and not just have our wishful biases confirmed. Thank you Duran!

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

Must have missed the most RECENT attack. When and where exactly was it?

Marija
Guest
Marija

today

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

Golan Heights? So nothing new that it hasnt already been doing for the last half century?

Marija
Guest
Marija

No, in northwestern Syria. Hama
But what are you saying: “It’s okay to bomb Syria if you have been doing that for a long time”?

Marija
Guest
Marija

Syria dude, Syria. Israel has not been bombing Syria until the war started

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

Never heard of Yom Kippur War , “dude”?

Marija
Guest
Marija

That was the war that was over 40 years a ago. 40 years later, now ,Israel started bombing Syria under Russian umbrella.

I can spell it out for you any way you want, and you can try to pretend it’s not what is.

Jorge Bizarro
Guest
Jorge Bizarro

There is another very plausible side to this story being ignored (may be voluntarily by Russia)…I call it the “Exocet” effect. Russia -like many others -uses third party circuits, components to build their SS300 SS400 missiles and other military equipment (like the US uses many ‘made in China’ components). It happens that they probably use INTEL processors and these ARE MADE IN ISRAEL and posses many back doors. What I think is happening is that these missiles are prevented from targeting Israeli planes. Iran found this some month ago with their SW300 and that is why they stop buying them… Read more »

TecumsehUnfaced
Guest
TecumsehUnfaced

Israel steals everybody’s technology and re-sells it.

sepheronx
Guest
sepheronx

Not even close. They use DSP cores and predominantly Russian processors. Nice tin foil hat theory

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal
l3leach
Guest
l3leach

Great analysis, though ally might not be the right word for their relationship.

Helen4Yemen
Guest
Helen4Yemen

The prevailing idea is that the Russian “deep state” … is joined at
the hip with Israel because of its ethnic diaspora in the latter which
connects them both.”

What “ethnic diaspora”. I am lost, what is the author trying to say?

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

Many Russian Jews migrated to Israel

Helen4Yemen
Guest
Helen4Yemen

But the Russians do not consider them one of their own, do they?

Punisher 1
Guest
Punisher 1

I have to agree largely (as much as I hate it ) with the author. Putin has never shown any anti-Jewish or anti-zionist feeling that I can think off. And Russian Jews hold vast power inside Russia. Most of the powerful oligarchs in Russia (at least 8 out of 10) are of Jewish background.Many of Putin’s closest friends are Jewish Russians. And easily over half the 5th column leadership in Russia is of Jewish background.Those are just facts that can’t be denied.As much as I and others would “like” him to oppose Israel,I don’t see it. That doesn’t mean he… Read more »

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

You are apparently the only open eyed cool headed person here not commenting based on emotion.Great and truthful comment

Matt Hol
Guest
Matt Hol

His whole thing about China is BS. China sucks at forign policy

peterkellow
Guest
peterkellow

The article is peppered with phrases like “There’s no use for anyone to seriously deny it anymore…” “this shouldn’t be a surprise for those who have even an elementary understanding…” “there was a prevailing unstated perception…” “A keen observer, however, would rightly note…” “Again, it can’t be emphasized enough how none of this should come as a surprise for objective observers,…” These phrases should be a red flag to “keen observers” [sic] that you are reading junk journalism. Rather than give facts he tries to make you feel stupid if you disagree. Like a lazy journalist he refers you to… Read more »

Marija
Guest
Marija

Perhaps you missed the see entire alt-media industry that lives off telling people nice fairy tales about how Putin is going to crush Zionism and NWO

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

If Russia and Israel were allies:
1. Russia would no longer be under sanctions as a single phone call to Israel buddy could sort everything out overnight.
2. Russia would be able to get Trump to pull his head in and stop his aggressive behaviour towards Russia
3. Assad would have never become chums with Russia, nor invited them into Syria if they were Israeli allies.

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

Geopolitics is more complicated than this bro.Your points here are naive at best

Terry Ross
Guest
Terry Ross

Drop the arrogance and address the comment.

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

that will be a waste of my time..As I said..Naive

Niall
Guest

Andrew, you really need to get out more. I mean that seriously; physical work will do you good! This is another instance of you ‘over-thinking it’. You get ‘idées fixes’, then start ‘fitting the facts around the theory’. Like Pakistan being ‘holy’ to India’s ‘evil’. It’s classic black-and-white thinking.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“There are myriad possible reasons why Russia either doesn’t or can’t block Israeli transgressions”

The first reason is that Russia realizes that it is up to the Syrian Government to decide if it retaliates again as it did in March of this year: http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/03/syria-confirms-shooting-down-one.html

Second, here is an excellent analysis of its position as regards Israels latest strike: http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-09-08/israel-launches-air-strikes-syria-and-assads-waiting-game

hvaiallverden
Guest
hvaiallverden

This article made me almost puke, and the incestuous relationship, will shine thru, and I know Russia again will make the same mistake, once again lead astray, by some obscure and infantile fear of offending the scums of this earth, huh, how pathetic this game is, shows the ugly truth, Russia have no spine, what an shame. And again, the never ending use of narratives I find remarkable, anti-semit, huh, Jesus f…. Christ why do the apologist for ethnic cleansing, always pimp the f…. victim card in every bloody time we debate the terror state Israel. I can tell you… Read more »

santiago
Guest
santiago

The Author uses his own past flawed stories as support for this piece, like if he is desperate to have unmatching pieces match

Daisy Adler
Guest
Daisy Adler

I don’t know about Russia and Israel being allies, but I do know they are NOT enemies. The relations between the two leaders and countries are “au beax fixe”, meaning very good. V.Putin visited twice Israel, and B.Netanyahu was received to Kremlin many times. The diplomatic relations were restored in 1991; the trade exchanges reached $5 billion in 2016. Russian tourists represent 10% of the 3 million tourists visiting Israel each year.

Helen4Yemen
Guest
Helen4Yemen

How much more are the European going to squat on and leech off Arab land?
Palestine is not their grandma’s land, is it? Poland, Lithuania, Russia are.

Helen4Yemen
Guest
Helen4Yemen

1530 THE COMPLETE DIARIES OF THEODOR HERZL

Russian Minister of Finance Witte told Herzl:

“I believe it is the fault of our government. The Jews are too
oppressed. I used to say to the late Emperor Alexander III: ‘Your
Majesty, if it is possible to drown the 6 or 7 million Jews in the
Black Sea, I have absolutely no objection to it. But if it isn’t
possible, we must let them live.’ That has continued to be my view.
I am against further oppression.”
_____________________
Russia and the rest of the European countries were elated with Herzl’s idea to make European Jewry other people’s problem.

Citizen Galactic
Guest
Citizen Galactic

Duh! The recent attack referred to was missiles launched from Israeli planes that were over LEBANESE airspace. So as to specifically avoid being engaged by Syrian/Russian anti-air assets, IMO.
It was a stupid little temper tantrum by Israel and only shows their frustration that their Jihadi buddies in Syria are losing.

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

I have always wondered about 2 things. Firstly, why did Russia take so long to intervene in Syria? Had Russia intervened in Syria a year earlier that war could have been over by now with countless lives saved.Things did not change in Syria over night.It was clear from the beginning what was happening.Secondly these S300 that Russia kept denying Iran for so long.Russia knows that these Iran nuclear weapon thing is nonsense and fake.We saw the fake Iraqi accusations. So why deny a sovereign country the right to self defense for so long if they are genuine allies..Something doesn’t add… Read more »

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“why did Russia take so long to intervene in Syria? ”

Answer: Because under International Law, Russia had to wait for a request for assistance from Assad’s government.

“these S300 that Russia kept denying Iran for so long.Russia knows that these Iran nuclear weapon thing is nonsense and fake.We saw the fake Iraqi accusations. So why deny a sovereign country the right to self defense for so long if they are genuine allies..Something doesn’t add up..The auther is right..”

Answer: Because Russia was obeying the UN sanctions against Iran. Once they were lifted the S300’s were delivered.
https://www.rt.com/news/342483-s-300-deployed-iran/
http://russia-insider.com/en/military/first-batch-russian-s-300-missiles-have-arrived-iran/ri15685
http://dailywesterner.com/news/2017-02-20/russia-to-send-iran-1-billion-worth-of-missile-defense-systems/
https://sputniknews.com/military/201704291053142611-iran-russia-military-cooperation/

Robert Duran
Guest
Robert Duran

I am aware that the S300 was delivered.So no point in posting all these links..Let me remind you..Sanctions never prevented Russia from delivering the S300..It was described as a “gesture of good will” to the west by Russia…So spare me the sanctions nonsense

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

Then your original post asking questions is ridiculous and stupid. If you are not looking for answers, dont ask questions!

Turbofan
Guest
Turbofan

“Because Russia was obeying the UN sanctions against Iran. Once they were lifted the S300’s were delivered.”

“Sanctions never prevented Russia from delivering the S300..It was described as a “gesture of good will” to the west by Russia”

“Then your original post asking questions is ridiculous and stupid. If you are not looking for answers, dont ask questions”..

Is that how you react when you are wrong?..You really need to grow up..

seby
Guest
seby

Russia knows that israel is the military army base of the dying US empire. It’s just a matter of time. Russia has no interest to “protect” a mentally deranged ACQUAINTANCE. It sees where the tide is going. Its real allies are China and other BRICS countries, and pretty much the rest of the civilized world that doesnt have their heads up the arse of the rotting US empire carcass. Apparently when the lithuanian zionist ran screaming to Moscow on the last visit shouting that the racist state would not tolerate an Iranian influence in Syria, Vladimir replied “good luck with… Read more »

andron
Guest
andron

Very smart and plausible analysis, which answered a lot of question and explained many extraordinary stances by Russia.
By the way I’d like to add to “Punisher1” list below the neo-oligarch Kirill Shamalov the son-in-law of V.Putin and Bibi’s fingers in the Kremlin; as Kushner is in the White house! I bet they compare notes about their respective stooges.
It is pathetic for some commenters to malign the author for his views, instead of presenting intelligent scouter-argument, for all of us to benefit from!

andron
Guest
andron

Sorry, … counter-argument.

Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal
Gonzogal
Guest
Gonzogal

“There’s no use for anyone to seriously deny it anymore at this stage – Russia and Israel are allies in Syria, and Tel Aviv’s latest bombing raid proves it. None of Russia’s impressive world-class and state-of-the-art S-400 anti-air defense units were activated to stop it, but this shouldn’t be a surprise for those who have even an elementary understanding of contemporary Russia-Israeli relations” There are also unconfirmed reports that Syrian Defense Systems shot down an Israeli jet http://www.fort-russ.com/2017/09/unconfirmed-syrian-forces-shoot-down.html Why does everyone including Mr KORYBKO think that it is Russia that should respond?! Syria is a SOVEREIGN COUNTRY with an ability… Read more »

cap960
Guest
cap960

I think Russia is allowing Israelis to act as Israelis. Once the Israelis have had their fun, Russia will have more ammunitions to deal with the Golan heights and Palestine problems. Who truly knows? Time will tell.

Walter Dublanica
Member
Walter Dublanica

Putin is smart enough to realize you have to have all the cards in your hand to come out with the best results. Israel is just a few of these cards. Also BiBi may be able to influence the neocon cabal that rules american foreign policy.

Melotte 22
Guest
Melotte 22

Just stop it please with your nonsense in regards to Russia-Israel being allies.
This is a second time you are trying to convince us, in some twisted ways, about Israel being Russia’s ally.
Russia doesn’t need criminal regime in Tel Aviv as an ally. Israel is a main initiator of Syrian destruction aiming to steal more land. It is simple as that.

GavinSealey
Guest
GavinSealey

To suggest that Russia would not ‘in any circumstances’ directly oppose Israel in Syria is incredible. It would be a defeat for Russia if the Israelis were allowed to invade Syria or attack the presidental palace or major Syrian assets, particularly at this time. Of course Russia will avoid military confrontation with Israel and the US since such confrontation would hurt both themselves and the Syrians. To suggest that Russia sees Israel as a ‘catspaw’ against Iran is ungenerous and I think incorrect. It may be unhelpful to Syria’s future cohesion as a politically secular and culturally multifaith nation to… Read more »

Michael Green
Guest
Michael Green

You people still thinks Issrael and the zionnist lobby don’t control everything??? They are the master minds behind every war ,and every decision around the world ! and every false flag job done by Mossad ,CIA and M16 .The Anglo-Zionnist joint venture …enslaving destroying the world .

Latest

Whose Money Stoked Religious Strife in Ukraine – and Who Tried to Steal It?

Was $25 million in American tax dollars allocated for a payoff to stir up religious turmoil and violence in Ukraine?

Jim Jatras

Published

on

Authored by James George Jatras via Strategic Culture:


Was $25 million in American tax dollars allocated for a payoff to stir up religious turmoil and violence in Ukraine? Did Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko (unsuccessfully) attempt to divert most of it into his own pocket?

Last month the worldwide Orthodox Christian communion was plunged into crisis by the decision of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I in Constantinople to recognize as legitimate schismatic pseudo-bishops anathematized by the canonical Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which is an autonomous part of the Russian Orthodox Church. In so doing not only has Patriarch Bartholomew besmirched the global witness of Orthodoxy’s two-millennia old Apostolic faith, he has set the stage for religious strife in Ukraine and fratricidal violence – which has already begun.

Starting in July, when few were paying attention, this analyst warned about the impending dispute and how it facilitated the anti-Christian moral agenda of certain marginal “Orthodox” voices like “Orthodoxy in Dialogue,” Fordham University’s “Orthodox Christian Studies Center,” and The Wheel. These “self-professed teachers presume to challenge the moral teachings of the faith” (in the words of Fr. John Parker) and “prowl around, wolves in sheep’s clothing, forming and shaping false ideas about the reality of our life in Christ.” Unsurprisingly such groups have embraced Constantinople’s neopapal self-aggrandizement and support for the Ukrainian schismatics.

No one – and certainly not this analyst – would accuse Patriarch Bartholomew, most Ukrainian politicians, or even the Ukrainian schismatics of sympathizing with advocacy of such anti-Orthodox values. And yet these advocates know they cannot advance their goals if the conciliar and traditional structure of Orthodoxy remains intact. Thus they welcome efforts by Constantinople to centralize power while throwing the Church into discord, especially the Russian Church, which is vilified in some Western circles precisely because it is a global beacon of traditional Christian moral witness.

This aspect points to another reason for Western governments to support Ukrainian autocephaly as a spiritual offensive against Russia and Orthodoxy. The post-Maidan leadership harp on the “European choice” the people of Ukraine supposedly made in 2014, but they soft-pedal the accompanying moral baggage the West demands, symbolized by “gay” marches organized over Christian objections in Orthodox cities like AthensBelgradeBucharestKievOdessaPodgoricaSofia, and Tbilisi. Even under the Trump administration, the US is in lockstep with our European Union friends in pressuring countries liberated from communism to adopt such nihilistic “democratic, European values.”

Perhaps even more important to its initiators, the row over Ukraine aims to break what they see as the “soft power” of the Russian Federation, of which the Orthodox Church is the spiritual heart and soul. As explained by Valeria Z. Nollan, professor emerita of Russian Studies at Rhodes College:

‘The real goal of the quest for autocephaly [i.e., complete self-governing status independent of the Moscow Patriarchate] of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church is a de facto coup: a political coup already took place in 2014, poisoning the relations between western Ukraine and Russia, and thus another type of coup – a religious one – similarly seeks to undermine the canonical relationship between the Ukrainian Orthodox Church and Moscow.’

In furthering these twin objectives (morally, the degrading of Orthodox Christianity; politically, undermining the Russian state as Orthodoxy’s powerful traditional protector) it is increasingly clear that the United States government – and specifically the Department of State – has become a hands-on fomenter of conflict. After a short period of appropriately declaring that “any decision on autocephaly is an internal [Orthodox] church matter,” the Department within days reversed its position and issued a formal statement (in the name of Department spokesperson Heather Nauert, but clearly drafted by the European bureau) that skirted a direct call for autocephaly but gave the unmistakable impression of such backing. This is exactly how it was reported in the media, for example, “US backs Ukrainian Church bid for autocephaly.” Finally, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo weighed in personally with his own endorsement as did the US Reichskommissar for UkraineKurt Volker.

The Threat…

There soon became reason to believe that the State Department’s involvement was not limited to exhortations. As reported by this analyst in October, according to an unconfirmed report originating with the members of the Russian Orthodox Church Outside of Russia (an autonomous New York-based jurisdiction of the Moscow Patriarchate), in July of this year State Department officials (possibly including Secretary Pompeo personally) warned the Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America (also based in New York but part of the Ecumenical Patriarchate) that the US government was aware of the misappropriation of a large amount of money, about $10 million, from estimated $37 million raised from believers for the construction of the St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church and National Shrine in New York. The State Department warning also reportedly noted that federal prosecutors have documentary evidence confirming the withdrawal of these funds abroad on the orders of Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew. It was suggested that Secretary Pompeo would “close his eyes” to this theft in exchange for movement by the Patriarchate of Constantinople in favor of Ukrainian autocephaly, which helped set Patriarch Bartholomew on his current course.

[Further details on the St. Nicholas scandal are available here, but in summary: Only one place of worship of any faith was destroyed in the September 11, 2001, attack in New York and only one building not part of the World Trade Center complex was completely destroyed. That was St. Nicholas Greek Orthodox Church, a small urban parish church established at the end of World War I and dedicated to St. Nicholas the Wonderworker, who is very popular with Greeks as the patron of sailors. In the aftermath of the 9/11 attack, and following a lengthy legal battle with the Port Authority, which opposed rebuilding the church, in 2011 the Greek Archdiocese launched an extensive campaign to raise funds for a brilliant innovative design by the renowned Spanish architect Santiago Calatrava based on traditional Byzantine forms. Wealthy donors and those of modest means alike enthusiastically contributed millions to the effort. Then – poof! In December 2017, suddenly all construction was halted for lack of funds and remains stalled to this day. Resumption would require having an estimated $2 million on hand. Despite the Archdiocese’s calling in a major accounting firm to conduct an audit, there’s been no clear answer to what happened to the money. Both the US Attorney and New York state authorities are investigating.]

This is where things get back to Ukraine. If the State Department wanted to find the right button to push to spur Patriarch Bartholomew to move on the question of autocephaly, the Greek Archdiocese in the US is it. Let’s keep in mind that in his home country, Turkey, Patriarch Bartholomew has virtually no local flock – only a few hundred mostly elderly Greeks left huddled in Istanbul’s Phanar district. (Sometimes the Patriarchate is referred to simply as “the Phanar,” much as “the Vatican” is shorthand for the Roman Catholic papacy.) Whatever funds the Patriarchate derives from other sources (the Greek government, the Roman Catholic Church, the World Council of Churches), the Phanar’s financial lifeline is the ethnic Greek community (including this analyst) in what is still quaintly called the “Diaspora” in places like America, Australia, and New Zealand. And of these, the biggest cash cow is the Greek-Americans.

That’s why, when Patriarch Bartholomew issued a call in 2016 for what was billed as an Orthodox “Eighth Ecumenical Council” (the first one since the year 787!), the funds largely came from America, to the tune of up to $8 million according to the same confidential source as will be noted below. Intended by some as a modernizing Orthodox “Vatican II,” the event was doomed to failure by a boycott organized by Moscow over what the latter saw as Patriarch Bartholomew’s adopting papal or even imperial prerogatives – now sadly coming to bear in Ukraine.

…and the Payoff

On top of the foregoing, it now appears that the State Department’s direct hand in this sordid business may not have consisted solely of wielding the “stick” of legal threat: there’s reason to believe there was a “carrot” too. It very recently came to the attention of this analyst, via an unsolicited, confidential source in the Greek Archdiocese in New York, that a payment of $25 million in US government money was made to Constantinople to encourage Patriarch Bartholomew to move forward on Ukraine.

The source for this confidential report was unaware of earlier media reports that the same figure – $25 million – was paid by Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to the Phanar as an incentive for Patriarch Bartholomew to move forward on creating an independent Ukrainian church. Moreover, Poroshenko evidently tried to shortchange the payment:

‘Peter [Petro] Poroshenko — the president of Ukraine — was obligated to return $15 million US dollars to the Patriarch of Constantinople, which he had appropriated for himself.

‘As reported by Izvestia, this occurred after the story about Bartholomew’s bribe and a “vanishing” large sum designated for the creation of a Unified Local Orthodox Church in Ukraine surfaced in the mass media.

‘As reported, on the eve of Poroshenko’s visit in Istanbul, a few wealthy people of Ukraine “chipped in” in order to hasten the process of creating a Unified Local Orthodox Church. About $25 million was collected. They were supposed to go to the award ceremony for Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople for the issuing of a tomos of autocephaly. [A tomos is a small book containing a formal announcement.] However, in the words of people close to the backer, during the visit on April 9, Poroshenko handed over only $10 million.

‘As a result, having learned of the deal, Bartholomew cancelled the participation of the delegation of the Phanar – the residence of the Patriarch of Constantinople, in the celebration of the 1030th anniversary of the Baptism of Russia on July 27 in Kiev.

‘”Such a decision from Bartholomew’s side was nothing other than a strong ultimatum to Poroshenko to return the stolen money. Of course, in order to not lose his face in light of the stark revelations of the creation of the tomos of autocephaly for the Ukrainian Orthodox Church, Peter Alexeevich [Poroshenko] had to just return those $15 million for the needs of Constantinople,” a trusted source explained to reporters.

‘For preliminary information, only after receiving the remaining sum, did Bartholomew finally give his consent to sending a delegation of the Phanar to Kiev … ‘

Now, it’s possible that the two identical figures of $25 million refer to two different pots of money (a cool $50 million!) but that seems unlikely. It’s more probable the reports refer to the same sum as viewed from the sending side (the State Department, the Greek Archdiocese) and the delivery side (Poroshenko, Constantinople).

Lending credibility to the confidential information from New York and pointing to the probability that it refers to the same payment that Poroshenko reportedly sought to raid for himself are the following observations:

  • When Poroshenko generously offered Patriarch Bartholomew $10 million, the latter was aware that the full amount was $25 million and demanded the $15 million Poroshenko had held back. How did the Patriarch know that, unless he was informed via New York of the full sum?
  • If the earlier-reported $25 million was really collected from “a few wealthy people of Ukraine” who “chipped in,” given the cutthroat nature of disputes among Ukrainian oligarchs would Poroshenko (an oligarch in his own right) have risked trying to shortchange the payment? Why has not even one such Ukrainian donor been identified?
  • Without going into all the details, the Phanar and the Greek Archdiocese have a long relationship with US administrations of both parties going back at least to the Truman administration, encompassing some decidedly unattractive episodes. In such a history, a mere bribe for a geopolitical shot against Moscow would hardly be a first instance or the worst.

As one of this analyst’s Greek-American connections puts it: “It’s easy to comprehend the Patriarchate bowing to the pressure of State Dept. blackmail… not overly savory, but understandable. However, it’s another thing altogether if Kiev truly “purchased” their autocephalous status from an all too willing Patriarchate … which would relegate the Patriarch to ‘salesman’ status and leave the faithful wondering what else might be offered to the highest bidder the next time it became convenient to hold a Patriarchal ‘fire sale’ at the Phanar?!”

To add insult to injury, you’d think Constantinople at least could pay back some of the $7-8 million wasted on the Crete 2016 debacle to restart the St. Nicholas project in New York. Evidently the Phanar has better things to spend it on, like the demonstrative environmentalism of “the Green Patriarch” and, together with Pope Francis, welcoming Muslim migrants to Europe through Greece. Of course maybe there’s no need to worry, as the Ukraine “sale” was consistent with Constantinople’s papal ambitions, an uncanonical claim to “universal” status, and misuse of incarnational language and adoption of a breathtakingly arrogant tone that would cause even the most ultramontane proponent of the Rome’s supremacy to blush.

Finally, it seems that, for the time being at least, Constantinople doesn’t intend to create an independent Ukrainian church but rather an autonomous church under its own authority. It’s unclear whether or not Poroshenko or the State Department, in such event, would believe they had gotten their money’s worth. Perhaps they would. After all, the issue here is less what is appropriate for Ukraine than what strikes at Russia and injures the worldwide Christian witness of the Orthodox Church. To that end, it doesn’t matter whether the new illegal body is Constantinopolitan or Kievan, just so long as it isn’t a “Moskal church” linked to Russia.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

EU Army: Fact or Fiction? (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 152.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and International Affairs and Security Analyst via Moscow, Mark Sleboda discuss the possibility, and feasibility, of putting together an EU army, as French President Macron is now boasting about.

Will an EU Army replace, rival, or fold into NATO? How will the US respond to Europe’s military initiative, and how will Russia deal an EU army?

Remember to Please Subscribe to The Duran’s YouTube Channel.

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via The Strategic Culture Foundation:


“Insulting” – that’s how US President Donald Trump sharply reacted to the idea of a “real European army” proposed by French President Emmanuel Macron.

And it was how Macron rationalized the need for an independent military force for Europe that perhaps most irked the American leader.

Speaking on a tour of World War I battlefields in northern France last week, Macron said that Europe needed to defend itself from “China, Russia and even the United States of America”.

It was a pretty extraordinary choice of words by the French leader. To frame the US among an array of perceived foreign enemy powers was a devastating blow to the concept of a much-vaunted transatlantic alliance.

Since the Second World War, ending 1945, the concept of an American-European alliance has been the bedrock of a supposed inviolable, mutual defense pact. That nearly seven-decade alliance is now being questioned more than ever.

Macron’s call for a European army was further backed up by German Chancellor Angela Merkel who also pointedly said this week that Europe can no longer rely on the US for its defense.

Russia’s President Vladimir Putin has welcomed the proposal for Europe to form its own military organization, independent from Washington. No doubt, Moscow views such a development as augmenting a move towards a multipolar international order, which Russia and China, among others, have been advocating in opposition to American ambitions of unipolar dominance.

When Trump arrived in Paris last weekend along with dozens of other world leaders, including Putin, to commemorate the centennial anniversary marking the end of World War I, there was a notable frostiness between Macron and the American president. Only a few months ago, Macron and Trump had appeared the best of friends in what some observers referred to as a “bromance”.

During the Paris events, Macron sought to placate Trump by saying that the European army proposal would have a “complementary” role to the US-led NATO military alliance. However, their relationship further soured when Macron later delivered a speech in which he made a veiled rebuke of Trump’s “nationalist” politics.

Days later, on returning to Washington, Trump then fired off a fusillade of angry tweets attacking Macron in very personal terms over a range of issues, including “unfair” economic trade and France’s alleged ungrateful attitude towards the US liberation of Paris from Nazi Germany during the Second World War.

The rift between the US and Europe has been brewing even before Trump’s presidency. For years, Washington has been carping that the Europeans need to spend more on military defense, claiming that the US has been shouldering the burden for too long. Trump has taken the griping to a new, higher level. Recall that he has threatened to pull out of NATO because the Europeans were “free loading” on American “protection”.

The irony is that now the French and German leaders are talking about setting up their own military defenses, Trump has blown a fuse.

Evidently, the American contention is not about “burden sharing” of defense. If Washington was genuinely aggrieved about supposedly defending Europe at too much of its own expense, then Trump, one would think, would be only too glad to hear that the Europeans were at last making their own military arrangements, and taking the burden off Washington.

This gets to the heart of the matter about the real purpose of NATO and presence of tens of thousands of US troops stationed in bases across Europe since 1945. American military presence in Europe is not about “protecting” its supposed allies. It is, and always has been, about projecting American power over Europe. In reality, American troops and bases in Europe are more functioning as an occupying force, keeping the Europeans in line with Washington’s strategic objectives of hegemony over the continent.

Macron and Merkel’s vision of a European army is probably fanciful anyway, without any real prospect of materializing. How such a new defense arrangement would work independently from the 29-member NATO alliance led by the US seems unwieldy and impractical.

But the latest tensions between Washington and European leaders over military organization demonstrate the real nature of America’s relationship to Europe. It is about domination by Washington over Europe and has little to do with partnership and protection.

When Trump and previous US presidents have urged greater military spending by Europe the ulterior agenda is for Europeans to pay more to underpin American military presence, not for Europeans to find their own independent defense arrangement.

Tensions in the transatlantic axis seem to be coming to a head, heightened by Trump’s nationalistic “America First” policy. Rivalries are sharpening over trade, US sanctions on Iran, Trump’s threats against European energy plans with Russia, the Paris Climate Accord, and squabbling over NATO expenditures.

There is nothing progressive about Macron or Merkel’s call for a European army. It is more to do with France and Germany wanting to assert themselves as great powers and to shake off American tutelage out of frustration with Trump’s domineering petulance.

Only last week, Macron caused controversy when he praised French military general Philippe Pétain who collaborated with Nazi Germany as leader of Vichy France (1940-44). Macron wants a European army to satisfy his own nationalistic ambitions of revamping French global power. This week, he spent the night onboard a refurbished French aircraft carrier, the Charles de Gaulle, from which he gave a media interview saying that being “an ally of America meant not being a vassal”. Touché!

A progressive challenge from Europe to American power would not involve setting up a new army. Instead it would involve Europeans pushing for the disbandment of NATO as an obsolete organization and for the withdrawal of US-led forces which are dangerously amassing on Russia’s border.

Nonetheless, the one positive thing to emerge from the transatlantic spat over military defenses is that it illustrates more than ever how European protection is not the real purpose of Washington’s relationship to the continent. The purpose is one of using Europe as a platform for projecting America’s power, in particular against Russia.

The recent announcement by the Trump administration that it is willing to rip up yet another nuclear arms control treaty – the INF following the ABM in 2002 – clearly shows that Washington, ultimately, has recklessly scant concern for Europe’s security with regard to a possible future war with Russia.

For Washington, despite all the chivalrous rhetoric, Europe is not a partner nor even an ally. It is a vassal. Admittedly, thousands of American troops died while bravely fighting wars in Europe. But they are distinct from the US ruling class. At bottom, Europe is merely a battlefield for American military power, just as it was in two previous world wars. One hundred years after the end of World War I, the same callous calculus for the imperial planners in Washington is at play.

European ideas for independent defense is why Washington has reacted so furiously. It’s not willing to give up its European front.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

Latest

Zuckerberg Clings To Power While Sandberg Claims Ignorance After Damaging NYT Report

The New York Times reported that Facebook hired GOP PR firm, Defenders, to smear liberal detractors as Soros operatives. 

Published

on

Facebook executives Mark Zuckerberg and Sheryl Sandberg are battling backlash over an explosive investigation by the New York Times into Facebook’s mercenary damage control tactics in the wake of several major scandals.

Despite fresh calls from investors for Zuckerberg to step down in his dual role as CEO and chairman and appoint an independent director to oversee the board, the 34-year-old tech titan brushed off the suggestion during a Thursday call with journalists.

“A company with Facebook’s massive reach and influence requires robust oversight and that can only be achieved through an independent chair who is empowered to provide critical checks on company leadership,” said New York City comptroller, Scott Stringer.

Zuckerberg disagrees. “I don’t think that that specific proposal is the right way to go,” said the Facebook CEO when asked if he would consider stepping down, adding that other initiatives had been launched to “get more independence into our systems.”

The measures include creating an independent body to advise the company on decisions over whether controversial content should remain on the site.

Ultimately, he said Facebook is never going to eradicate mistakes. “We’re never going to get to the point where there are no errors,” he told reporters. “I’m trying to set up the company so that way we have our board, and we report on our financial results and do a call every quarter, but that also we have this independent oversight that is just focused on the community.” –Business Insider

Facebook COO Sheryl Sandberg, meanwhile, is claiming ignorance – telling CBS This Morning co-host Norah O’Donnell “we absolutely did not pay anyone to create fake news – that they have assured me was not happening.”

In their Wednesday exposé – the culmination of interviews with over 50 current and former company executives, lawmakers, government officials, lobbyists and congressional staff members,the New York Times reported that Facebook had hired GOP PR firm, Defenders, which smeared liberal detractors as Soros operatives – and worked with a sister company to create negative propaganda about competitors Google and Apple.

Mr. Kaplan prevailed on Ms. Sandberg to promote Kevin Martin, a former Federal Communications Commission chairman and fellow Bush administration veteran, to lead the company’s American lobbying efforts. Facebook also expanded its work with Definers.

On a conservative news site called the NTK Network, dozens of articles blasted Google and Apple for unsavory business practices. One story called Mr. Cook hypocritical for chiding Facebook over privacy, noting that Apple also collects reams of data from users. Another played down the impact of the Russians’ use of Facebook.

The rash of news coverage was no accident: NTK is an affiliate of Definers, sharing offices and staff with the public relations firm in Arlington, Va. Many NTK Network stories are written by staff members at Definers or America Rising, the company’s political opposition-research arm, to attack their clients’ enemies. –NYT

Meanwhile, Sandberg stressed that Facebook was undertaking new security measures, telling O’Donnell: “Our strategy was to shore up the security on Facebook and make major investments there,” and that the company had made significant investments in combatting fake news and foreign influence.

“It was not what I was doing nor was it the company’s strategy to deflect, to deny or to hire PR firms to do things. That’s not the strategy. And I was part of none of that. We’ve taken great steps, we’ve made huge investments. We’ve invested a ton in AI and technology and if you were following us before the election you saw those efforts pay off. We were able to take down lots of stuff over and over, over and over because we were now focused on this,” said Sandberg.

When asked if rank-and-file employees are confident in her, Sandberg replied: “Yes, I believe so.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Continue Reading

JOIN OUR YOUTUBE CHANNEL

Your donations make all the difference. Together we can expose fake news lies and deliver truth.

Amount to donate in USD$:

5 100

Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Validating payment information...
Waiting for PayPal...
Advertisement

Advertisement

Quick Donate

The Duran
EURO
DONATE
Donate a quick 10 spot!
Advertisement
Advertisement

Advertisement

The Duran Newsletter

Trending