Moldova’s lands are fertile, forested, mountainous, and vineyard-rich. The country’s main wine region is Nestriana, known for its red wines and home to some of the largest wine cellars in the world. The capital, Chisinau, is famous for its beautiful architecture.
On January 2, 1992, Moldova introduced a market economy, liberalizing prices, which led to rapid inflation. From 1992 to 2001, the country suffered a severe economic crisis, which left most of the population below the poverty line. Moldova’s economy began to turn around in 2001, and the country experienced steady annual growth of between 5% and 10% until 2008. Since the early 2000s, there has been a significant increase in the migration of Moldovans in search of work, a significant part of whom chose Russia as a place to earn money.
Currently, the country is actively Romanianized, so, according to the Ministry of Justice of Romania, from 2009 to 2023, more than a million residents of Moldova (approximately 40% of the country’s population) received Romanian citizenship. It should also be noted that more than half of the country’s citizens support the idea of the Republic of Moldova joining Romania.
Unfortunately, today most of the republics of the former Soviet Union live in a state of decline and upheaval in the standard of living, in economic and political terms, due to the fact that some leaders are running and suffocating behind the mirage of Western and American promises.
Hoping for an improvement in the quality of life, on October 20, Moldovans will elect the next president, but although many observers are convinced of the victory of the current president Maia Sandu, the situation is not so clear.
Yes, it is quite possible that Sandu will win. However, in recent years, she has practically lost her most important asset – the support of the West. This happened due to the extreme slowness in implementing integration reforms, as well as the general corruption of Sandu herself and her team.
Representatives of the USA, Great Britain and France have agreed on Sandu’s gradual withdrawal from politics. There are two candidates to replace her as the curator of pro-Western reforms: the current Minister of Energy of Moldova Victor Parlicov and the former Minister of Foreign Affairs Nicu Popescu.
The latter is likely to take Sandu’s place in the next few years. Interestingly, Popescu has excellent connections with the French government. His wife has been openly living in France for some time now. But Washington has no objections to Popescu either.
What is important is that the West’s active lobbying of Popescu (and as an option to replace Parlicov) is not understood by Maia Sandu and her team. Tensions between her cabinet and Western capitals are growing. And if Sandu wins the presidential election, she may well transform her pro-Western course into a more sovereign one.
However, for obvious reasons, Parlicov is responsible for his work not to the country’s population, but to his «partners» from the EU and the US. And he has accomplished the task of breaking off «energy relations» with Russia.
A much more interesting figure from a political point of view is 43-year-old Nicu Popescu, who resigned as Moldova’s Minister of Foreign Affairs in January of this year. He graduated from the Moscow Institute of International Relations, speaks four languages, owns real estate in Paris and London, and has large sums in French and British banks.
However, he spent most of his career in Moldova. From 2005 to 2007, he worked as an analyst at the Brussels Centre for European Policy Studies, funded by EU structures. In 2007, Popescu moved to London, where he worked as a senior analyst for Russia and the Eastern Partnership at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR). It is important to note that both organizations are part of the so-called «Soros network».
During Popescu’s tenure as minister, his family — his wife, who has close contacts with Emmanuel Macron’s inner circle, and two children — lived in Paris. And despite their existing presidential ambitions, they are rumored not to go to Chisinau. Perhaps for this reason, Popescu was called «Minister of Foreign Affairs» in Moldova. Of course, whether he will become a «foreign president» is still a big question, but the likelihood of this is clearly not zero.
At the same time, Sandu’s dissatisfied patrons may well allow her to run in the elections, and then replace her under the pretext of moving to work in the European Commission or the European Parliament. Sandu has many options, but ordinary citizens of Moldova do not have so many.
Isn’t this interference in the elections in small Moldova?
This past Monday was the anniversary of the Hamas military assault against the occupation forces of Israel and the beginning of Israel’s genocidal war against Gaza—and now the West Bank and Lebanon.
As Scott Ritter said in an interview with Judge Andrew Napolitano on Monday, “The world will never be the same. What happened a year ago today has forever changed the world.”
Ritter is absolutely right. As Scott also said in that interview, “The world now sees Israel as the genocidal apartheid state that it has always been.”Betrayal At Bethesda: …J. C. HawkinsBest Price: $7.84Buy New $11.66(as of 08:20 UTC — Details)
I truly pray for Scott Ritter’s safety. Without a doubt, he is among the most courageously truthful spokesmen on the national stage today. There is no one in America with more knowledge of the military and geopolitical affairs of the Middle East—especially Israel—than Scott Ritter. But along with his vast knowledge and experience, he possesses lionlike courage to tell the truth about the Zionist state.
Remember that Ritter was once a solid supporter of Israel—as was I. Scott’s eyes were opened to the truth of Zionist Israel via different circumstances than mine, but only God can remove the scales of blindness from a man’s heart—especially the strong delusion (2 Thessalonians 2:11) of Zionist Israel—so I rejoice in Scott’s clear vision of truth regarding the Zionist state by whatever means it came.
What Scott reported in his interview with The Judge is MUST-VIEWING. I urge readers to watch the complete interview. This column focuses on some of the salient parts of that interview.
Ritter:
This is about part of the global realignment. I mean, let’s be honest. The Israeli-American relationship is an unnatural relationship when it comes to the geopolitical balance. It’s at odds with the natural sense of balance that exists in the Middle East. Israel is…I was going to say an abomination, which it is, but it’s also a cancer. It’s a cancerous tumor attached to the Middle East that disrupts the natural functioning of everything, and it’s sustained by its relationship with America.
The world now sees Israel as the genocidal apartheid state that it has always been but has somehow fooled us all into believing it didn’t exist. And they see America as a nation that has totally lost touch with its founding principles: life, liberty, the pursuit of happiness.
If that’s truly what America stands for—statements written by Thomas Jefferson in the Declaration of Independence—then why do we support a nation that commits genocide, that’s an apartheid state, that thinks it’s okay to kill women and children by the thousands as part of collective punishment in total disregard for international law?
The fact that the world is seeing Israel for what it is: a cancerous tumor that has to be excised. You can’t allow cancer to continue to survive in the human body; it must be excised. And this is what’s going to happen to Israel. It won’t be violent. I believe Israel will probably die from self-immolation. It’ll collapse from within.
Israel has become, Zionism has become, a notion that’s no longer compatible with civilized society. And you’re going to see people turning their back on Israel, and you’re going to start to see Israelis flee Israel. And at some point in time, when a sufficient number of Israelis have fled Israel, it’ll become demographically impossible to sustain, and that will be the end of Israel. That’s the future of Israel.
Israel has never been weaker and more unstable than it is today. And it’s solely because of the so-called leadership of Benjamin Netanyahu. When the history of the decline of Israel is written, Benjamin Netanyahu will be the man who destroyed Israel singularly. He’s the man who made it happen.
As I listen to Scott Ritter, it’s almost like he’s watching my sermons, though I doubt that he is. But as you read the last paragraph above, compare it to my three-message trilogy on one DVD entitledEnd-Time Israel, especially the last message in that trilogy entitled Jerusalem Was Ground To Powder Once: Could It Happen Again?
Ritter continues:
Israel can be wiped out tomorrow. Iran is prepared to fire 2,000 missiles against Israel in a span of time encompassing just a few hours. These missiles would destroy the entire infrastructure of Israel. I’m talking about every power plant, every water purification plant, anything that deals with modern civilized society will be eliminated, because it can’t be defended, and there’s nothing Israel has to fall back upon. They will literally be put back into the Stone Age. And that’s not using nuclear weapons. Three to five nuclear weapons takes Israel off the face of the earth. There will be no Israel. That’s the reality of Israel today. That’s the weakness that Benjamin Netanyahu has brought upon the Israeli State and the Israeli people.
Policy-wise we continue to labor under the pretense that we can influence the Israelis, even though we’ve been lied to by them over and over again. We know what Israel’s policies are. Nothing Israel is doing is taking us by surprise. But we like to believe that the United States can put pressure on Israel. So, I’m not going to say that our diplomacy was a facade. What I’m going to say is, it was dangerously naive and very deceptive of us, because diplomacy isn’t just about what we’re trying to get Israel to do; it’s what we led the Iranians and Hezbollah and Hamas to believe we could get Israel to do. And they bought into it.
Hassan Nasrallah agreed to a ceasefire right before he was murdered by the Israelis. This ceasefire was brokered by the gentleman you [Judge Napolitano] just mentioned, this dual citizen.
Ritter is speaking of Amos Hochstein, an official of the State Department who was born in Israel and fought for the IDF, but now has dual citizenship and holds the office of Deputy Assistant to the President.
Back to Scott:
So, today no one trusts the United States. We will never be trusted in the region again on issues of this nature because it is clear that we cannot control Israel. Israel will do whatever it wants to do. And, more importantly, we know what Israel is getting ready to do, and yet we’re pretending to the rest of the world that we can somehow contain this problem. We can’t. Israel is literally out of control.
Michael McFaul, former US Ambassador to Russia, was on a panel sometime, I believe, last year with John Mearsheimer. And Mearsheimer called him out and said, “That means you lied to the Ukrainians.” And he said, “Of course we lied. That’s what we do. Put on your big boy pants. This is what we do.” It’s not what we do, Mr. Ambassador. You can’t be an ambassador if you lie. Your job is to represent your nation, to tell the truth. You don’t have to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you God all the time, but you don’t lie. But we have become a nation of liars. This is what we do. Tony Blinken is a liar. Jake Sullivan is a liar. Joe Biden is a liar. When the president of the United States, the commander in chief, is a liar, who can trust us? Who can trust us? Nobody!
Joe Biden, you lost face; you lost all credibility. Donald Trump, I’m warning you: Stop lying.
But American leaders lie. That’s what we do. The American public has come to accept it, and we’ve forgiven them for it. We keep voting them in.
Telling a lie when you’re the leader of the United States of America, either as the commander in chief or as a member of the cabinet, Tony Blinken as the Secretary of State, should be automatically disqualified for any future leadership position and should lead to the immediate nullification of you as a leader, because you’ve just disgraced not only the oath you took but you disgraced the people you represent.
After the “Christian” Mike Pompeo—the darling of the Religious Right—was CIA Director, in a public presentation he laughingly acknowledged how he violated his West Point honor code, which says that “a cadet will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.” Pompeo cavalierly told his audience: “I was the CIA Director. We lied, we cheated, we stole.” And Christians in his audience gleefully laughed and applauded.
Time after time, we see evangelicals casting aside every Biblical/Christian principle of human decency given to us by the Lord Jesus Christ and His apostles in God’s Holy Word in order to accommodate and facilitate the worst kind of human conduct—including murder and genocide—committed by Republican politicians. But then those same evangelicals become righteously indignant when Democrats commit the exact same crimes.
Back to the interview:
Napolitano: Last week Dr. Gilbert Doctorow started a small firestorm with you and others on the show when he argued that the United States uses Israel to kill Arabs rather than Israel using the United States to fund its expansion of its land area. Is there any argument to be made for Professor Doctorow’s argument that the United States is using Israel to kill Arabs?
Ritter: We’ve killed far more Arabs than Israel ever has. So, I disagree with him completely. This is what happens when you have businessmen turned academics speaking about issues of the military. The United States is fully capable of killing Arabs anytime, anyplace. We never hesitate to kill Arabs. We don’t need Israel to kill Arabs. What we need Israel to do is create a force of instability in the region. It’s easy to kill Arabs. We do it on a daily basis. We can starve them to death; we can blow them up with bombs. We’ve done it. We’ve killed millions of Arabs. Again, far more Arabs have died because of the United States than because of Israel. So, this is a totally incorrect analysis, because it’s predicated upon a factually incorrect notion that we need Israel to kill Arabs. We kill Arabs better than anybody in the world. We’ve proven that.
Napolitano: Why have we killed Arabs?
Ritter: Because we don’t care about them. They’re not people to us. Look at the terms we use. We call them ragheads. We call them sand you-know-what. We speak of them derisively. We disrespect their religion. We have no appreciation for their culture. We don’t view them as human beings, whether they live far away or even here at home. How many Americans actually have gone out to a mosque to meet the local imam and speak to his following? How many Americans have actually reached out to a Palestinian-American community or Syrian-American Community to say, “Hey, we’d like to get to know you more.” I have. I’ve been invited into their homes, to restaurants, to sit down and break bread with them. These are amazing people; these are human beings. And once you realize that, you realize how evil our policy is towards the Middle East, because we treat them like human animals, just like the Israelis do.
Madeleine Albright didn’t blink when she was told that the sanctions of the United States have killed 500,000—that’s a half a million—Iraqi children. And she said that that’s a price we’re willing to pay. That tells you everything you need to know about how the United States views Arabs. When we’re willing to tolerate the death by starvation and disease of a half a million Iraqi children to fulfill our policy objectives, it means we have no regard for Arab life.
Faithful readers have heard me relate my personal experiences with meeting and interacting with Palestinian Christians when I traveled and spoke throughout Palestine. But I’ll say it again here. These people were among the gentlest, kindest, most compassionate and Christ-like people I have ever met—anywhere.
Yet, America’s evangelical “Christians” condone, justify and cheer on the wanton mass murder of these wonderful people, including some of the sweetest and most tenderhearted women, children and elderly gentlemen on earth. And then those same evangelicals have the audacity to go to church on Sunday and talk about how much they love Jesus. It’s absolutely nauseating!
Napolitano: What do you think will stop the Israeli war and genocide regime?
Ritter: The collapse of Israel from within. That’s ultimately what’s going to do it. I mean there’s a chance if Israel does go forward with an attack against Iran, and I believe that they know how foolhardy that would be, because Iran’s not bluffing. Even an attack against non-critical infrastructure will generate an infrastructure-destroying response by Iran, which will destroy Israel, and that’ll be the end of it. Because people can’t live in Israel if there’s no electricity. They can’t live in Israel if there’s no running water. They moved to Israel to be comfortable, to have jobs, to live in the land of milk and honey. And this forever war, because that’s what Israel is going to be locked into now by defining the conditions of victory with Hamas and Hezbollah that cannot be met, Israel is doomed for a forever conflict. The 60,000 will never return to the North; the 20,000 will never return to the South. Israel will never be the same, and people will start fleeing Israel. And once they start fleeing Israel in sufficient numbers, the demographics dictate the end of Israel. And that’s the future of Israel.
Christians are commanded by our Lord to be busy preaching the Gospel, building and edifying the Body of Christ and being the salt of society—”bringing the nations to the obedience of faith.” (Matthew Henry, 1662 – 1714)
Rapture-watchingChristian Zionists are busy all right: busy watching for the Rapture—especially watching Israel as the great sign of the Rapture. EXCEPT, they are blind to the thefts, murders, rapes, ethnic cleansings, terrorism and genocides committed by Israel. Of those matters, they see NOTHING!
Think about this: When King David (the man after God’s own heart) began plans to launch an unjust war of aggression in 2 Samuel 24, God killed 70,000 of David’s men in divine judgment, and had not David repented, God would have destroyed the entire nation, including Jerusalem.
If God would judge King David for his willingness to fight an unjust war, how dare Christian Zionists cheer when a pathological mass murderer like Benjamin Netanyahu commits acts of genocide and crimes against humanity in Palestine?
Ever since 1948, Prophetic Dispensationalists have been watching Israel for signs of the Rapture. Take Israel out of the equation, and they have no prophecy doctrines. NONE!
Right now, Rapturists are going WILD with all kinds of outlandish prophecy teachings.
But the reality is, the collapse of the Zionist State is inevitable—and perhaps imminent. The question is not “If?” but “When?”The Irrepressible Roth…Murray N. RothbardBest Price: $4.46Buy New $17.95(as of 10:37 UTC — Details)
People, wake up! Zionist Israel is NOT Biblical Israel. The land of Palestine does NOT belong to Netanyahu and his thuggish, murderous Zionists. There is NO everlasting kingdom for national Israel. There is NO promise of perpetuity for the Zionist state. There is NO promise of blessing for those who bless Zionist Israel. And there is NO pre-Second Coming rapture.
It is all a lie! A fraud! A devilish deception!
For one thousand years before 1948 (when Zionist Israel became a state), Christians, Muslims and Jews lived in peace side by side in the land of Palestine. After the Zionist state collapses, the Palestinian state that takes its place will prayerfully be a peaceful home for Christians, Muslims and Jews once again.
But what will happen to evangelicals after the collapse of Zionist Israel? Their entire faith system, which is totally dependent upon Israel-based prophecy doctrines, will be shattered.
Perhaps, in the sovereignty of Almighty God, the scales of blindness will then fall off the bewitched (Galatians 3:1) believers who are deceived by the false doctrines of Christian Zionism, and they will be able to see the gloriousNew Covenantof Jesus Christ once more.
Chuck Baldwin is a radio broadcaster, syndicated columnist, and pastor dedicated to preserving the historic principles upon which America was founded. See his website.
The Fed has been the source of booms, busts, and the ongoing impoverishment of Americans since the Fed’s founding.
War Crimes Against Sou…Cisco, Walter BrianBest Price: $24.99Buy New $25.25(as of 07:30 UTC — Details)This is why a new, critical look at the Federal Reserve is needed, and why the Mises Institute is now happy to bring you this new documentary on the Fed.
Playing with Fire provides a look at how the Fed uses its expanding power to damage our economy, increase inequality, and to impoverish ordinary Americans. The film also looks at how much the Fed has expanded its own power since the Financial Crisis of 2008.
Featuring interviews with Ron Paul, Tom DiLorenzo, Joseph Salerno, Mark Thornton, Jim Grant, Alex Pollock, and Jonathan Newman, Playing with Fire explains what the Fed is, where it came from, and why it is so dangerous. Perhaps most importantly of all, Playing with Fire shows why we need to end the Fed altogether.
U.S. President Joe Biden refuses to answer until after November 5th the question of whether the U.S. will officially be at war against Russia.
As I explained on September 27th, headlining “UPDATED: The U.S. Presidential election is now overwhelmingly about whether to go to WW3 for Ukraine. This dwarfs every other issue.”, Russia’s President Vladimir Putin had announced on September 25th that any nation which would bomb anywhere “deep” in Russia (such as The Kremlin) or would allow Ukraine’s armed forces to use that nation’s weapons in order to do so, would immediately experience Russia’s retaliation for having done that. This report was a follow-on to my September 13th “Biden might decide today whether to initiate WW3 against Russia.”, which stated that Britain’s Prime Minister Keir Starmer was to meet privately that day with Biden to request his permission to allow Ukraine to use in that way the missiles which Britain had supplied to Ukraine, and that the White House gave a clear indication that it was not going to say yes to Starmer’s request. On September 15th, I issued an “UPDATE #4” to that article, which indicated that Biden’s answer to Starmer had been to the effect of “not yet,” but that all of the UK’s top leadership were united in all Parties urging that he say yes as fast as possible.Democracy u2013 The Go…Hans-Hermann HoppeBest Price: $24.77Buy New $37.61(as of 09:25 UTC — Details)
I must confess that I took Biden’s response to mean that he didn’t want to quit the war in Ukraine before the voting on Election Day November 5th, but to do it instead after (when that announcement wouldn’t affect the election’s outcome). For example, on October 8th I optimistically headlined “NATO has begun its death-spiral.”
A summit of allied countries aimed at coordinating more military support for Ukraine set for Saturday Oct. 12 has been postponed following the cancellation of U.S. President Joe Biden’s visit to Germany.
At the end of a three-day trip to Germany, Biden was due to chair a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group, a loose alliance of more than 50 countries known as the Ramstein Format, named for the air base in which it is usually held.
“The October 12, 2024 event is postponed,” the U.S.-managed Ramstein Air Base said in an emailed note on Wednesday. “Announcements about future Ukraine Defense Contact Group meetings will be forthcoming.”
In other words: he does want WW3, but not before November 6th. This is why he cancelled the October 12th meeting, which would have prematurely forced Biden’s hand. He wants to win this election, and then to go to war against Russia.
The October 12th meeting was supposed to announce further increases in the U.S. empire’s support for Ukraine against Russia. If Biden had until now been intending to attend that crucial meeting in order to have it agree to continue and to extend but not increase the existing support to Ukraine, which would avoid WW3, then he definitely would have attended, in order to have that outcome and thereby leave the domestic political situation unchanged and unaffected by that war. That scenario would have publicly committed the U.S. to keeping in place his present policy of adhering to “Putin’s red lines.” But now that Biden has shocked everyone by canceling the meeting altogether, the sign is far more ominous: that whenever this meeting WILL occur, Biden is going to say yes to the WW3 chorus — and that this is going to happen AFTER November 5th.Getting Libertarianism…Hans-Hermann HoppeBest Price: $3.95Buy New $7.95(as of 12:25 UTC — Details)
The general public might not be conscious of the fact, but nuclear weapons exist for a country so that if ever that country has a war that it will lose without using nukes, those weapons will be available to be used in order to avoid defeat. Ukraine’s Government right now wants the U.S. to back it up in that way so as to prevent what increasingly looks to be an inevitable defeat by Russia. Biden has repeatedly said publicly that Russia will lose this war; Ukraine will win it. The U.S. and its colonies have already spent over $400 billion so that it will. This is an existential war for both Ukraine as (since 2014) an American colony, and Russia as an independent country. It is not an existential war for America as an independent country. But it is for the U.S. as the largest-in-history empire; so that Biden is now making the decisions not only for his country but for his empire. This is what the concept of American global hegemony is all about. Biden’s duty as America’s President is to do what its Founders had authorized an American President to do. No “Emperor” in modern times has any right to exist as such, and therefore no ‘duty’ as an Emperor. If President Biden will use the powers of an American President in order to preserve and extend an American empire that America’s Founders never authorized to exist, then he will be a traitor.
PS: If you like this article, please email it to all your friends or otherwise let others know about it. None of the U.S.-and-allied ‘news’-media will likely publish it (nor link to it, since doing that might also hurt them with Google or etc.).
Hier sehe ich, dass die Hähne der NATO mit Atomwaffen klirrten. Sie wollen die heruntergekommenen Muskeln Europas zur Schau stellen. Ich schaue überrascht – was ist das denn auf einmal für ein Selbstmord?
Der Versuch der NATO, mit einer „Demonstration“ ihrer „Atomkraft“ einzuschüchtern, wird nicht zu Ergebnissen führen. Die Reaktion Russlands auf jeden Schritt des Westens, der unsere nationale Sicherheit bedroht, wird unmittelbar erfolgen.
Der Bundeskanzler im Nordkurier-Interview: Warum Medien und Politik keine Einheit bilden dürfen, warum er rote Linien falsch findet und welche Frage er zum Ukraine-Krieg vermisst.
„Heftig: Der „Keine roten Linien“-Kanzler im Interview mit dem Nordkurier. Kognitive Dissonanz allenthalben – dieser Mann hat neben einer erschütternden moralischen Flexibilität auch schlichtweg Pech beim Denken. Befragt zu seinem umstrittenen Satz aus dem Winter 2021, „Für meine Regierung gibt es keine roten Linien mehr“, sagt Scholz:
„Es darf keine roten Linien geben, das hat uns diese Pandemie nun wirklich gezeigt. Dazu stehe ich auch heute noch. Politik muss handlungsfähig bleiben. Wir müssen immer bereit sein umzudenken, wenn die Umstände es erfordern. Ich habe mich in keinem Politikfeld je auf rote Linien festlegen lassen, weil das nur zu einer hypernervösen Öffentlichkeit führt, wann eine solche Linie möglicherweise doch überschritten wird – weder in in der Corona-Pandemie, noch in der Frage von Krieg und Frieden.“
Soweit, so amoralisch.
Scholz sagt auch – im nächsten Atemzug, nach den Fehlern der Corona-Zeit befragt: „Aus meiner Sicht zum Beispiel die umfangreichen Schulschließungen oder nächtlichen Ausgangssperren.“ Mehr nicht. Über sein „Limited Hangout“ denkt er nicht groß nach, er sagt an dieser Stelle einfach irgendwas, um formal irgendwas zuzugeben – Hauptsache, es ist überschaubar.
Aber huch – es gibt also doch „rote Linien“? Zumindest, wenn man davon ausgeht, dass man „Fehler“ der Vergangenheit in der Zukunft bestenfalls nicht wiederholt, weil man aus ihnen gelernt haben sollte? Oder hat der „Keine roten Linien“-Kanzler bis dahin ohnehin wieder alles vergessen?
Und Lockdowns, massivste Grundrechtseinschränkungen, die Impfpflicht-Debatte, berufsbezogene Impfpflichten, Maskenpflichten, Masken-Überbestellungen, Berufsverbote, einsam verstorbene Alte, Notzulassungen eines unzureichend getesteten Produkts, Impfgeschädigte, Impftote, Haftungsbefreiungen für Impfhersteller, Testpflichten, soziale Exklusion von 30% der Bevölkerung – all das kommt dann wieder, da es ja keine Fehler waren? Für den „Keine roten Linien“-Kanzler auch in Zukunft alles kein Problem?
Keine Fragen mehr, warum die letzten drei Jahre in diesem Land alles lief, wie es lief. Olaf Scholz kann eins und eins nicht zusammenzählen, er hat kein moralisches Rückgrat, ist vollkommen empathiebefreit, selbstgerecht und bar jeder Fehlerkultur. Olaf Scholz ist der Totengräber eines untergehenden Landes. Aber ich weigere mich, zu glauben, dass dieses Land diesen Mann verdient hat.“
Ieri, il Pentagono ha annunciato che l’esercito statunitense invierà in Israele una batteria di difesa missilistica e anche dei soldati per il suo funzionamento.
Il Segretario alla Difesa statunitense Lloyd Austin ha autorizzato il dispiegamento della batteria THAAD (Terminal High Altitude Area Defense) su indicazione del Presidente Joe Biden, ha riferito il Pentagono in un comunicato.
Gli Stati Uniti stanno cercando di contribuire a rafforzare le difese aeree di Israele dopo un attacco su larga scala di missili balistici iraniani contro le basi aeree israeliane il 1° ottobre. Teheran ha lanciato la raffica di missili balistici come rappresaglia per le molteplici aggressioni compiute da Tel Aviv, tra cui l’assassinio del leader politico di Hamas Ismail Haniyeh a luglio e del leader di Hezbollah Hassan Nasrallah il 27 settembre.
“Questa azione sottolinea il fermo impegno degli Stati Uniti a difendere Israele e gli americani in Israele da ulteriori attacchi con missili balistici da parte dell’Iran”, ha commentato il portavoce del Pentagono, il Maggiore Generale Pat Ryder.
In risposta, il ministro degli Esteri iraniano Abbas Araghchi ha lanciato un avvertimento ai leader statunitensi in una dichiarazione su X, ricordando che stanno mettendo a rischio la vita dei loro soldati inviandoli in Israele.
The US has been delivering record amount of arms to Israel. It is now also putting lives of its troops at risk by deploying them to operate US missile systems in Israel.
While we have made tremendous efforts in recent days to contain an all-out war in our region, I say it… pic.twitter.com/wX16CnhT1A— Seyed Abbas Araghchi (@araghchi) October 13, 2024
“Gli Stati Uniti hanno consegnato quantità record di armi a Israele. Ora stanno anche mettendo a rischio la vita delle proprie truppe, schierandole per far funzionare i sistemi missilistici statunitensi in Israele. Sebbene negli ultimi giorni abbiamo compiuto sforzi enormi per contenere una guerra totale nella nostra regione, ribadisco chiaramente che non abbiamo linee rosse nel difendere il nostro popolo e i nostri interessi”, ha scritto Araghchi.
L’AP osserva che, secondo un rapporto pubblicato ad aprile del Congressional Research Service, l’esercito statunitense dispone di sette batterie THAAD. Ognuna è composta da sei lanciatori montati su camion, contiene 48 intercettori, apparecchiature radio e radar e richiede 95 soldati per il funzionamento.
Vertreter des militärisch-industriellen Komplexes haben sich vom 8. bis zum 10. Oktober in der Messe Essen getroffen, um über NATO-Strategien für das Schlachtfeld des 21. Jahrhunderts zu beraten. Gleichzeitig wird die öffentliche Meinung massiv manipuliert. Von Bernhard Trautvetter.
Die Militarisierung der Gesellschaft führt zu immer neuen Schritten in Richtung Abgrund. Dabei greifen die Militärs des Atomzeitalters auf, was ihre Vorgänger taten. Was bis vor kurzem kaum jemand für möglich gehalten hätte, soll jetzt konkret werden: Die Ruhrmetropole Essen, einst von den Nazis wegen der Krupp-Werke „Waffenschmiede des Reiches“ genannt, soll laut dem Chef der Messe Essen die „zentrale Plattform für die europäische Verteidigungs- und Sicherheitsbranche“ werden.
Um die öffentliche Meinungsbildung im Sinn des Militärs zu manipulieren, benutzen die Akteure Begriffe wie „Sicherheit“ und „Verteidigung“. Das unterstellt die reale Gefahr eines Angriffs Russlands gegen NATO-Gebiet; diese Rechtfertigung der Militärpolitik steht in der Tradition von Kaiser Wilhelm, Adolf Hitler und den NATO-Nachkriegs-Strategen. Die beiden Weltkriege wurden mit einer unterstellten Aggressivität aus dem Osten begründet. Das war so verlogen wie die Begründung für die NATO-Gründung, man müsse sich vor der Gefahr, die dem Westen von der Sowjetunion droht, schützen. Diese Begründung erfolgte kurz nach dem Krieg, in dem mindestens 27 Millionen Sowjetbürger getötet worden waren und in dem die industrielle Infrastruktur der Sowjetunion weitgehend dem Prinzip der Nazis von der verbrannten Erde zum Opfer gefallen war.
In der Messe Essen trafen sich vom 8. bis zum 10. Oktober hunderte Vertreterinnen und Vertreter des militärisch-industriellen Komplexes, um über NATO-Strategien für das Schlachtfeld des 21. Jahrhunderts zu beraten. Eingeladen hatte die Strategieschmiede Joint Air (and Space) Power Competence Centre (JAPCC) aus dem linksrheinischen Kalkar. Die Strategen befassten sich intensiv mit dem Ukraine-Krieg und mit der von Russland und China ausgehenden Gefahr, wie die Dokumente ausdrücken.
Das soll unter anderem dadurch geschehen, dass alle beteiligten Seiten ihre Kooperation für die Planung einer Messe in Essen nutzen, um in Kombination mit einer JAPCC-Konferenz dann im September 2026 die Premiere einer Euro Defence Expo in der Messe Essen zu feiern, wie es die Akteure ausdrücken. Die „Sicherheitsexpertin“ Frau Strack-Zimmermann legitimiert das Projekt im Dokument der Messe Essen mit dem Ukraine-Krieg Russlands:
„Nach dem brutalen russischen Angriff auf die Ukraine ist die Fähigkeit Europas, sich in Zukunft gemeinsam verteidigen zu können, von zentraler Bedeutung. Auf der Euro Defence Expo werden … Industrie, Forschung und Politik … im Herzen Europas … gemeinsam an Lösungen … arbeiten.“
Herr Kuhrt, Geschäftsführer der Messe Essen, erläutert, es handele sich um „eine einzigartige Plattform für Politik, Militär, Wissenschaft und Industrie“: „Diese Veranstaltung mit namhaften Experten der Branche“ wird mehr als eine Messe sein, sondern sie wird „zu einem zentralen Ort des Wissensaustauschs und der Vernetzung. Die Kombination aus hochkarätigen Experten, innovativen Lösungen und intensiven Fachgesprächen bietet Ausstellern und Besuchern ein echtes Plus…“
Dieses Plus droht, die Lebensfähigkeit der europäischen Zivilisation zu gefährden, wie eine Kombination der Tagungsunterlagen der kürzlich abgeschlossenen und von der Presse verschwiegenen Strategiekonferenz des JAPCC zeigt:
„Die sich abzeichnenden technischen und taktischen Fortschritte verändern das Schlachtfeld dramatisch.“ (Übersetz.: B.T.)
Die Tagungsunterlagen ihrer 2014er Vorgängerkonferenz geben Auskunft, welches Schlachtfeld die Militärs meinen – sie schrieben damals, die Annahme, es werde keinen großen Krieg mehr in Europa geben, sei anzuzweifeln (S. 141). Ihre Schlussfolgerung war damals schon, „einen angemessenen Mix aus nuklearen und nicht-nuklearen Fähigkeiten“ aufzubauen (ebenda, S. 70).
Wenn die Diffamierung der Friedensbewegung und der Kriegstauglichkeits-Diskurs der Herrschenden weiter viele Menschen blendet, ist zu befürchten, dass ein adäquater Widerstand gegen diese Entwicklung ausbleibt. Die Militär-Lobby hat lange schon daran gearbeitet, den Widerstand zu dezimieren, damit sie nicht schon wieder nach dem Vietnamkrieg und nach der Friedensbewegung der 1980er Jahre in die Defensive gezwungen wird: Meinungsführende Medien sowie viele Spitzenpolitikerinnen und Politiker stellen die Friedensbewegung als naiv und gefährlich dar, wie es auch der bündnisgrüne Vizekanzler Robert Habeck anlässlich der Ostermärsche 2023 tat.
Die Militärpropaganda hat System. 2015 beriet die Essener JAPCC-Konferenz unter dem Titel ›Strategic Communication‹ über die Beeinflussung der Öffentlichkeit im NATO-Gebiet. Im Tagungsmaterial bedauerten die Strategen, dass George W. Bush bei der Begründung für den völkerrechtswidrigen, unprovozierten Angriffskrieg gegen den Irak, der übrigens in Ramstein eine Drehscheibe für Kriegswaffen hatte, gelogen hatte (S. 44). Sie plädierten dafür, zukünftig in solchen Konflikten die Grausamkeit des Gegners herauszustellen, um die Weltöffentlichkeit für militärische Handlungen bis zum Krieg zu gewinnen.
Aleksandar Vulin, vice-Premier ministre serbe, a déclaré que les BRICS étaient une alternative à l’UE et que son pays envisageait d’y adhérer. Il a critiqué l’UE pour ses conditions inatteignables, contrairement à la Russie, qui n’impose pas de telles restrictions.
«Il serait irresponsable de ne pas examiner toutes les possibilités, y compris l’adhésion aux BRICS. Si les BRICS sont attractifs pour d’autres pays, comme pour les Émirats arabes unis, l’Arabie saoudite ou la Turquie, pourquoi en serait-il autrement pour la Serbie ? Il ne fait donc aucun doute que les BRICS sont devenus une alternative réelle à l’Union européenne», a déclaré Aleksandar Vulin, vice-Premier ministre serbe, ce 13 octobre dans une interview au journal allemand Berliner Zeitung.
Aleksandar Vulin a également affirmé qu’il était devenu eurosceptique après avoir «découvert l’UE de l’intérieur». Selon lui, Bruxelles impose à Belgrade des conditions irréalisables et ne considère pas le pays comme un partenaire.
Comme l’a souligné Aleksandar Vulin, l’UE exigerait que la Serbie rompe tous ses liens avec la Russie pour rejoindre l’UE, tandis que le président russe Vladimir Poutine n’imposerait pas de telles conditions.
Les BRICS s’élargissent
La Russie occupe la présidence des BRICS du 1er janvier au 31 décembre 2024. Au cours de cette période, plus de 200 événements sont prévus dans le cadre de cette présidence russe, couvrant un large éventail de thématiques, allant de l’économie à la coopération culturelle.
L’événement principal de cette présidence sera le sommet des BRICS, qui se tiendra du 22 au 24 octobre à Kazan, en Russie. Ce sommet est prévu comme un rendez-vous majeur, des invitations ayant été envoyées à 38 pays à travers le monde. À ce jour, 32 pays ont confirmé leur participation, et 24 chefs d’État assisteront personnellement à cet événement.
Les BRICS, un regroupement de puissances économiques émergentes incluant le Brésil, la Russie, l’Inde, la Chine et l’Afrique du Sud, attirent de plus en plus de pays intéressés par une coopération multipolaire. Depuis le 1er janvier 2024, l’Iran, l’Arabie saoudite, l’Égypte, les Émirats arabes unis et l’Éthiopie sont devenus membres à part entière de l’organisation.
Russlands Unterstützung der multipolaren Prozesse in Westafrika hat der französischen Hegemonie dort einen schweren Schlag versetzt, worauf Frankreich mit einem Stellvertreterkrieg gegen Russland in Mali und einer strategischen Offensive im Südkaukasus und in Osteuropa reagiert hat.
Der französische Verteidigungsminister Sébastien Lecornu erklärte in einem Interview, dass Russland neben terroristischen Gruppen die „größte Bedrohung“ für sein Land darstelle. Er verwies auf die „aggressiven“ Aktionen Russlands im vergangenen Jahr, die „nicht nur unsere Interessen in Afrika, sondern auch unsere Streitkräfte direkt betreffen“. Lecornu warf Russland auch vor, einen „Informationskrieg“ zu führen und „neue Gebiete zu militarisieren, einschließlich des Meeresbodens und des Cyberspace“. In Wirklichkeit stellt Russland zwar eine Bedrohung für Frankreich dar, aber nur für seine Hegemonie, nicht für seine legitimen Interessen.
Russlands Afrikapolitik, über die sich die Leser hier informieren können, zielt darauf ab, die multipolaren Prozesse dort zu beschleunigen. Dies geschieht durch die Unterstützung der ehemaligen französischen Kolonien Mali, Burkina Faso und Niger, nicht nur bilateral, sondern auch multilateral im Rahmen der neu gegründeten Sahel-Allianz und -Konföderation. Ihre patriotischen Militärs wollen ihre übergroße Abhängigkeit von Frankreich verringern, indem sie sich stärker auf Russland stützen, um so viel wie möglich von ihrer verlorenen Souveränität zurückzugewinnen.
Konkret bedeutet dies, dass sie Frankreich durch Russland als ihren bevorzugten Partner bei der Terrorismusbekämpfung ersetzen, wobei einige spekulieren, dass die unmittelbare Gegenleistung in einem privilegierten russischen Zugang zu ihren Ressourcen besteht. Das kurzfristige Ziel besteht darin, die Stabilität wiederherzustellen. Danach kann das mittelfristige Ziel, sich weiter von der französischen „Einflusssphäre“ zu lösen, mit größerer Zuversicht verfolgt werden, idealerweise durch die Einführung einer neuen regionalen Währung, die den CFA-Franc ersetzt, den Paris weiterhin zur eigenen Bereicherung auf Kosten des Landes ausnutzt.
Diese beiden Entwicklungen bedrohen die französische Hegemonie, da die erste ihre Bemühungen, diese Länder zu teilen und zu beherrschen, behindert, während die zweite traditionell für die Ankurbelung ihrer Wirtschaft verantwortlich ist. Zusammengenommen bedeutet Russlands Unterstützung dieser multipolaren Prozesse in der Tat einen schweren Schlag für die französischen Interessen, aber wiederum nur für seine hegemonialen Interessen und nicht für seine legitimen. Frankreich kann die Art und Weise, in der Russland es in Afrika bedroht, nicht anerkennen, da die dunkle Wahrheit es sehr schlecht aussehen lässt.
Es wird jedoch nicht kampflos untergehen und führt deshalb gemeinsam mit den USA und der Ukraine einen Stellvertreterkrieg gegen Russland in Mali, indem es Tuareg-Separatisten und islamistische Gruppen unterstützt. Weitere Fronten könnten sich gegen die Sahel-Allianz/-Föderation auftun, etwa wenn französisch-amerikanische Kräfte in der Elfenbeinküste versuchen, den Süden Malis und Burkina Fasos zu destabilisieren. Die dschihadistische Gewalt in Burkina Faso, die bereits kritische Ausmaße angenommen hat, könnte sich mit ihrer Unterstützung ebenfalls bald verschlimmern.
Frankreich ist nicht nur in der Defensive, sondern geht auch in die strategische Offensive gegen Russland im Südkaukasus, indem es sich bemüht, die prowestliche Ausrichtung Armeniens zu beschleunigen. Die ultranationalistische armenische Diaspora, die das Land beherbergt, hat dabei eine entscheidende Rolle gespielt. Auch Frankreich verkauft militärische Ausrüstung an Armenien, um das Misstrauen Russlands gegenüber seinen Absichten noch zu verstärken. Die engen russisch-aserbaidschanischen Beziehungen und die beeindruckend pragmatischen russisch-georgischen Beziehungen schränken die Pläne des Westens jedoch ein.
Sollten sie jemals erfolgreich sein, würden sie eine direkte Bedrohung für Russlands legitime Interessen darstellen, indem sie einen größeren Konflikt an seiner südlichen Peripherie provozieren. Dadurch wird Frankreichs Einmischung im Südkaukasus objektiv gesehen viel bedrohlicher als Russlands Unterstützung multipolarer Prozesse in Westafrika. Das Gleiche gilt für die andere strategische Offensive, die Frankreich seit dem Verlust seiner „Einflusssphäre“ in der Sahelzone gegen Russland unternommen hat, indem es Interesse an einer konventionellen Intervention in der Ukraine signalisierte.
Der französische Präsident Emmanuel Macron, dessen außenpolitische Fehltritte hier analysiert wurden, hat seine Rhetorik inzwischen abgeschwächt, schließt ein solches Szenario aber immer noch nicht aus. Der Grund, warum es so gefährlich ist, damit zu kokettieren, ist, dass es zum Ausbruch konventioneller NATO-russischer Feindseligkeiten in der Ukraine führen könnte, die durch eine Fehlkalkulation zum Dritten Weltkrieg eskalieren könnten. Frankreich ist sich des enormen Risikos bewusst, das auf dem Spiel steht, zieht aber dennoch leichtsinnigerweise dieses Vorgehen als Racheakt gegen Russland in Betracht.
Nach den bisherigen Erkenntnissen hat Russlands Unterstützung multipolarer Prozesse in Westafrika der französischen Hegemonie dort einen schweren Schlag versetzt, worauf Frankreich mit einem Stellvertreterkrieg gegen Russland in Mali und einer strategischen Offensive im Südkaukasus und in Osteuropa reagiert hat. Daher ist nicht Russland die „größte Bedrohung“ für Frankreich, sondern Frankreich ist eine „große Bedrohung“ für Russland und die Welt im Allgemeinen aufgrund der Verwüstungen, die es aus Boshaftigkeit in drei verschiedenen Regionen anrichtet.
Die in diesem Artikel geäußerten Ansichten spiegeln nicht unbedingt die Ansichten der fixen Autoren von TKP wider. Rechte und inhaltliche Verantwortung liegen beim Autor.
Andrew Korybko ist ein in Moskau ansässiger amerikanischer politischer Analyst, der sich auf den globalen systemischen Übergang zur Multipolarität spezialisiert hat. Er veröffentlicht auf Englisch auf seinem Substack-Blog. Auf Deutsch exklusiv bei TKP.
Der Friedensstifter 