Connect with us

Latest

Analysis

News

An inside look at post-coup Ukraine

The bleak state of post-coup Ukraine offers little but war, terrorism, lawlessness and extreme poverty.

Published

on

3,022 Views

The colossal chaos, economic depression, and everyday violence that is now part of daily life in Ukraine have defied the expectations of even some of the most hardened critics of the regime which came to power during the Kiev coup of February 2014.

Journalists killed and kidnapped:

Two days ago, the Russian journalist Anna Kurbatova who works for Russia’s prestigious Channel One was kidnapped in the streets of Kiev by assailants later exposed as working for the Kiev regime’s security service, the SBU.

She was detained without being allowed to contact anyone before being deported to the Russian border.

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova has described the egregious incident in the following way,

“We were shocked by the Kiev regime’s actions against Russian journalists. Qualifying this as something other than a new abduction of a Russian journalist would be difficult.

Individuals come up and do not introduce themselves. They take away a phone and documents and do not allow a phone call either to a foreign mission or relatives or even an employer,” the spokeswoman explained.

Then, the reporter disappears from the information field for several hours and it is only under huge pressure from the public, journalists, representatives of Russian state executive bodies that scanty information is provided that the correspondent was detained by agents of Ukrainian security services.

We were shocked that we did not hear from any of high-placed representatives of foreign countries any qualification of such actions by Kiev”.

Far from being an isolated incident, both local and international journalists face a deluge of persecution by the Kiev regime. In some cases, journalists have been assassinated for voicing opinions which contradict the regime’s narrative.

On the same day that Anna Kurbatova was kidnapped, a civilian camera crew from Russia-24 were shot at with live rounds by forces loyal to the regime as they covered the war in Donbass.

In 2015, the local writer and journalist Oles Buzina was assassinated by unknown individuals. Buzina was targeted as an ‘enemy’ of the regime by the ISIS-style website Mirotvorets which names and publishes the personal details of figures deemed non-compliant with the regime and encourages acts of violence upon them.

In 2014, shortly after the coup, British journalist Graham Phillips was abducted by the Ukrainian SBU while covering the Kiev regime’s war on Donbass. After being held in dangerous conditions he had his possessions stolen and was thrown out of the country. A fellow journalist who was abducted at the same time as Phillips, a man called Vadim Aksyonov was savagely beaten by forces loyal to the Kiev regime.

Political assassinations: 

In 2015 Oleg Kalashnikov, a former deputy of the Part of Regions, the faction which held a legislative majority in the country prior to the coup, was brutally assassinated. His death is linked with death threats emanating from the  Mirotvorets  website.

Other terrorist associations included state-sponsored killings of Donbass field commanders Motorola and Givi. Motorola was killed in a bomb planted in his apartment building while Givi was the target of a bomb blast in his office.

More recently, Ukrainian political assassinations have not been exclusively limited to regime opponents. In June of 2017, a car bomb killed Colonel Maksim Shapoval of the regime’s Defence Ministry while in March Denis Voronenkov, a former Communist Deputy from Russia’s State Duma was killed in the streets of Kiev.

Ethnic cleansing: 

The regime’s war on Donbass is a clear attempt to ethnically cleanse  former regions of Ukraine of a population which has held democratic votes to codify the self-determination of the peoples of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.

The regime’s economic blockade and frequent sabotage of infrastructure in Donbass as well as calls for “total war” coming from prominent politicians in Kiev, makes it clear that Kiev has no intention to adhere to the protocols of the Minsk II ceasefire agreements which have never been implemented.

However, the ethnic cleansing and political disenfranchisement in post-coup Ukraine are not limited to the People’s Republics in Donbass.

On the 2nd of May, 2014, an armed mod of neo-Nazi regimes supporters burnt alive, shot and beat to death nearly 50 people and injured over 200.

The following describes the details of the atrocity:

Throughout the winter and into the spring of 2014, the protests in historic Novorossiya were generally peaceful but often turned violent as fascist thugs from western Ukrainian often visited the protests in order to beat and kill the protesters.

In May of 2014, in the days prior to the 9th of May Victory Day celebrations over Hitler’s fascist forces, things started to become tense.

Knowing that the ethnic and cultural Russians of the region would be honouring their fathers and grandfathers on the 9th of May, the fascist/ultra-nationalist presence in the region grew.

Many people were severely beaten simply because they were wearing the Ribbon of St. George, the symbol of Victory Day that had been adopted by anti-fascist protesters to show solidarity against extremism.

May the 2nd: The Massacre 

The 2nd of May, 2014, began as a day like any other. Although many had seen that in previous days, fascist thugs from the neo-Nazi group Right Sector, the neo-fascist party Svoboda as well as far-right football hooligans from outside the region had descended on Odessa. They continued to pour in on the morning of the 2nd.

By the afternoon, the fascist gangs started violently attacking the anti-fascist protesters. As the anti-fascists come under increasingly violent attacks, the peaceful protesters ran into the Trade Unions House, eventually barricading themselves inside for protection.

As the afternoon wore on, fascists were seen firing shots into the building and then they began to set the building on fire using a combination of Molotov cocktail and flaming debris.

As the fire raged, the fascists surrounded the front and back of the building, prohibiting escape. Many of the protesters, some in their mid-teens died of asphyxiation. Others jumped to their deaths.

Some who jumped and survived the initial fall were beaten to death. Others were tortured to the brink of death.

The authorities did nothing.

The events were videoed and I can personally remember watching as the attack unfolded. It was a barbaric brutality that one had naively hoped had no place in the 21st century. This after all was the age of Facebook, not the age of Hitler. But for those who committed the massacre, it was clearly the age of both.

Aftermath: 

Russia immediately condemned the massacre. Russia was joined by Belarus, Armenia and EU member Bulgaria.

odessa victims

The west remained largely indifferent while the western mainstream media did their best to whitewash the massacre.

There was and still is a kind of unspoken racism that was inherent in the west’s coverage of The Odessa Massacre. Had the events happened in the Arab world and under an ISIS flag, things would have doubtlessly got more coverage.

But because the victims were ethnic and cultural Russians, things were interpreted through the prism of two paradoxical but equally potent forms of racism.

On the one hand, European and English-speaking audiences have been racially conditioned to believe that savage atrocities only happen in the Middle East, Africa or Asia. This is of course unfair and insulting to the vast majority of peace loving people in the aforementioned places.

At the same time, Russians, a distinct ethnic group in spite of their generally white skin, can still be described in racially inflammatory ways by the west. This does not generally happen to black Africans, white Jews, African-Americans or Latin Americans in the western mainstream media. The only other group subject to the same slander as Russians are Serbs, a people who are an historical ally to Russia”.

In the nearby Black Sea city of  Maripoul violence against mainly Russian speaking/culturally Russian opponents of the regime. According to left-wing Ukrainian politician Pyotr Simonenko,

“In Maripoul there was a slaughter of civilians, a mass murder. The number of those killed, first of all among peaceful civilians, is being concealed. A peaceful demonstration was shot at on May 9 and it was a show murder carried out by the current regime. There was a shooting of peaceful civilians, there was no one with weapons there. When you, using armoured personnel carrier guns, killed a family of three, shot [them] in their kitchen, this is what you must be held accountable for; there is blood on your hands today”.

READ MORE: Violence plagues Victory Day in Ukraine

The regime’s acts of violence against civilians is not however limited to the mobilisation of armed militias and thugs. Regime forces have been documented using chemical weapons against civilian populations, an act which is illegal according to international law.

A Russian investigation from 2015 found that Kiev’s forces did indeed drop chemical weapons on Dobass, thus confirming a war crime, in contravention to the Geneva Conventions. Investigative Committee spokesman Vladimir Markin reported,

“We have received irrefutable evidence of the use by the Kiev forces of weaponry similar to phosphorus bombs,” Markin said, based on the conclusion of a forensic chemical analysis from soil samples provided by witnesses in the targeted areas.

“The refugees bring in fragments of bombs and artillery shells, which maim and kill their loved ones. We have conducted more than a hundred tests, which all attest to (the war crimes committed by the Ukrainian military)”.

 READ MORE: When Ukraine dropped chemical weapons on Donbass, the west didn’t care (VIDEO)

TERRORISM: 

Regime forces and paramilitaries loyal to the regime have also committed acts of international terrorism. In the spring of 2016, Ukrainian terrorists with connections to the regime in Kiev blew up scores of power-lines which for decades had delivered electricity to Crimea. The fallout has led Crimea to hasten a drive to produce its own energy rather than pay for power-lines originating on Ukrainian territory.

The border between the Russian Republic of Crimea and Ukrainian terrorist has been rendered impassable due to terrorist activities.

Crimean leader Sergey Aksyonov has described the situation in the following way,

“They have placed gunmen from the Right Sector (an neo-fascist Ukrainian group outlawed in Russia) and the so-called Crimean Tatar Battalion near the Crimean border. The border regions have become a cesspool of extremism and terrorism”.

Two weeks ago, Russia’s Federal Security Service FSB, arrested a Ukrainian terrorist who later admitted to acting under orders from the Kiev regime. He was caught will attempting to conduct an act of violence against civilians in Crimea.

READ MORE: Ukrainian terrorist agent captured in Russia pleads guilty to attempted sabotage

CONCLUSION: 

Ukraine is not only a failed state conducting a war of aggression against a people’s who have peacefully exercised their legal right to self-determination, but the regime is attempting to wage war on Russia using terrorist proxies.

Additionally, the freedom of journalists and political leaders, both Ukrainian citizens and visitors has been violently repressed, making Ukraine a country that is unsafe for foreign journalist to operate in without extreme caution.

The Kiev regime can barely pay its own electricity bills and all the while the country’s infrastructure, including its nuclear power stations, is collapsing.

READ MORE: UKRAINE–a ticking nuclear time-bomb

The regime looks close to collapse, but in spite of this western governments ranging from major EU state to the US, continue to prop up a regime which came to power illegal and operates in a swamp of terrorism, violence, oppression and economic deprivation.

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

Leave a Reply

avatar
  Subscribe  
Notify of
Wayne Blow
Guest
Wayne Blow

There are a shit-load of American and Ukraine scum-bags that need a good kick in the “NUTS”

Seán Murphy
Guest
Seán Murphy

They need a lot more than that.

tapatio
Guest
tapatio

A year before the coup that removed Ukraine’s elected government and installed the neo-Nazis in Kiev, the US and most of Europe called Poroshenko and his gang what they are – Nazis.

As soon as Ukraine’s legitimate government chose not to obey the Rothschild banks, the Nazis became “freedom fighters”, according to the Western media.

Guess what? They were Nazis before the coup and they are still NAZIS.

Wayne Blow
Guest
Wayne Blow

Right on the money, thank you, my friend!!!!

tapatio
Guest
tapatio

Thanks.

Voltaire
Guest
Voltaire

This US organised coup d’état in Ukraine- the most obvious CIA/State Department regime change in many years – must be regarded as the most criminal act in recent years, creating a cancer in the middle of Europe which continues to fester… It is clearly US policy to continue the bloodletting, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity in Ukraine… Just as the US has done in Iraq, Syria, Libya and Yemen….. This is now fully documented… THE UNITED STATES NOW CLEARLY AND OPENLY AIDS AND ABETS MULTIPLE CRIMES IN UKRAINE – for the sole sordid and cynical reason of creating problems… Read more »

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

And just think, all it took was the mass murder of a few thousand americans in the WTC demolition and ‘Pearl-Harbor-like event’ as called for by the Neocons in their PNAC document.

Franz Kafka
Guest
Franz Kafka

Banderastan bawled on the burning Maidan: “We are the heart of Europe”. Europe laughed. Now it is not laughing so hard. And the US is the other parent of this Neo-Fascism. How can it not come to the USA? It is there already.

VeeNarian (Yerevan)
Guest
VeeNarian (Yerevan)

Of course, Maidan was the heart, sorry FART, of Europe when Ukraine made its “civilizational choice”.
Something smelly was lost in translation!

gbardizbanian
Guest
gbardizbanian

The situation in Ukraine is frightening. The US have encouraged a Nazi regime in Europe just as they did with Islamists in Afghanistan and more recently in Kosovo. US leaders are ready to support any criminal faction, any gangster state in the hope of weakening Russia. The EU is controlled by a bunch of irresponsible “leaders” who follow the US and destroy their own continent to please the mad hawks in Washington.

Lants Schtolz
Guest
Lants Schtolz

What is the big difference between Ukraine and the Filipino dictatorship that you suck off on a daily basis?

VeeNarian (Yerevan)
Guest
VeeNarian (Yerevan)

You do know that both Banderised Ukraine and Philippines are loyal US allies following the values of the “superior and civilized” West?
This is all the rubbish you have to say in response to the burning of 50 in Odessa and the US/EU/NATO gang financing and instigating a war in the Donbass in which 10,000 to 100,000 have died and thousands more horrible injured?

Seán Murphy
Guest
Seán Murphy

The Philippines is a legal elected democracy. The Ukraine is not. Understand now?

santiago
Guest
santiago

Do not waste your time, imbeciles like Lants are UNABLE to understand anything beyond very simple concepts.

Guy
Member
Guy

Savagery is a mild word to describe what is going on in Ukraine and to think that it was the work of US of Israel that initiated all this.

Аргел Тал
Guest
Аргел Тал

You know what I can’t understand as Ukrainian myself? Why the fuck is this absolutely safe to talk about separatism and the UK, Spain, Belgium or any other civilized European country, while in Ukraine even a simple citizen can get into real troubles for that. You can easily get to the Mirotvorets website the author mentioned. Guess who runs this law breaking website? The minister’s of internal affairs councelor.

Latest

Honest liberal says he is NOT INTERESTED in policy explanation [Video]

When news anchors try to act like prosecuting attorneys instead of actually interviewing people, we all lose.

Seraphim Hanisch

Published

on

One characteristic of modern-day television “news reporting” is that the political news is not truly reported. Rather, if the interviewer disagrees with the one being interviewed, the session turns into interviewer grandstanding. Regrettably, this tactic is used by liberal and conservative journalists alike. However, it is usually not admitted, as the interviewer usually chooses to say things like “I want the truth” when he or she really wants to force the other person to admit the correctness of the interviewer.

Over the weekend, Fox News’ Chris Wallace grandstanded against White House Senior Policy Adviser Stephen Miller. However, Chris Wallace at least was honest about his wish:

STEPHEN MILLER: … At a fundamental level, we could go down into the details, and you know, Chris, I can go down into details as much as you want to, but the bottom line is this…

CHRIS WALLACE: Please don’t! (laughs)

This is a big problem. The responsibility of any good journalist is to get full and accurate information about a given topic. Isn’t it?

Not in the press of our day. Chris Wallace is a valued personality for the Fox News Channel. As a former CBS anchor for 60 Minutes, Wallace brings a well-known face and voice of the mainstream media to Fox, even though he is quite liberal politically, as are many in the entertainment and information professions.

The problem is that the topic here, the facts justifying President Trump’s National Emergency declaration on Friday over the still permeable US-Mexico border, are present in abundance. But Mr. Wallace did not want to know these facts, or perhaps worse, he did not want to let his viewing audience know this information, so he tried to prevent Mr. Miller from talking about those details.

Stephen Miller, thankfully, was not having it. He insisted on giving a full and informed response to Mr. Wallace’s questions, even though Wallace did not want to hear any information.

The rest of the interview is comprised of Mr. Miller trying to dissemimate information and Mr. Wallace trying to block it and refuse it in order to sustain his own preferred narrative.

Chris Wallace’ point of view is that the President called a National Emergency for no good reason, and that President Trump is breaking the law by appropriating money for the Border Wall, something which only the House of Representatives can do, legislatively.

However, the point of view expressed by Mr. Wallace and President Trump is that as Chief Executive of the United States of America, the President is responsible to preserve the country from invasion. For the President, the never-ending waves of illegals coming into the country and not being deported, but rather, released into the US pending trials that they often never attend years later, amounts to a slow invasion.

Strictly speaking, President Trump is correct. The illegals are not (usually) armed representatives of a foreign power, but neither do they become American citizens. Many of them take advantage of generous provisions and loopholes in the law (Mexico teaches them how to do this!) and they therefore earn money but usurp the country of resources.

It has been exceedingly difficult to move the level of interest in stopping illegal immigration in the US. Rush Limbaugh rightly stated in his program on Friday, February 15, what the problem is, and we include some of the details (as we should) for why Mr. Limbaugh says what he says here:

There is a limit on a number of detainees. There is limit on how much of border and fence can be built. There’s a limit on what kind can be built. There’s a limit on modernization. This bill is filled with congressional edicts telling the president of the United States what he cannot do. Now, it authorizes $23 billion for Homeland Security, but it specifies $1.375 billion for fencing and bordering.

But there are so many limits on this as to make this practically irrelevant — by design and on purpose, because I firmly believe that what members of Congress (both parties) actually want with this bill is to send a message that nothing is ever gonna happen as long as Donald Trump is President. The attempt in this budget deal is to send a message to you Trump voters that it’s worthless voting for him, that it is a waste of time supporting him, because they are demonstrating that he can’t get anything done.

This is Pelosi in the House and Schumer in the Senate getting together, because they know when it comes to illegal immigration, these parties are unified, folks. For the most part, the Republicans and Democrats are for open borders. There are exceptions on the Republican side. But there are a lot of Republicans that don’t want Trump to succeed even now. There are a lot of Republicans just after he was inaugurated who don’t want him to succeed. So they come up with a piece of legislation here that is outrageous.

It is outrageous in its denial of the existence of a genuine emergency at the border. They don’t care. They will deal with whatever mess they create. They don’t care how bad it gets because in their world, the only mess is Donald Trump — and since the Russian effort and the Mueller effort and everything else related to that has failed to get his approval numbers down (and that has been the objective from the get-go), this is the latest effort, and it won’t be long… You mark my words on this.

There is an emergency at the US-Mexico border. Last year almost half a million people were apprehended by the Border Patrol and ICE. Many, if not most, though, are still in the United States. They were not all sent back. Some were, and some of them probably have come back in yet again. The fact that our nation’s borders are unrestricted in this manner is absolute folly.

The more American people know the details about what is actually happening at the border, the more they support the wall’s construction and President Trump’s policies. We have seen evidence for this in polling even by liberal network outlets. President Trump managed to call attention to this topic and bring it into the center of the discussion of US domestic policy. Rasmussen reported that the level of approval of Trump’s work to close the border is high – at 59 percent, with only 33 percent disapproving.

The President made this an issue. Chris Wallace tried in his own program to deflect and dissuade information from being brought to the attention of the American viewers who watch his program.

This is not journalism. It is reinforcement of propaganda on Mr. Wallace’s part, defense against facts, and an unwillingness to let the American people have information and therefore to think for themselves.

Unfortunately, such practices are not limited to Mr. Wallace. Tucker Carlson, Sean Hannity and others all utilize this form of questioning, and it is a shame, because the news reporter no longer reports the news. When a talking head on TV or radio places himself or herself as the Gatekeeper to allow or prevent information from reaching the American people, this is highly presumptuous, ego driven and almost always, dishonest.

Worse, such an approach reinforces this message to American people: “You cannot think for yourself. It is too hard, so we will do your thinking for you. Trust us!”

This style of journalism became more and more popular over, under the “appearance” of “tough questioning.” However the usual course of “tough questioning” is ideologically aligned with whatever the journalist thinks, and not at all about what is actually important. Chris Wallace is notorious for doing this with conservatives, and he does aggravate them, but he reduces interviews to an argument between the journalist and the person interviewed.

And usually, this is not the story. This was made absolutely clear in the interview with Stephen Miller, even to the point that Mr. Wallace actually voiced the request, “please don’t (give us all the specifics of this issue.)” 

Good journalism respects the fact that different people have different points of view. Agreement or disagreement with these points is what Op-Ed writing is for. But when Op-Ed is treated as hard fact journalism, we all lose.

We included the whole interview video from the beginning here so that the viewer can take in the whole course of this discussion. It is well worth watching. And as it is well-worth watching, it is also well-worth each person’s own personal consideration. People are smarter than the media would like us to be.

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

Latest

Macron pisses off Merkel as he tries to sabotage Nord Stream 2 pipeline (Video)

The Duran – News in Review – Episode 177.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss an EU compromise for Nord Stream 2 where EU member states, the EU Parliament, and its Commission will give the bloc more oversight on gas pipelines, with one caveat…the Nord Stream 2 project with Russia will not be threatened by the new regulations in the agreement.

Macron pushed hard to have the new regulations include (and derail) Nord Stream 2, an action which annoyed Angela Merkel, who eventually got her way and delivered another blow to Macron’s failing French presidency.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

Via The Express UK

Angela Merkel hit back at Emmanuel Macron over Russia and Germany’s pipeline project, declaring it would “not be a one-sided dependency”. The German Chancellor explained that Germany will expand its gas terminals with “liquified gas”. Speaking at a press conference, Ms Merkel declared: “Do we become dependent on Russia because of this second gas pipeline? I say no, if we diversify. Germany will expand its gas terminals with liquefied gas.

“This means that we do not want to depend only on Russia, but Russia was a source of gas in the Cold War and will remain one.

“But it would not be one-sided dependency.”

Via DW

The EU parliament and its Council are set to adopt new regulations on gas pipelines connecting the bloc members with non-EU countries, the EU Commission announced early on Wednesday.

The upcoming directive is based on a compromise between EU member states and EU officials in Brussels. The bloc leaders agreed to tighten Brussels’ oversight of gas delivery and expand its rules to all pipelines plugging into the EU’s gas distribution network.

“The new rules ensure that… everyone interested in selling gas to Europe must respect European energy law,” EU Energy Commissioner Miguel Arias Canete said in a statement.

For example, owners of pipelines linking EU and non-EU countries would also be required to allow access for their competitors. Brussels would also have more power regarding transparency and tariff regulations.

Russian ambassador slams US

Brussels has repeatedly expressed concern over the controversial Nord Stream 2 project which would deliver Russian gas directly to Germany through a pipeline under the Baltic Sea. Many EU states oppose the mammoth project, and the US claims it would allow Moscow to tighten its grip on the EU’s energy policy.

Berlin has insisted that the pipeline is a “purely economic” issue.

Speaking to Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung daily, Russian ambassador to Berlin, Sergey Nechayev, slammed the US’ opposition as an attempt to “push its competition aside” and clear the way for American suppliers of liquefied gas.

“It’s hard to believe that a country that is destroying the rules of free and fair trade, that is imposing import tariffs on its competition, that is flying slogans like ‘America First’ on its flags and often threatens biggest European concerns with illegal sanctions, is now really concerned about European interests,” the Russian envoy said in remarks published in German on Wednesday.

Last week, France unexpectedly rebelled against the project, but Berlin and Paris soon reached a compromise. Thanks to their agreement, the latest deal is not expected to impede the ongoing construction of Nord Stream 2.

Citing sources from negotiators’ circles, German public broadcaster ARD reported that the deal left room for Germany to approve exceptions from the EU-wide rules.

According to the EU Commission, however, exceptions are “only possible under strict procedures in which the Commission plays a decisive role.”

The Gazprom-backed pipeline is set to be completed by the end of the year.

 

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

Latest

UK Defence Secretary looking for a fight with both China and Russia (Video)

The Duran Quick Take: Episode 87.

Alex Christoforou

Published

on

The Duran’s Alex Christoforou and Editor-in-Chief Alexander Mercouris discuss UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson’s idea to deploy hard power against China and Russia, starting with plans to send Britain’s new aircraft carrier to the tense sea routes in the South China Sea.

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

Follow The Duran Audio Podcast on Soundcloud.

“Britain’s Gavin Williamson places Russia & China on notice, I’m not joking,” authored by John Wight, via RT

UK Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson is itching for conflict with Russia and China. He’s not mad. Not even slightly. But he is stupid. Very.

Unlike former fireplace salesman Gavin Williamson, I am no military expert. But then you do not need to be one to understand that while Britain going to war with Russia and China might work as a video game, the real thing would be an exceedingly bad idea.

So why then in a speech delivered to the Royal United Services Institute in London, did Mr Williamson’s argument on the feasibility of the real thing elicit applause rather than the shrieks of horror and demands he be sacked forthwith it should have? This is a serious question, by the way. It is one that cuts through British establishment verbiage to reveal a country ruled not by the sober and doughty political heavyweights of years gone by, but by foaming fanatics in expensive suits

Placing to one side for a moment the insanity of the very concept of Britain deploying hard power against Russia and/or China, the prospect of fighting a war against two designated enemies at the same time is a recipe for disaster. Not satisfied with that, though, Mr Williamson is actually contemplating a conflict with three different enemies at the same time – i.e. against Russia, China, and the millions of people in Britain his government is currently waging war against under the rubric of austerity.

“Today, Russia is resurgent,” Mr Williamson said, “rebuilding its military arsenal and seeking to bring the independent countries of the former Soviet Union, like Georgia and Ukraine, back into its orbit.”

For Mr Williamson and his ilk a resurgent Russia is a bad thing. Much better in their eyes if Russia, after the Soviet era in the 1990s, had remained on its knees as a free market desert; its state institutions in a state of near collapse and tens of millions of its citizens in the grip of immiseration. Yes, because in that scenario Western ideologues like him would have had free rein to rampage around the world as they saw fit, setting fire to country after country on the perverse grounds of ‘saving them’ for democracy.

As it is, he and his still managed to squeeze in a considerable amount of carnage and chaos in the years it did take Russia to recover. The indictment reads as follows: Yugoslavia destroyed; Afghanistan turned upside down; Iraq pushed into the abyss; Libya sent to hell.

By the time they turned their attention to Syria, intent on exploiting an Arab Spring that NATO in Libya transformed into an Arab Winter, Russia had recovered and was able to intervene. It did so in concert with the Syrian Arab Army, Iran and Hezbollah to save the day – much to the evident chagrin of those who, like Gavin Williamson, prefer to see countries in ashes rather than independent of Western hegemony.

As to the facile nonsense about Russia trying to bring Georgia and Ukraine back into its orbit, both countries happen to share a border with Russia and both countries, in recent years, have been used by the UK and its allies as cat’s paws with the eastward expansion of NATO in mind.

It gets worse though: “The Alliance must develop its ability to handle the kind of provocations that Russia is throwing at us. Such action from Russia must come at a cost.”

“Provocations,” the man said. Since British troops have been taking part in exercises on Russia’s doorstep, not the other way round, one wonders if Gavin Williamson wrote this speech while inebriated.

It is Russia that has been on the receiving end of repeated provocations from NATO member states such as the UK in recent times, and it is Russia that has been forced to respond to protect its own security and that of its people where necessary. Furthermore, not only in Russia but everywhere, including the UK, people understand that when you have political leaders intoxicated by their own national myths and propaganda to such an extent as Britain’s Defence Secretary, danger ensues.

The most enduring of those national myths where London is concerned is that the British Empire was a force for good rather than a vast criminal enterprise, that Britain and America won the Second World War together alone, that Iraq had WMDs, and that international law and international brigandage really are one and the same thing.

Perhaps the most preposterous section of the speech came when Mr Williamson tried to fashion a connection between Brexit and Britain’s military strength: “Brexit has brought us to a moment. A great moment in our history. A moment when we must strengthen our global presence, enhance our lethality, and increase our mass.”

Reading this, you can almost hear Churchill turning in his grave. Britain’s wartime prime minister had such as Gavin Williamson in mind when he famously said, “He has all the virtues I dislike, and none of the vices I admire.”

Mr Williamson obviously misread the memo talking up not the opportunity for increased conflict with China after Brexit but trade.

This was not a speech it was a linguistic car crash, one that will forever command an honoured place in compendiums of the worst political speeches ever made. As for Gavin Williamson, just as no responsible parent would ever dream of putting an 10-year old behind the wheel of car to drive unsupervised, no responsible British government would ever appoint a man like him as its Defence Secretary.

In years past, he would have struggled to find employment polishing the brass plate outside the building.

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