(The RFE/RL live blog) It’s all such predictable hyperbolic bellicosity, it’s hard to bring any of it, to say the truth. But I’ll bring a few bits that are just so self-serving, admit zero of the blame for what the Imperium in terms of ‘enemies’ has wrought on its own, and knows, but reuses to see. Because: endless war is so profitable to Wall Street and other Kleptocrats. So: Ramp Up the Rhetoric, Idiots! Note: I won’t bother with quotation marks.
WARSAW — NATO leaders shifted the focus to conflict-plagued Afghanistan and Ukraine on Day Two of a summit that produced a plan to deploy military forces to member-states near the border of an increasingly assertive Russia.
The 28-nation Western alliance is set to extend its Resolute Support mission, which trains and advises Afghan security forces following the withdrawal of the bulk of foreign troops at the end of 2014.
NATO is also expected to continue financing Afghan forces with about $4 billion a year through 2020.
“We are committed to assisting the Afghan forces to secure their country and to ensure it never again becomes a safe haven for international terrorism,” NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg said ahead of the July 8-9 summit in Warsaw.
U.S.-led forces entered Afghanistan after the September 11 attacks in 2001 and drove the Taliban, which had harbored Al-Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden, from power. But the insurgents have not been defeated and by some accounts now hold more territory than at any time since 2001.
Ever ask yourselves why the Imperium’s never-ending wars have created more terr’ists?
NATO’s moves to bolster its defenses in the east have been prompted largely by concerns about the intentions of Russia, which seized the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in March 2014 and backs separatists whose war with Kyiv’s forces has killed more than 9,300 people in eastern Ukraine since that April.
(Ludicrous; who was killed by whom? How many dead were civilians and insurgents in the Donbass killed by Kiev’s neo-Nazis?)
Librul mouthpiece for the Imperium:
“Russia’s aggression against Ukraine threatens our vision of a Europe that is whole, free, and at peace,” Obama wrote in a commentary published on the Financial Times website on July 8. He said NATO must “reaffirm our determination — our duty…to defend every NATO ally.”
(or ‘under their 26 ‘partnering’ nations ‘umbrella’, at NATO’s whim)
Russia’s interference in Ukraine has increased concerns in Poland and the three Baltic states, which were under Moscow’s thumb until the collapse of communism and the disintegration of the Soviet Union a quarter-century ago. All are now NATO members.
In addition to military force, Western governments say that under President Vladimir Putin, Russia has used cyberattacks, propaganda, and other methods in an effort to destabilize European countries and undermine Western unity.
“We need to remember that Putin will be far less likely to engage in provocation if he sees a NATO that is unified, strong, and determined to push back against any aggressive move on his part,” Albright said at the experts’ forum.
I won’t bring any of Madeleine Aldark’s Tweets cuz her face seriously scares the horses, and of course…me.
@DamonMacWilson “At #WSEF16 @FedericaMog calls @madeleine a great model for all of us as foreign policy practitioners”
(ay.yi.yi; if that ain’t the crux of the problem, I dunno what is)
Get ready for some serious disconnect:
The Minority Report:
Konstantin Kosachyov, chairman of the foreign policy committee in the upper parliament house, likened them to “building a dam in the desert,” and Putin’s spokesman said on July 8 that it was “absurd to speak of a threat from Russia.”
“Russia was and is open to dialogue and interested in cooperation — but only on a mutually beneficial basis and taking into account mutual interests,” Dmitry Peskov said in a conference call with journalists on July 8.
Stoltenberg said that “NATO does not seek confrontation” and will “continue to seek meaningful and constructive dialogue” with Russia.
Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze told RFE/RL in Warsaw that her country hopes bilateral talks with NATO members at the summit will provide it with lethal and non-lethal aid to combat Russian “escalation” of the conflict in eastern Ukraine.
‘British forces will be training 4,000 Ukrainian military troops until next March, the UK’s Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond has announced’, presstv.com
“We have a very active cooperation with Ukraine. The UK will train 4,000 Ukrainian servicemen until March 2017,” said Hammond on the sidelines of a NATO summit in the Polish capital of Warsaw on Friday.”
British Prime Minister David Cameron said that his country, while it may leave the EU, will not turn its back on European defense.
Signing the joint declaration, European Council President Donald Tusk said “the EU and NATO face the same threats.”
He said the the EU and NATO will deepen cooperation to counter both physical and hybrid attacks.
“Our critical infrastructure could be attacked, our banking system could be hacked, or our citizens could be exposed to disinformation campaigns,” Tusk warned.
‘Warsaw: NATO’s Theater of the Absurd’, nationalinterest.org
“Time for another NATO Summit, this one in Warsaw, Poland. Each has a theme, several photo ops for the attending leaders, a terrific dinner, an official communique, four or five white papers for reference, and culminates with a renewed resolve for the common defense. The 2016 Warsaw Summit theme is a bit ironic as it focuses on fending off the Russian threat to former members of the Warsaw Pact who are now NATO members. But, as is usual since the end of the Cold War, the Summit is mostly NATO Theater of the Absurd.” [snip]
Re: the constant Nato push for ‘members to contribute 2% of their nations’ GDP:
“The fear is that alternative security arrangements, including those organized via the European Union, would be too appeasing or weak. NATO is the United States’ way to manage European security. The United States would do it for free, and the NATO nations know that and spend accordingly. The two percent goal is there to distract attention from this reality.” (the rest is here.)
‘‘Russia threat is bombast’: Brian Becker on NATO summit’, via RT (Becker is with the anti-war Answer coalition)
“Warsaw, Poland, is holding NATO’s largest summit since the Cold War. NATO secretary general Jens Stoltenberg confirmed the bloc will have a four-battalion rotational presence in Poland and the Baltics from 2017.
RT: NATO states aren’t all on the same page when it comes to determining threats. How significant is this divide between members?
Brian Becker: There is quite a big divide, in fact. You have the both houses of the French Parliament saying sanctions against Russia should be lifted. The French foreign minister, when he met with the Russian foreign minister last week, also said France wants the sanctions lifted. Italy, again, wants the sanctions lifted.
Donald Rumsfeld at the time of the Iraq war made the point that there were two Europes. There was the old Europe and the new Europe, because they couldn’t get the old Europe – meaning Germany and France to go along with the US criminal invasion of Iraq in 2003. We have the Chilcot report, and we can see what a disaster that was.
But he was talking also where we have new Europe. Who was new Europe? It was the former socialist bloc countries that have been incorporated step-by-step first into the EU and also into NATO. And we have irony of ironies: in Warsaw, Poland on the 25th anniversary of the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact countries, the formidable Soviet-led military alliance that took the same states in the confrontation with NATO starting the 1940’s – you have NATO meeting in Warsaw, Poland to say: “Yes, in fact the Cold War never really did end escalating. We’re sending four battalions to the Baltics and Poland.” But most importantly is this defies what President Obama said: “The US quadrupled its military budget for Eastern and Central Europe” and in its quadrennial report the Pentagon identifies Russia as the number one threat, not ISIS. Russia is the number one threat for the US.
RT: A supposed “Russian threat” is on the summit’s agenda. How justified is the use of that term?
BB: It is just bombast. It is provocative in and of itself.” (again, the rest is here.)
Not bombastic; not provocative. Stabilizing the world.