Unscrupulous “elites” drive Europe and Russia into war
by Wolfgang Effenberger*
(18 June 2021) An unscrupulous “elite” of NATO strategists, global financial and economic oligarchs is plunging Europe and Russia into war. Since the collapse of the Soviet Union, NATO has expanded more and more towards Russia, contrary to the agreements made. The culmination of this expansion was the 2014 coup in Ukraine, which was clearly engineered by the United States to the tune of five billion dollars.
The predominantly Russian-speaking inhabitants of Crimea opposed the plan of the new pro-Western Ukrainian government to introduce Ukrainian as an official language in a referendum and voted by a majority to join the Russian Federation. This prevented the installation of a NATO naval base in Crimea.
In early January 2017, an entire U.S. armoured brigade landed in Bremerhaven to be deployed on NATO's eastern flank in Poland and Lithuania. At the time, neither the media nor the peace movement took note of this largest deployment since the end of the Cold War. Since then, the scale and density of NATO maneuvers in the region have continued to increase. Since 2020, an entire armoured division has been unloaded in Bremerhaven and moved by land to Poland or the Baltic States.
All-embracing war preparations
In March 2021, the large-scale maneuvers “Defender Europe 21” began; it will last until June with many individual exercises. The main objective of the exercise is the rapid transfer of soldiers and equipment from the United States by ship to Europe, and then by land towards Russia. In 2017, the EU created the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) organisation so that land movements can also be conducted smoothly by heavy tracked vehicles. Its objective is to ensure that the infrastructure for improving military mobility in Europe is optimised.
According to media reports, Turkey, as a NATO member, wants to become involved in the EU's security and defense policy. By mid-May, Ankara reportedly asked the Dutch Ministry of Defense to participate in a multi-billion euro project to improve military mobility as part of “permanent structured cooperation”. The Netherlands is coordinating the project, which aims to improve the transport of troops and equipment in Europe.1 Meanwhile, three former Soviet republics have joined forces in Kiev in an effort to join the EU.
On May 17, 2021, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba tweeted with satisfaction, “Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova are now officially the Associated Trio. Today we join the road to European integration in this new format created in Kiev.”2 All three states have access to the Black Sea, and the Black Sea happens to be the focus of this year's NATO maneuvers.
U.S. Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, former commander of U.S. Army Europe (2014 to 2017), wrote in a 2020 strategy paper that Russia was too strong in the Black Sea for NATO to “take control”.3 However, the transatlantic coalition could “make the Russian Black Sea fleet vulnerable.” Last year's war exercise focused on the Baltic Sea region, which is of growing geostrategic importance due to the ever-increasing tensions between the West and Russia.4 These maneuvers further heightened tensions. Is the Black Sea region about to experience a similar situation?
In May 2021, some 30,000 troops from 21 NATO states and five countries close to the Alliance – Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo, Moldova, Ukraine and Georgia – were deployed to the Black Sea, where a large number of combat exercises were held. During the maneuvers “Noble Jump” in Bulgaria (19 May–2 June 2021) and “Maritime Live Exercise” in the Atlantic (20–28 May), the exercise “Command Post Exercise” (12–20 May) was conducted in Germany.
On 20 May 2021, the U.S. Army newspaper “Stars and Stripes” reported on long-range artillery maneuvers at Grafenwoehr; 1,800 soldiers from 15 countries are participating in the “Dynamic Front” exercise, which runs through 24 May. U.S. Brig. Gen. Christopher Norrie, in charge of the 7th Army Training Command, explained that the purpose of the exercise was to “ensure that, in the event of a conflict, his army's gunners in Germany can coordinate fire missions with any number of allied ground forces anywhere in Europe.”5 Unlike the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, a conflict with Russia in Europe would mean dealing with an adversary capable of launching precision strikes, even at long range. The United States and its allies will now focus on improving their ability to deploy large numbers of troops and equipment quickly in a crisis, he said. Norrie emphasised the role of the U.S. military and the fact that long-range artillery exercises must be accompanied by a broader effort to improve required capabilities. These requests and PESCO (infrastructure) measures underscore the offensive nature of strategic exercises.
For Russia, all this activity by the US and NATO must seem frightening.
According to General Norrie, “Defender 21” was developed because of fears of a more aggressive Russia. The general seems to have ignored the fact that only six months after the U.S.-fomented coup in February 2014 in violation of international law, the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command – one of the three major Army-level commands – presented the strategic document “TRADOC 525-3-1 Win in a complex world 2020–2040”6 on 31 October 2014. It originated under Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton and propagates U.S. “full-spectrum dominance” on land, sea, and in the air. The most important adversaries: the competing powers of China and Russia.7
Banks and NGOs as auxiliary volunteers
The Open Society Fondations8 of mega-speculator and billionaire9 George Soros, a network of foundations active in 42 countries, have been instrumental in the colour revolutions of the past 30 years. As early as 1984, he encouraged dissents behind the Iron Curtain. That certainly sounds brave. But is it? On 2 September 1982, US President Ronald Reagan signed the “National Security Decision Directive 54” (NSDD-54). With this directive, Reagan sought to destabilise the Soviet bloc, undermine the Warsaw Pact and weaken Moscow's hold on Eastern Europe:
Governments allied with the Soviet Union that stepped back from socialism, adopted liberal reforms or demonstrated independence from Moscow would, Reagan promised, receive US support. “Among the incentives listed in NSDD-54 were 'most favored nation' status, access to US capital and credits, membership in the International Monetary Fund (IMF), cultural and scientific exchanges, and high-level visits.” 10
It is likely that Soros' operations were concerted in collusion with the US State Department and the CIA. His support for the 2014 coup in Ukraine is now established.11
In 1984, George Soros set up a foundation in Hungary that later became the “Open Society Foundations” network. He mainly supported student groups by distributing free communication tools (first photocopiers, then laptops and mobile phones) in order “to break the Communist Party's stranglehold on information”12 – and, of course, to spread anti-Russian propaganda. This was used to prepare for the “regime changes” in Ukraine and Georgia. In Moldova, the Soros Moldova Foundation was established in 1992. In the meantime, “regime change” activities are being successfully implemented in Belarus and Russia.
The method of the “Open Society” is always the same: state structures are undermined by means of “protests” until the state power has to react, which can then be publicly denounced as dictatorial. In the resulting chaos, one can then establish one's own (mafia) structures without hindrance. Of course, Soros is also active in Western societies as an opinion maker. For example, he finances the campaign organisation Campact13 (including Open Petition) and the “censorship body” Correctiv.14
Together with the IMF and other NGOs, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) helps bring wars and impoverishment to the world through debt and plunder. This international central bank is an institution that implements a century-old feudal agenda of the dominant financial elite. The wars of this mafia are waged by the debt-dependent states in Europe and elsewhere that are incited to hatred. When the incitement does not bear fruit, the ground is prepared for war with imported terror. See Libya, Syria, Ukraine, etc.
During Donald Trump's presidency, no new wars were triggered and some hot spots were contained. Now, under the leadership of Joe Biden, the provocations are on the rise again (Ukraine, Middle East). How much longer will Vladimir Putin be able to resist the pressure and keep his military leaders waiting?
Is there still an opposing force worth mentioning, or has the global financial elite and its media taken over the world for a long time already?
The so-called quality media, in which controversial commentaries and opinions could still be read until the 1990s, have now been completely brought to heel. “Die Zeit” has surpassed “Spiegel” in Russia-bashing by publishing the anti-Russian commentary “Germany's resounding silence” by German-British journalist Alan Posener at the end of April 2021.
In it, he recommends that the “cultural left” should free itself from its guilt complex towards Russia. It should, he says, “get rid of the idea that peace with Russia at almost any price is a moral duty because of the German invasion of the Soviet Union in 1941. Among the main victims of the German war of extermination in the East were, in addition to the Poles and Balts, above all the Ukrainians, who had already been mistreated by Stalin. It should therefore be part of Germany's raison d'état to promote democracy in this new state as it did in Poland and the Baltic States, to give it security within NATO and to show it the way to EU membership. Germany's resounding silence on this issue almost drowns out the loud Russian propaganda.”15 This argument should serve as a model for the Greens and the left to facilitate the planned war against Russia.
Especially in view of the 80th anniversary of the invasion of the Soviet Union by the Wehrmacht of the National Socialist regime on 22 June, we must counter the warmongers.
"A new war in Europe? Not in our name!"
Only five weeks after the presentation of the TRADOC pamphlet, at the end of October 2014, Roman Herzog, Gerhard Schröder and more than 60 other personalities from politics, business, culture and the media issued a warning in the appeal “A new war in Europe? Not in our name!” against war and called for dialogue with Russia.16
They called for a new détente policy for Europe. Their appeal was addressed to the German government, members of the Bundestag and the media:
“We, the undersigned, call on the Federal Government to assume its responsibility for peace in Europe. We need a new détente policy for Europe. This can only be achieved on the basis of equal security for all and with equal and mutually respected partners. The German government is not taking a particular path when it continues to call for calm and dialogue with Russia in this tense situation. The Russians' need for security is as legitimate and pronounced as that of the Germans, Poles, Baltics and Ukrainians.
We must not push Russia out of Europe. That would be unhistorical, unreasonable and dangerous for peace. Since the Congress of Vienna in 1814, Russia has been one of the recognised shaping powers of Europe. All those who have tried to change this by force have failed bloodily – the most recent being Hitler's megalomaniac Germany, which set out in 1941 to subjugate Russia too.
We call on the members of the German Bundestag, as politicians entrusted by the people, to do justice to the gravity of the situation and to be mindful of the federal government's duty to keep the peace. Those who merely construct hostile images and use one-sided accusations are exacerbating tensions at a time when the signals should be pointing towards détente. Inclusion instead of exclusion must be the guiding principle for German politicians.
We call on the media to fulfil their duty of impartial information more convincingly than before. Editorialists and commentators demonise entire populations without sufficient appreciation of their history. Any journalist versed in foreign policy will understand the fear of the Russians since NATO members invited Georgia and Ukraine to join the alliance in 2008. This is not about Putin. Leaders come and go. It's about Europe. It's about removing the fear of war from people's minds. Responsible reporting based on solid research can go a long way.
On 3 October 1990, the day of German unity, Federal President Richard von Weizsäcker said: ’The Cold War is over. Freedom and democracy have rapidly prevailed in all states. ...] They can now consolidate their relations and secure them institutionally in such a way that for the first time they can become a common order of life and peace. For the peoples of Europe, this marks the beginning of a fundamentally new chapter in their history. Its goal is pan-European unification. This is an enormous goal. We can achieve it, but we can also fail to achieve it. We are faced with a clear alternative: to unite Europe or, according to painful historical examples, to fall back into nationalistic antagonisms.’
Until the conflict in Ukraine, we thought we were on the right track in Europe. Richard von Weizsäcker's admonition is more relevant than ever today, a quarter of a century later."
It would be difficult to find 60 well-known personalities today for such a call to responsibility. They would probably be pilloried in the media as “Russlandversteher” (Russia understander) or “Putinversteher” (= Putin empathiser). Strangely enough, even the understanding of other people's positions is outlawed, while in our Western “discourse society” we are so proud of dialogue and mutual understanding.
The exclusion of renowned scientific experts from the public debate on Covid-19 already shows that a real social discourse has become almost impossible.
(Written on 23 May 2021)
(Translation «Swiss Standpoint»)
|
* Wolfgang Effenberger, born 1946, is a journalist and author of numerous books. He publishes in German. Here are three of his latest books: “Wiederkehr der Hasardeure, Schattenstrategen, Kriegstreiber, stille Profiteure 1914 und heute”; “Geo-Imperialismus: Die Zerstörung der Welt”, 2016. Most recently, the following was published “Schwarzbuch EU & NATO”, 2021 (https://zeitgeist-online.de/2013-11-30-00-57-32/1097-wolfgang-effenberger-schwarzbuch-eu-nato.html). |
1 Turkey to join EU defense policy (16 May 2021) https://www.faz.net/aktuell/politik/ausland/tuerkei-will-sich-an-eu-verteidigungspolitik-beteiligen-17343535.html?utm_source=pocket-newtab-global-de-DE
3 NATO must focus more on the Black Sea to defend itself against Russia, according to a report (26 May 2020)
https://www.stripes.com/news/europe/nato-needs-to-focus-more-on-the-black-sea-to-defend-against-russia-report-says-1.631211
4 Peter Ozechowski: “Die Konfliktzonen im Schwarzen Meer”, Kopp exklusiv 20/21, p. 6.
5 John Vandiver: Stars and Stripes. 20 May 2021: “Fifteen countries, 1,800 troops demonstrate NATO’s reach in US-led fires exercise in Germany” https://www.stripes.com/fifteen-countries-1-800-troops-demonstrate-nato-s-reach-in-us-led-fires-exercise-in-germany-1.674002?
6 Army training and doctrine command fort Eustis VA on http://oai.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=getRecord&metadataPrefix=html&identifier=ADA611359
7 Wolfgang Effenberger: Der “Militärisch-Industrielle Komplex” (MIC) or the “Merchants of Death” http://www.nrhz.de/flyer/beitrag.php?id=23092
8 Annual budget of the Open Society Foundations: $940 million.
9 According to the American magazine Forbes, Soros owns about $25 billion
10 https://alphahistory.com/coldwar/reagan-policy-soviet-bloc-nations-1982/
11 https://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/welt/osteuropa/politik/ukraine-soros-kampagne-100.html
12 https://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/who-we-are/our-history
16 “Wieder Krieg in Europa? Nicht in unserem Namen!” https://www.zeit.de/politik/2014-12/aufruf-russland-dialog?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2F