Connect with us
//pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});

Latest

Merkel adopts “Russian hacker” meme

The EU elites desperately want to get Merkel re-elected to have a back-up for Trump in the West’s confrontation with Russia

Elena Troyanova

Published

on

On Monday, the Russian foreign ministry squarely denied the allegations of Russian interference in Germany’s electoral campaign in anticipation of Bundestag elections in autumn 2017. The elections will decide if Angela Merkel, who had been reelected for the ninth time in a row as the head of her Christian-Democratic Union, will remain the chancellor of Germany for the next few years.

The head of the Russian Foreign Ministry’s European Department, Sergei Nechayev, made the following statement:

“Russia’s president Vladimir Putin said not once, but many times that we do not interfere into the affairs of other states. It is the German people that decides.  May be, someone likes to view us as all-powerful hackers, but this hackneyed story, in my view, is losing the capacity to entertain even the precious few people it did make interested.”

However, the version of “Russian influence” as a likely explanation for Merkel’s possible future defeat at the autumn elections has been circulating for quite a few weeks now. Chancellor Merkel herself made some dubious comments on the matter.  In the wake of Donald Trump victory on 8th November 2016 in the US Presidential election she made the following comment:

“We are already now having to deal with information out of Russia or with Internet attacks that are of Russian origin.  There are also a lot of news from Russia, which sow false information.”

Since then, two heads of German secret services made statements accusing Russia of meddling in the German elections, with direct threats voiced against RT and Sputnik, two of Russia’s international media organisations. 

The heads of the BND and the Federal Office for the Defence of the Constitution, two of Germany’s strongest special services, in many ways echoed the recent accusations by the CIA against the Russian “hackers” who supposedly tipped the balance at the US election in Donald Trump’s favour.   

Meanwhile, the pro-Atlanticist European elite is investing a lot into Merkel’s victory in Germany’s elections, which are due to take place in autumn 2017, since her victory is seen as a crucial element in future confrontation with Russia.              

Javier Solana, NATO’s ex-Secretary General, said in his recent interview to a Russian TV-channel Rossiya 24:

“Trump is not good for the US, he is not good for the world… and he is not good for almost anything. I think Merkel should take his place.”

(Bold italics added)

Solana is not alone in that opinion.  President of the European Council Donald Tusk, a representative of Poland, echoed Solana in his comments published by the EU Observer:

“It will be harder to keep the West united against Russia with Donald Trump in the White House.”

In this situation, in Tusk’s opinion, the role of Merkel as the key element in the European solidarity against Russia becomes even more important.

The Polish Foreign Minister Witold Waszczikowski, whose Law and Justice party is seen as an opponent of Tusk inside Poland, said in Monday’s interview that “Poland sees no alternative to Merkel” at the helm of Europe.   

The significance of Solana’s and Tusk’s statements is hard to understate. They voiced two trends in EU foreign policy for the post-Obama period: 1) The EU elites do not see Trump as a reliable partner in their foreign policy on Russia; and 2) They are ready to see Merkel replace Trump as the leader of the Western Front against Russia.

Trump has just nominated Rex Tillerson, CEO of Exxon Mobile, as Secretary of State.

Tillerson had friendly contacts with Russia’s leaders years ago, and this “worries” not just the American elite alone. The EU’s bigwigs also view the mere possibility of someone not hostile to Russia becoming the head of American diplomacy as a threat to themselves.      

Despite the multi-billion losses for the European national economies, the EU’s establishment certainly wants to continue its economic war on Russia. It will continue to cover it up with Russia’s ‘failure to comply with the Minsk accord’, a document where Russia is mentioned zero times.

Apart from that, NATO is not willing to reduce military tensions with Russia. On the contrary, NATO is currently doubling down on the war games near the Russian borders with additional troops being sent to the Baltic states and Poland.

Meanwhile the anti-Russian hysteria propelled by government officials and mainstream media is skyrocketing in Germany.

One incident in Germany with even a distant linkage to notorious Russian hackers can trigger a diplomatic war.

One incident at Russia’s border with, say, Lithuania, where hundreds of German troops are being stationed, – one such incident might be enough to ignite an all-out war against Russia.

Russia is perceived by the EU establishment as a clear threat to their globalist agenda. By contrast, to the EU’s disappointment, by his plans to appoint Tillerson Trump has made clear his intention to do business with Russia instead of fighting that country.

The EU establishment sees yet another threat to its anti-Russian agenda in the much touted European democracy: France, Italy and the Netherlands may soon elect leaders who will want to restore a decent level of dialogue with Russia.

Feeling abandoned by the US, the anti-Russian elite of the European Union is now looking for a substitute for Trump to lead the West’s confrontation with Russia and by default Angela Merkel is their top candidate for the role.

However, for Merkel to be able to do the job, the ruling CDU/CSU coalition needs to win the German parliamentary election next year.

At this stage, this still seems feasible.  According to recent polls, the CDU/CSU coalition has 31.5% of popular support, SPD 22%, and AfD (Alternative for Germany) has 15%.

The AfD overtly opposes the government’s policies, especially those concerning refugees and Russia, and is gaining popular support.

However, the dissatisfaction of the population may still not be enough to win the election.

Most likely we will see the pro-Merkel wing of Germany’s political class, as well as the mainstream media, silencing the opposition voices by declaring them not just “Islamophobes” or “populists”, but also ‘Kremlin agents’.

Most certainly they will also double down on accusing AfD of fascism.

While these tactics did not work with Brexit and in the US presidential election, they might be more successful in Germany, where for obvious historical reasons the topic of fascism has another dimension.

With all this said, there is still a chance for the tables to turn. The year 2016 has already provided brilliant examples of surprising outcomes which hardly anyone had believed possible.

Liked it? Take a second to support The Duran on Patreon!
Advertisement //pagead2.googlesyndication.com/pagead/js/adsbygoogle.js (adsbygoogle = window.adsbygoogle || []).push({});
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of

Latest

Trump Has Gifted “No More Wars” Policy Position To Bernie Sanders (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 148.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

RT CrossTalk host Peter Lavelle and The Duran’s Alex Christoforou discuss how US President Donald Tump appears to have ceded his popular 2016 ‘no more wars’ campaign message and policy position to Bernie Sanders and any other US 2020 candidate willing to grad onto a non-interventionist approach to the upcoming Democrat primaries.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Is Bernie Stealing Trump’s ‘No More Wars’ Issue?” by Patrick J. Buchanan…


The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016.

“The president has said that he does not want to see this country involved in endless wars… I agree with that,” Bernie Sanders told the Fox News audience at Monday’s town hall meeting in Bethlehem, Pennsylvania.

Then turning and staring straight into the camera, Bernie added:

“Mr. President, tonight you have the opportunity to do something extraordinary: Sign that resolution. Saudi Arabia should not be determining the military or foreign policy of this country.”

Sanders was talking about a War Powers Act resolution that would have ended U.S. involvement in the five-year civil war in Yemen that has created one of the great humanitarian crises of our time, with thousands of dead children amidst an epidemic of cholera and a famine.

Supported by a united Democratic Party on the Hill, and an anti-interventionist faction of the GOP led by Sens. Rand Paul and Mike Lee of Utah, the War Powers resolution had passed both houses of Congress.

But 24 hours after Sanders urged him to sign it, Trump, heeding the hawks in his Cabinet and National Security Council, vetoed S.J.Res.7, calling it a “dangerous attempt to weaken my constitutional authorities.”

With sufficient Republican votes in both houses to sustain Trump’s veto, that should be the end of the matter.

It is not: Trump may have just ceded the peace issue in 2020 to the Democrats. If Sanders emerges as the nominee, we will have an election with a Democrat running on the “no-more-wars” theme Trump touted in 2016. And Trump will be left defending the bombing of Yemeni rebels and civilians by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia.

Does Trump really want to go into 2020 as a war party president?

Does he want to go into 2020 with Democrats denouncing “Trump’s endless wars” in the Middle East? Because that is where he is headed.

In 2008, John McCain, leading hawk in the Senate, was routed by a left-wing first-term senator from Illinois, Barack Obama, who had won his nomination by defeating the more hawkish Hillary Clinton, who had voted to authorize the war in Iraq.

In 2012, the Republican nominee Mitt Romney, who was far more hawkish than Obama on Russia, lost.

Yet, in 2016, Trump ran as a different kind of Republican, an opponent of the Iraq War and an anti-interventionist who wanted to get along with Russia’s Vladimir Putin and get out of these Middle East wars.

Looking closely at the front-running candidates for the Democratic nomination of 2020 — Joe Biden, Sanders, Kamala Harris, Beto O’Rourke, Pete Buttigieg, Elizabeth Warren, Cory Booker — not one appears to be as hawkish as Trump has become.

Trump pulled us out of the nuclear deal with Iran negotiated by Secretary of State John Kerry and reimposed severe sanctions.

He declared Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps a terrorist organization, to which Iran has responded by declaring U.S. Central Command a terrorist organization. Ominously, the IRGC and its trained Shiite militias in Iraq are in close proximity to U.S. troops.

Trump has recognized Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, moved the U.S. Embassy there, closed the consulate that dealt with Palestinian affairs, cut off aid to the Palestinians, recognized Israel’s annexation of the Golan Heights seized from Syria in 1967, and gone silent on Bibi Netanyahu’s threat to annex Jewish settlements on the West Bank.

Sanders, however, though he stands by Israel, is supporting a two-state solution and castigating the “right-wing” Netanyahu regime.

Trump has talked of pulling all U.S. troops out of Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan. Yet the troops are still there.

Though Trump came into office promising to get along with the Russians, he sent Javelin anti-tank missiles to Ukraine and announced a pullout from Ronald Reagan’s 1987 INF treaty that outlawed all land-based intermediate-range nuclear missiles.

When Putin provocatively sent 100 Russian troops to Caracas — ostensibly to repair the S-400 anti-aircraft and anti-missile system that was damaged in recent blackouts — Trump, drawing a red line, ordered the Russians to “get out.”

Biden is expected to announce next week. If the stands he takes on Russia, China, Israel and the Middle East are more hawkish than the rest of the field, he will be challenged by the left wing of his party, and by Sanders, who voted “no” on the Iraq War that Biden supported.

The center of gravity of U.S. politics is shifting toward the Trump position of 2016. And the anti-interventionist wing of the GOP is growing.

And when added to the anti-interventionist and anti-war wing of the Democratic Party on the Hill, together, they are able, as on the Yemen War Powers resolution, to produce a new bipartisan majority.

Prediction: By the primaries of 2020, foreign policy will be front and center, and the Democratic Party will have captured the “no-more-wars” political high ground that Candidate Donald Trump occupied in 2016.

Do You Appreciate Reading Our Emails and Website? Let us know how we are doing – Send us a Thank You Via Paypal!

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

Latest

Over 200 killed, hundreds injured in series of blasts at Sri Lankan hotels & churches

A series of bombings hit churches and hotels across Sri Lanka on Easter Sunday, killing more than 200 people.

RT

Published

on

By

Via RT…


A series of eight explosions rocked Catholic churches and luxury hotels in Sri Lanka as Christians began Easter Sunday celebrations, with over 200 killed and hundreds injured, media reported, citing police.

The blasts started at around 8:45am local time at St. Anthony’s Church in Colombo and St. Sebastian’s Church in Negombo, a Catholic-majority town outside of the capital. The Zion Church in Batticaloa on the eastern coast was also targeted. At around the same time, the Shangri-La, Cinnamon Grand and Kingsbury five-star hotels were also hit, police confirmed.

Two more explosions happened later in the day, targeting two more locations in Colombo. All attacks appear to have been coordinated.

At least 207 people were killed, Reuters reported, citing police. More than 450 were injured in the attacks.

Alleged footage of the aftermath, shared on social media, showed chaos and large-scale destruction inside at least one of the churches.

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

Latest

Mike Pompeo reveals true motto of CIA: ‘We lied, we cheated, we stole’ (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 147.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris take a look at a Texas A&M University speech, and subsequent interview, with US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.

The former CIA Director admitted, ‘as an aside’ to the question asked, that the Intelligence agency he headed up before being appointed as the top US Diplomat had a motto “we lied, we cheated, we stole”…which, according to Pompeo, contained entire CIA training courses based on ‘lying, cheating and stealing.’

Pompeo finally speaks some truth.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

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

Videos

Trending