Connect with us



Staff Picks

Here’s why a Russia-U.S. alliance makes sense – a memo to President-elect Trump

Shared culture and national interests make the US and Russia natural allies. The US policy of hostility to Russia makes no sense and should be reversed.

Walter Dublanica




A US-Russia alliance stretching from Seattle to Vladivostok would be a win-win for both the United States and Russia as well as all the countries of Europe.

We now have a House of Representatives Resolution 758 which declares Russia to be America’s enemy. Resolution 758 was passed on December 4, 2014, with only 10 votes against. Such a Resolution, passed in connection to recent events in Ukraine, makes no sense compared to the much bigger challenges that face both the US and Russia.

ISIS terrorism is a danger to both the US and Russia. Both countries share common enemies. Over the last 13 years US policy in the Middle East has been an unmitigated disaster, with no end in sight and with thousands of lives and trillions of dollars lost.

According to former US Defence Secretary Chuck Hagel, Saudi Arabia is the US’s main ally in the Middle East. Saudi Arabia is the diametric opposite to the sort of democracy the US claims to want to see in the world. Fifteen of the twenty  9/11 terrorists came from Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is the prime sponsor of the radical Muslim Wahhabi sect, with which Jihadist terrorism – including ISIS – is associated. 

China  is a challenge to the United States. China is still a Communist country. Moreover, it is close to surpassing the US as the world’s biggest economy. China competes directly with the US for world energy and mineral resources, which Russia does not, since its vast energy and mineral resources make it self-sufficient. China has also taken millions of US manufacturing jobs, whereas Russia has taken none.   

China also thinks of itself in terms of the ancient ‘Middle Kingdom’ destined to control the world. Russia does not, though understandably enough it does want to influence countries on its border as does the US.

Military conflict between the US and Russia is unthinkable. No one in their right mind in either country would contemplate nuclear war. As for a conventional war, Russia clearly can defend itself.

Who in fact would attack Russia alongside the US? Certainly not Germany and France. Both of these countries have previously attacked Russia and both were badly defeated. Germany and its allies during the Second World War lost 4 million troops fighting the Red Army on the eastern front. That means the Germans and their allies were losing more men fighting the Russians each week than the US has lost in the Middle East in 13 years of war. 

There is no way Germany and France will go to war with Russia again for the sake of the US.

The US and Russia need to get past their previous antagonisms and live in peace with each other. The US should invite Russia to join NATO and do so without delay. Why not? Russians and Americans are both culturally Europeans. Russia is a Christian nation as is the United States. Russians have abandoned communism and have adopted democratic principles.

The US has fought wars with many  countries: Britain, Mexico, Spain, China, Japan, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Germany and Italy – the list is endless. However it has NEVER fought a war with Russia.

The United States and Russia have fought common enemies together like Japan and Germany. The fighting the Russians did during the Second World War in Europe saved millions of American lives.

Russia has been on the US’s side throughout much of its history.

During the American Revolution the British King asked his allies in Germany to supply Hessians to fight against the Americans, which they did. He also asked the Russian Tsar for Cossacks to fight the Americans. That was not surprising since the Cossacks had the reputation of being the best fighters in Europe. In the war of 1812 between France and Russia, Napoleon labelled the Cossacks “a disgrace to the human race” because of their bravery in fighting and defeating the French army – supposedly the best in Europe. 

The Tsar, however, refused the British King’s request.

During the American Civil War, the Russians sent ships to New York harbour and to San Francisco to support the Union. The British supported the Confederacy in an attempt to split the US.

In 1867 Russia sold Alaska (about 660,000 square miles) to the U.S. for $6,500,000. That’s $10 per square mile or  less than 2 cents per acre.

In the 20th century the US and Russia were fighting common enemies: Germany in the First and Second World Wars, and Japan also in the Second.   

This brings us to the present  tensions relating to the Ukraine, which began when President Victor Yanukovych – Ukraine’s elected leader – refused to sign an association agreement with the EU. Victoria Nuland (Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs) arranged the coup which overthrew him, being caught in a recorded phone conversation with the US ambassador to the Ukraine deciding who the new Ukrainian Prime Minister should be (“Yats” i.e. Arseny Yatsenyuk) and famously  saying “f..k the EU”.

The US established a “putsch” regime in Ukraine much as it has done so often in Latin America in the past.  Nuland even publicly admitted that the US spent $5 billion dollars to influence events in Ukraine and to prepare the ground for the coup.

The crisis in Ukraine comes from the fact that the US leveraged into power a small group of extremists originating mainly in the province of Galicia in western Ukraine, and a bunch of oligarchs who want to control Ukraine in their own selfish interests.

During the Second World War, under the leadership of Stephen Bandera, some Galicians  collaborated with the Nazis and were actively involved in the Nazi programme to exterminate the Jews and the Poles. The present day radicals in Ukraine look upon Bandera as a national hero. Are those the sort of people the US should support?

The majority of Ukrainians want a peaceful relationship with Russia.  Why does the US support fanatical neo-Nazi extremists and not the ordinary citizens?

Why shouldn’t the US be friends with Russia?  What problem is the US solving  by confronting Russia? 

If the focus is Ukraine, then Russia and Ukraine have been neighbours for over a 1,000 years and originated from the same cradle. They will be neighbours forever and in time friends again. What does the US gain by trying to stop this? 

If we are talking about nuclear weapons, the US and Russia have between them 95% of the world’s nuclear stockpiles. Why is it a good thing to have them pointed at each other? Does it not make more sense to stop doing so? 

Surely it makes far better sense, and is far more in the US’s interests to have Russia as a friend and ally, bringing it into the West rather than have it join the East, where because of US hostility it is already forming alliances with China through BRICS and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation in opposition to the US.

There is an old joke that one can divide people into two categories. First there are those who wear suits and those those who don’t.  Well Americans and Russians both wear suits.  Then there are those who drink their liquor straight, and those who drink it mixed. Russians unlike Americans drink their vodka straight.

Is that a significant enough difference or reason to make them enemies?

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

Leave a Reply

Notify of


Tape recorded evidence of Clinton-Ukraine meddling in US election surfaces (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 114.

Alex Christoforou



RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou take a look at new evidence to surface from Ukraine that exposes a plot by the US Embassy in Kiev and the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) to leak Paul Manafort’s corrupt dealings in the country, all for the benefit of Hillary Clinton during the 2016 U.S. presidential election.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via Zerohedge

Ukraine’s Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko has launched an investigation into the head of the Ukrainian National Anti-Corruption Bureau for allegedly attempting to help Hillary Clinton defeat Donald Trump during the 2016 US election by releasing damaging information about a “black ledger” of illegal business dealings by former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort.

The Hill’s John Solomon, Ukrainian Prosecutor General Yuriy Lutsenko

“Today we will launch a criminal investigation about this and we will give legal assessment of this information,” Lutsenko said last week, according to The Hill

Lutsenko is probing a claim from a member of the Ukrainian parliament that the director of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU), Artem Sytnyk, attempted to the benefit of the 2016 U.S. presidential election on behalf of Hillary Clinton.

A State Department spokesman told Hill.TV that officials aware of news reports regarding Sytnyk. –The Hill

“According to the member of parliament of Ukraine, he got the court decision that the NABU official conducted an illegal intrusion into the American election campaign,” said Lutsenko, speaking with The Hill’s John Solomon about the anti-corruption bureau chief, Artem Sytnyk.

“It means that we think Mr. Sytnyk, the NABU director, officially talked about criminal investigation with Mr. [Paul] Manafort, and at the same time, Mr. Sytnyk stressed that in such a way, he wanted to assist the campaign of Ms. Clinton,” Lutsenko continued.

Solomon asked Lutsenko about reports that a member of Ukraine’s parliament obtained a tape of the current head of the NABU saying that he was attempting to help Clinton win the 2016 presidential election, as well as connections that helped release the black-ledger files that exposed Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort‘s wrongdoing in Ukraine.

“This member of parliament even attached the audio tape where several men, one of which had a voice similar to the voice of Mr. Sytnyk, discussed the matter.” –The Hill

What The Hill doesn’t mention is that Sytnyk released Manafort’s Black Book with Ukrainian lawmaker Serhiy Leshchenko – discussed in great length by former Breitbart investigator Lee Stranahan, who has been closely monitoring this case.

Serhiy Leshchenko

T]he main spokesman for these accusations was Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian politician and journalist who works closely with both top Hillary Clinton donors George Soros and Victor Pinchuk, as well as to the US Embassy in Kyiv.

James Comey should be asked about this source that Leshchenko would not identify. Was the source someone connected to US government, either the State Department or the Department of Justice?

The New York Times should also explain why they didn’t mention that Leshchenko had direct connections to two of Hillary Clinton biggest financial backers. Victor Pinchuk, the largest donor to the Clinton Foundation at a staggering $8.6 million also happened to have paid for Leshchenko’s expenses to go to international conferences. George Soros, whose also founded the International Renaissance Foundationthat worked closely with Hillary Clinton’s State Department in Ukraine, also contributed at least $8 million to Hillary affiliated super PACs in the 2016 campaign cycle. –Lee Stranahan via Medium

Meanwhile, according to former Fusion GPS contractor Nellie Ohr, Leshchenko was a source for opposition research firm Fusion GPS, which commissioned the infamous Trump-Russia dossier.

Nellie Ohr, a former contractor for the Washington, D.C.-based Fusion GPS, testified on Oct. 19 that Serhiy Leshchenko, a former investigative journalist turned Ukrainian lawmaker, was a source for Fusion GPS during the 2016 campaign.

“I recall … they were mentioning someone named Serhiy Leshchenko, a Ukrainian,” Ohr said when asked who Fusion GPS’s sources were, according to portions of Ohr’s testimony confirmed by The Daily Caller News Foundation. –Daily Caller

Also absent from The Hill report is the fact that Leshchenko was convicted in December by a Kiev court of interfering in the 2016 US election.

A Kyiv court said that a Ukrainian lawmaker and a top anticorruption official’s decision in 2016 to publish documents linked to President Donald Trump’s then-campaign chairman amounted to interference in the U.S. presidential election.

The December 11 finding came in response to a complaint filed by another Ukrainian lawmaker, who alleged that Serhiy Leshchenko and Artem Sytnyk illegally released the documents in August 2016, showing payments by a Ukrainian political party to Trump’s then-campaign chairman, Paul Manafort.

The documents, excerpts from a secret ledger of payments by the Party of Regions, led to Manafort being fired by Trump’s election campaign.

The Kyiv court said that the documents published by Leshchenko and Sytnyk were part of an ongoing pretrial investigation in Ukraine into the operations of the pro-Russian Party of Regions. The party’s head had been President Viktor Yanukovych until he fled the country amid mass protests two years earlier.

-RadioFreeEurope/Radio Liberty (funded by the US govt.).

So while Lutsenko – Solomon’s guest and Ukrainian Prosecutor is currently going after Artem Sytnyk, it should be noted that Leshchenko was already found to have meddled in the 2016 US election.


Meanwhile, you can also check out Stranahan’s take on Leshchenko being left out of the loop.

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


‘I will take over as Brexit Party leader’: Nigel Farage back on the frontline

Nigel Farage says that if the UK takes part in European elections, he will lead his new Brexit Party.





Via RT

Former UKIP leader Nigel Farage has announced that he will lead his new Brexit Party into the European elections if UK MPs decide to delay Brexit beyond May 22.

Farage, who has ostensibly appointed himself leader, told various media, including the BBC and Sky News on Friday morning: “I will take over as leader of the Brexit Party and lead it into the European Elections.”

It comes after the Brexit Party’s leader, Catherine Blaiklock, quit over a series of alleged Islamophobic statements and retweets of far-right figures on social media.

It is not yet thought that Farage has officially been elected as leader, as the party does not, as yet, have a formal infrastructure to conduct such a vote.

The right-wing MEP vowed to put out a whole host of Brexit Party candidates if the UK participates in the upcoming EU elections in May, adding: “If we fight those elections, we will fight them on trust.”

On Thursday night, the EU agreed to PM May’s request for a delaying to Brexit beyond the March 29 deadline. Brussels announced two new exit dates depending on what happens next week in the UK parliament.

The UK will have to leave the bloc on April 12 unless British MPs agree to May’s Brexit deal. If the withdrawal agreement is passed by next week, EU leaders have agreed to grant an extension until May 22.

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


Baltics cannot rely on Germany any more

The matter is NATO today is not as strong as it is supposed to be. And it is not only because of leadership blunders.

The Duran



Submitted by Adomas Abromaitis…

On March 29 Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia will celebrate 15 years of becoming NATO member states. The way to the alliance membership was not simple for newly born independent countries. They have reached great success in fulfilling many of NATO demands: they have considerably increased their defence expenditures, renewed armaments and increased the number of military personnel.

In turn, they get used to rely on more powerful member states, their advice, help and even decision making. All these 15 years they felt more or less safe because of proclaimed European NATO allies’ capabilities.

Unfortunately, now it is high time to doubt. The matter is NATO today is not as strong as it supposed to be. And it is not only because of leadership’s blunders. Every member state does a bit. As for the Baltic states, they are particularly vulnerable, because they fully depend on other NATO member states in their defence. Thus, Germany, Canada and Britain are leading nations of the NATO battle group stationed in Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia respectively.

But the state of national armed forces in Germany, for example, raises doubts and makes it impossible not only defend the Baltics against Russia, but Germany itself.

It turned out, that Germany itself remains dissatisfied with its combat readiness and minister of defence’s ability to perform her duties. Things are so bad, that the military’s annual readiness report would be kept classified for the first time for “security reasons.”

“Apparently the readiness of the Bundeswehr is so bad that the public should not be allowed to know about it,” said Tobias Lindner, a Greens member who serves on the budget and defense committees.

Inspector General Eberhard Zorn said ( the average readiness of the country’s nearly 10,000 weapons systems stood at about 70 percent in 2018, which meant Germany was able to fulfill its military obligations despite increasing responsibilities.

No overall comparison figure was available for 2017, but last year’s report revealed readiness rates of under 50 percent for specific weapons such as the aging CH-53 heavy-lift helicopters and the Tornado fighter jets.

Zorn said this year’s report was more comprehensive and included details on five main weapons systems used by the cyber command, and eight arms critical for NATO’s high readiness task force, which Germany heads this year.

“The overall view allows such concrete conclusions about the current readiness of the Bundeswehr that knowledge by unauthorized individuals would harm the security interests of the Federal Republic of Germany,” he wrote.

Critics are sure of incompetence of the Federal Minister of Defence, Ursula von der Leyen. Though she has occupied the upper echelons of German politics for 14 years now — and shows no sign of success. This mother of seven, gynecologist by profession, by some miracle for a long time has been remaining in power, though has no trust even among German military elites. Despite numerous scandals she tries to manage the Armed Forces as a housewife does and, of course, the results are devastating for German military capabilities. The same statement could be easily apply for the Baltic States, which highly dependent on Germany in military sphere.

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


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...


Quick Donate

The Duran
Donate a quick 10 spot!


The Duran Newsletter