Mr Lukyanov,
Mr Karaganov,
Colleagues,
I am glad to be here again, at this anniversary assembly. Last time, we met in this room on October 2, 2021. But I have an impression that this was in a totally different historical epoch.
I would like to congratulate you on the 30th anniversary of the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy. Its activities are a fine example of Russian expert involvement in the foreign policy process. From the very start, the Council has brought together professionals, including politicians, state officials, journalists, academics, and entrepreneurs. Throughout these years, this has ensured an effective and rewarding combination of practical experience and impeccable knowledge of the subject matter. Therein lies the key to comprehending the most complex international processes, particularly at stages like the present one. Advice, analytical materials, and debates (occasionally heated debates involving a clash of opinions) are of much help to us. We invariably take them into consideration in our foreign policy activities.
It is a cliche to say that this meeting is taking place at a historical turning point. I agree with the experts (Mr Karaganov and Mr Lukyanov have written a lot about this), who say that we again have to choose a historical path, like we did in 1917 and 1991.
The external circumstances have not just changed radically; they are changing ever more profoundly and extensively (though not becoming more elevated, unfortunately) with each passing day. And our country is changing along with them. It is drawing its conclusions. The choice we have taken is made easier by the fact that the “collective West” has declared a total hybrid war against us. It is hard to forecast how long this will last. But it is clear that its consequences will be felt by everyone without exception.
We did everything in our power to avoid a direct conflict. But they issued a challenge and we have accepted it. We are used to sanctions. We have been living under one or another form of sanctions for a long time now. The surprising thing is a surge of rabid Russophobia in almost all “civilised” countries. They have thrown to the wind their political correctness, propriety, rules, and legal norms. They are using the cancel culture against all things Russian. All hostile actions against our country are allowed, including robbery. Russian cultural figures, artists, athletes, academics, businesspeople and just ordinary citizens are exposed to harassment.
This campaign has not bypassed Russian diplomats. They often have to work under extreme conditions, occasionally with a risk to their health or life. We do not remember anything like the current massive and synchronised expulsion of diplomats happening even in the grimmest Cold War years. This is destroying the general atmosphere of relations with the West. On the other hand, this is freeing up energy and human resources for work in the areas with which our country’s future development should be associated.
In accordance with the demands of the times, we are carrying out our professional duties conscientiously and to the fullest extent. There are no traitors among our diplomats, although such attempts have been made from abroad and within the country. We do our best to defend the rights and interests of Russian citizens abroad. When the West hysterically reacted to the beginning of our special military operation and all flights were cancelled, we immediately helped Russians who were abroad at the time to return home. The routine consular services to Russians (of which there have always been many) are provided as always. It is clear that the situation demands that the diplomatic service works in a special regime. This is required by the new tasks set by the country’s leadership to protect national interests.
This is not only and not so much about Ukraine, which is being used as an instrument to contain the peaceful development of the Russian Federation in the context of their course to perpetuate a unipolar world order.
The Americans started preparing the current crisis long ago, right after the end of the Cold War, having decided that the way to global hegemony was then open. NATO’s eastward expansion has been one of the key components of such a course. We tried hard to convince them not to do this. We showed where and why our red lines are drawn. We were flexible, ready to make concessions and look for compromises. All this proved futile. President Vladimir Putin reminded us of this once again in his speech on May 9 on Red Square.
Today Western countries are ready to oppose Russia, as they now say, “to the last Ukrainian”. At first glance, this is a very convenient position, especially for the United States, which is managing these processes from across the ocean. At the same time, they are weakening Europe by clearing its markets for its goods, technologies and military-technical products.
In fact, the situation has many layers. Russia, the United States, China and all others realise that it is being decided today whether the world order will become fair, democratic and polycentric, or whether this small group of countries will be able to impose on the international community a neo-colonial division of the world into those who consider themselves “exceptional” and the rest – those who are destined to do the bidding of the chosen few.
This is the aim of the “rules-based order” concept that they have sought to introduce into general circulation for years. No one has seen, or discussed, or approved these “rules”, but they are being imposed on the international community. As an example, let me quote a recent statement by US Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen, who called for a new Bretton Woods framework and said that the United States would practice “the friend-shoring of supply chains to a large number of trusted countries” that shared “a set of [liberal] norms and values about how to operate in the global economy.” The hint is absolutely clear: the US dollars and the “benefits” of the international financial system are only for those who follow these American “rules.” Dissenters will be punished. Clearly, Russia is not the sole target, all the more so as we will fight back. The attack is aimed at all those capable of conducting an independent policy. Take, for example, Washington’s pet Indo-Pacific strategy, which is directed against China. In parallel, it seeks to firmly and reliably harness India to the US and NATO. In the spirit of the Monroe doctrine, the United States wants to dictate standards to Latin America. The inevitable question is whether the Americans are really able to follow the key principle of the UN Charter, which states: “The Organisation is based on the principle of the sovereign equality of all its Members.”
The “rules-based order” envisions neither democracy, nor pluralism even within the “collective West.” The case in point is the revival of tough bloc discipline and an unconditional submission of the “allies” to Washington’s diktat. The Americans will not stand on ceremony with their “junior partners.” The EU will finally lose all attributes of independence and obediently join the Anglo-Saxon plans to assert the unipolar world order, while sacrificing the Europeans’ quality of life and key interests in order to please the United States. Just recall how Victoria Nuland defined the EU’s place in Washington’s plans to reformat Ukraine in her conversation with the US Ambassador in Kiev in December 2013, at the height of the Maidan riots. Her prediction came true in its entirety. In security matters, the EU is also blending in with NATO, which, in turn, is making increasingly louder claims about its global ambitions. What defensive alliance? We are being told and assured to this day that NATO’s expansion is a defensive process and threatens no one. The Cold War defence line ran along the Berlin Wall – concrete and imagined – between the two military blocs. Since then, it has been moved east five times. Today, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, and others are telling us that NATO has a global responsibility to solve security problems, primarily in the Indo-Pacific region. As I understand it, the next defence line will be moved to the South China Sea.
It is being insinuated that NATO as the vanguard of the community of democracies should replace the UN in matters of international politics, or at least bring global affairs under its sway. The G7 should step in to run the global economy and from time to time invite benevolently the extras the West needs at this or that moment.
Western politicians should accept the fact that their efforts to isolate our country are doomed. Many experts have already recognised this, even if quietly and off the record, because saying this openly is “politically incorrect.” But this is happening right now. The non-Western world is coming to see that the world is becoming increasingly more diverse. There is no escaping this fact. More and more countries want to have a real freedom to choose their development ways and integration projects to join. An increasing number of countries in Asia, Africa and Latin America are refusing to abandon their national interests and to pull chestnuts out of the fire for the former parent countries. An overwhelming majority of our partners, who have felt the effects of Western colonialism and racism, have not joined the anti-Russia sanctions. The West, which President Putin described as the “empire of lies,” has not been considered an ideal of democracy, freedom and well-being for a long time. By plundering other countries’ material assets, the Western countries have destroyed their reputation of predictable partners who honour their commitments. Nobody is safe from expropriation and “state piracy” now. Therefore, not just Russia but also many other countries are reducing their reliance on the US dollar and on Western technologies and markets. I am sure that a gradual de-monopolisation of the global economy is not a distant future.
We have taken note of Fyodor Lukyanov’s article published in the newspaper Kommersant (on April 29, 2022), in which he writes, with good reason, that the West will not listen to us or hear what we have to say. This was a fact of life long ago, before the special military operation, and a “a radical reorientation of assets from the west to other flanks is a natural necessity.” I would like to remind you that Sergey Karaganov has been systematically promoting this philosophy by for many years. It is perfectly clear to everyone that the process has begun and not on our whim – we have always been open to an equal dialogue – but because of an unacceptable and arrogant behaviour of our Western neighbours, who have followed Washington’s prompting to “cancel Russia” in international affairs.
Forging closer ties with the like-minded forces outside of what used to be referred to as the Golden Billion is an absolutely inevitable and mutually driven process. The Russia-China relations are at their all-time high. We are also strengthening our privileged strategic partnerships with India, Algeria, and Egypt. We have taken our relations with the Persian Gulf countries to a whole new level. The same applies to our relations with the Association of Southeast Asian Nations, as well as other countries in Asia-Pacific, in the Middle East, Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
We are fully aware of the fact it is at this juncture, which perfectly lends itself to be called a turning point, that the place for Russia and all other countries and forces in the future international architecture will be determined.
We believe the aim of Russia’s diplomacy is, on the one hand, to act with great resolve to fend off all adversarial attacks against us, while, on the other hand, to consistently, calmly and patiently reinforce our positions in order to facilitate Russia’s sustained development from within and improve the quality of life for its people. There is much to be done, as usual. We always have a packed agenda, but in the current environment we are witnessing a serious shift in the mindsets of many of our comrades in all spheres of Russia’s life. This makes meetings held by the Council on Foreign and Defence Policy especially useful because they help nurture ideas which make their way into Russia’s foreign policy.
When Russia promises something to another country and people, it keeps its promises.
Lavrov “There are no traitors among our diplomats, ….”
An interpretation here is that there is nothing but traitors amongst the “diplomats” of the collective west. Many would agree.
The west does not have any diplomats.
“There are no traitors among our diplomats, ….”
This is a very interesting phrase. Especially when uttered by a man of the level of distinction and experience of Lavrov. I am still trying to understand what he means/implies, beyond the obvious.
Jewish diplomats (both real descendents of Judah, and the very many pretenders from other tribes) are truly loyal to Isntrael only. Displays of loyalty to their country of employment are only to achieve tactical objectives.
They aren’t diplomats for their supposed nation, they’re diplomats for Isntrael. Just like the “British” and “German” diplomats in Versailles discussing the conclusion of successful German operations in France, as Britain was within a week or two of running out of food due the German U-boat blockade.
https://duckduckgo.com/?q=1961+Willard+Hotel+Benjamin+Freedman
https://www.google.com/search?q=1961+Willard+Hotel+Benjamin+Freedman
Where would one find a speech like that from ANY Western (so called – US, EU Canada, AUS, NZ) politician?? Why are we, in the so called West, led by such a collective of fucckwit politicians, 99% of whom are so totally corrupt that there is no way out other than stringing them up? As they say, I don’t mind a hung parliament but I would much prefer to see a hanged one.
Cheers
MP
It is high time – and past time – that we examined and deconstructed the term “the West”. What can it possibly mean? Ostensibly it contrasts the “civilised” Europe and North America with the “barbarous” and “backward” world of Asia, Africa, and Latin America. Thus the term “the West” is even used in reference to, say, Chile, which is more or less due south of the USA and far to the west of Europe. Technically, China is to the west of the USA, as it is only 6,000 miles away via the Pacific, but over 9,000 miles away via Asia, Europe and the Atlantic.
In practice, “the West” also includes Australia and New Zealand, although the term makes even less sense in those cases. One is tempted to identify “the West” with the countries either inhabited or colonised by white Europeans. “The Golden Billion” seems very similar, but with more emphasis on the disproportionate share of wealth.
Adding together the populations of North America (excluding Mexico) and Europe (excluding Russia), we have very nearly 1 billion – out of the global population of nearly 8 billion.
The Anglo-Saxons according to Mr.Lavrov.
If someone here thinks that he or his offsprings will be included in Golden Billion, because of being smart and beautiful – guess again.
Only Anglo-saxon hereiditiary oligarchy is ment to live and enjoy on planet Earth. Everybody else has to die.
And, yes. “Golden Billion” is an ancient term. Less than 200 million is number now.
“not just Russia but also many other countries are reducing their reliance on the US dollar and on Western technologies and markets. I am sure that a gradual de-monopolisation of the global economy is not a distant future.”
The war mongrel bush clinton obama UK German Israel cartel have lost the impetus with their incompetent sanctions failure. The overall incompetence and corruption of all governmental institutions is obvious. Biden is a nothing and Trump has been neutered. The take down of the United States is proceeding as planned which means future death and destruction.
The imposed overlords have set a fire to their own houses.
I’m going to set up a book (illegal, so what? ) listing all existing NATO member countries as well as current applicants, stating the odds of which one will jump ship1st. Who’s the weakest link, or rather, who’s most unwilling to sign away their sovereignty over to 5 Eyes?
Hungary would be odds on favourites, but the EU will relent in the short term for fear of fracturing even more their sinking ship. Germany would appear long odds, however, should they witness real hardship through 2022, then I can see mega revolt against the current puppet Government. I’d make Brussels the complete outsider; this is where the US Federal Reserve hide all the worthless shit, AAA+ come Junk on its books.
Therefore Belgium may be the line at which Russia needs to advance to in order to denazify & demilitarise.
Putin’s Leadership wouldn’t take much selling in many European countries, where the standard of living depends on subjugating developing countries.
Lavrov’s statement remarks on the fact that, during the cold war, NATO’s so-called defence line “ran along the Berlin Wall – concrete and imagined – between the two military blocs. Since then, it has been moved east five times.” That seems to imply that Russia would regard any further such NATO “defence line” movements as unacceptable per se. Putin’s most recent statement on the subject, however, raises some serious questions about whether that is, in fact, Russia’s actual position on the matter.
Putin Re NATO Accession:
It’s not at all clear to this reader how Russia is likely to regard and react to recent indications of Sweden’s and especially Finland’s intentions to apply for NATO membership. I’m sure Putin has his reasons, but on its face, his apparently softer stance appears somewhat less than opportune for Russia strategically in the overall geopolitical context.
Sorry, forgot to provide a reference for that latest statement by Putin. Here’s one:
https://www.rt.com/russia/555565-putin-outlines-position-nato/
It’s about missiles, planes, nuclear warheads placed close to Russia.
The membership in an organization is not the issue. The danger, the threat is the proximity of missiles, planes and warheads to the Russian border.
Already, the Russians have told the Finns and Swedes that military-technical measures will be used if they allow NATO weapons on their territory.
That’s what the West was told would happen pre-SMO to Ukraine.
So, we know what the Russian response will be.
This goes for Romania which already has Aegis Ashore missile launchers capable of sending Tomahawk missiles with nuclear warheads at Russia. And Poland which is receiving the same Aegis Ashore systems.
Both will soon be dealt with by military-technical measures. Likely, Kinzhal hypersonic missiles will end the threat.
“It’s about missiles, planes, nuclear warheads placed close to Russia.”
Well yes, that is the “bottom line” militarily of course. But I’m much less certain about your saying that NATO membership itself is not an issue inasmuch as it includes acceptance and agreement to some quite substantive treaty provisions. And, in Finland’s case at least, it sure appears to abandon an important neutrality agreement that has been a fundamental aspect of the existing relationship with Russia.
Geopolitically, I guess I’m just a little surprised at Putin’s timing in appearing to accept any such NATO accession developments so readily in current circumstances. I can understand his wanting to be and appear to be reasonable about the issue, but as I said, such acquiescence seems to me inopportune from an overall geopolitical standpoint, especially in relation to Finland’s prior neutrality commitment. But that’s just one person’s gut reaction, of course. There is no doubt whatever that President Putin’s judgement about his country’s best interests are unquestionably superior to my own.
You nailed it.
Everything is perfectly clearly described in “non”-ultimatum. almost half year ago. Yet we still have to remind people what’s happening and what may happen.
Including why Russia is using minimal forces in Ukraine.
Ukraine is just warm-up for practicaly already declared war with NATO as they rejected “non”-ultimatum. The goal is to push them beyond the safe range of nuclear tipped and anti ICBM missiles. (>10 minutes flight time). That’s roughly 2500km West of Russian border for Aegis ashore controled RIM-161 (SM-3 block IIA) missile.
Yes, that is beyond Europe.
That is gravity of the situation. We ain’t seen nothing yet.
I don’t think he’s soft on this.
If military NATO hardware is forming a serious threat, Russia will not hesitate to respond.
Remember Russia hardly shows their capebillitys.
But if they are warning you, you’re in trouble.
Very stupid of Finland’s PM to ignore that.
It shows the incompetence of the collective west.
It’s a non-seqitor. You can join any party you like as long as you don’t bring any of your new friends’ noisy toys home with you.
I enjoy reading and listening to Mr. Lavrov. His speech is always very measured and on point, much like Vladimir Putin. Speaking of Mr. Lavrov and Mr. Putin I can’t recall a time when either lied. They mean what they say, and say what they mean. Very contrary behavior to that of the West. Let’s just pick a few names from the West: Joe Biden, Stoltenberg, Van der Leden and Boris Johnson, all have one thing in common, they lie.
Just recall how Victoria Nuland defined the EU’s place in Washington’s plans to reformat Ukraine in her conversation with the US Ambassador in Kiev in December 2013, at the height of the Maidan riots. Her prediction came true in its entirety.
What a beautifully crafted statement. Typical Lavrov.
On Finland and Sweden possibly joining NATO, these states were already de facto NATO members. The states themselves military do not present an existential threat to Russia, it could be argued that their membership removes doubt militarily about their allegiance and gives Russia the latitude to respond when the time comes if necessary. The more NATO adds countries that are fundamentally unwilling to fight offensively against near peers(Russia, China) the more it becomes weaker. The true NATO threats to Russia are the Poles and the other Baltic states but they are small and very unpredictable and highly undisciplined when it comes to this game from what I have seen.
I believe the reason Putin is not too concerned about Sweden & Finland is that these states in the end are not offensive military states on their own, their populations as a whole are not radicalized and if push comes to shove they will be very reluctant to shed even small drops of their own blood. Ukraine was so different because the radicalized elements of the military(Azov, NAZI, etc,) were ready and willing to die for their cause and are currently doing so. A far cry from Sweden or Finland where they are not willing to sacrifice themselves in a bloody conventional war.
The west wants the energy resources of Russia and it’s strategic position vis a vis China but as we have seen they wish to achieve it via conventional means, this means finding peoples/nations in Europe willing to move into the meat grinder readily and fanatically, Ukraine was really the only one of any large size. The military side of this round is over for the most part, now we will see what the economic games bring.
” The more NATO adds countries that are fundamentally unwilling to fight offensively against near peers(Russia, China) ”
China is a near peer (they have hardware, but despite the wisdom in The Art of War attributed to the possibly mythical Sun Tsu, the Chinese have a horrible record when it comes to actually conducting ground warfare and even worse when it comes to the few times they have engaged in naval warfare — historically, their only demonstrable abilities when it comes to warlike actions at sea are the actions of Chinese pirates during the age of sail — but that’s only against lightly armed to completely unarmed merchantmen, not against warships.).
In contrast, the Russians ARE a peer. They learned how to fight the Germans, and managed to destroy 80% of the Wermacht during WW2. And over the long run of history, nobody has EVER successfully bitten a chunk off of Russia and managed to swallow it — the Russians have always managed to conclude hostilities with their territory intact. A borderline exception would be the Mongol Yoke (1240~1480). Ghengis Khan and the Golden Horde did manage to capture Kiev (and then burn it to the ground and kill every person and most of the livestock for 20 miles in all directions), and hold it for about 240 years, while receiving tribute in gold the entire time, but the Russians regrouped, moving the capital from Kiev to Moskva, and from there, the Prince of Moskva managed to secretly accumulate wealth, then quickly recruit and equip an army, then march down to Kiev, and not only remove the Mongols from Kiev, but pushed them all the way to the northern shores of the Caspian Sea.
Russians know how to fight, and they have good equipment. Some not as good as the best NATO equipment, and some superior (S-400). But that will change, as Russia will soon have equal or better equipment than the corresponding NATO equipment, because they have captured vast quantities of it, including the what is for now, the MANPADS missile system with no peers: The Stinger air defence artillery missile, and they have so far captured hundreds of the.
The Stinger is so sensitive that U.S. personnel are required to have a SECRET level security clearance to even handle one or attend classes on how to fire it. And right now the Russians are reverse-engineering all of its extensive capabilities which make it the unchallenged best MANPADS missile on the planet.
Soon, the Russians will have their own version of the Stinger, and the days of USAF being able to conduct ground support operations without fear are over. Not even a Wild Weasel anti-air defense strike package can protect itself against Stingers.
Remember that, because even the same aerospace military contractors who designed and manufacture the Stinger have never come up with a practical solution for how to protect an aircraft from it, other than the Russian solution in the Hind-D, which is to put armor around all of the vital spots on an aircraft (cockpit and engine), and improve the strength of that which can’t be protected (main and tail rotors).
I’m not so sure about the quasi magical properties of stingers.
“Advice, analytical materials, and debates (occasionally heated debates involving a clash of opinions) are of much help to us. We invariably take them into consideration in our foreign policy activities.”
Case solved (from last Sitrep), he and the Kremlin pay attention to outside analysts a lot. To social media too.
Team ‘West’ is Trotsky communist at root, that spawn which from the Lower East Side of Manhattan headed directly to “1917”.
The WASP (Anglo-Saxon) long ago lost suzerainty to its financial wizards, and today its International Neocons are found everywhere on earth, including in the ‘East’!
Our struggle is not East v. West. Civilization was never a slice of geography. The curtain was never iron.
It has always been Moral.
Only a Moral Curtain can keep us from this Evil.
“The external circumstances have not just changed radically; they are changing ever more profoundly and extensively (though not becoming more elevated, unfortunately) with each passing day. And our country is changing along with them. It is drawing its conclusions.”
This is something that has been clear from the start, but most are oblivious to it. It affects the SMO too.
“We did everything in our power to avoid a direct conflict. But they issued a challenge and we have accepted it.”
This is more about a change of mind and disposition than anything else. If this is what was needed or desired, it has happened. However, I guess it’s “more of the same” to some, a big change to others. The truth is that it’s a big change.
“The attack is aimed at all those capable of conducting an independent policy.”
I don’t think it’s clear what this “independent policy” means internationally. What “independence” can they exercise after the attack which they could not exercise before the attack? Lavrov is likeable, but like many diplomats he likes to blow diplomatic air too (his last response is an example of this), so I don’t know if this “independence” is mostly rhetoric. We know about the internal economic changes that sanctions forced upon Russia and before on Iran. Why, Iran industrialized itself a lot, and Russia was virtually thankful. After that, who knows why they would want to sanction Russia more – I don’t know. Lavrov reacted at the beginning of the sanctions by saying that it was dumb or stupid to try to do it to a nation like Russia. He did not say it again; that’s all the help he gave (he was just being honest about it).
“An overwhelming majority of our partners, who have felt the effects of Western colonialism and racism, have not joined the anti-Russia sanctions.”
It was a majority of nations; “majority of our partners” shows their “let’s be partners” approach well. Maybe next time it will be “overwhelming.” After that vote, my ideal president changes his policy because he knows many of those countries that voted “yes” were surprised by the vote result and may go with the majority later, and because the whole thing failed anyway when the majority voted “no”…
“Nobody is safe from expropriation and “state piracy” now. Therefore, not just Russia but also many other countries are reducing their reliance on the US dollar and on Western technologies and markets.”
Does anyone know which countries? Would be nice to know it.
Too many have missed Lavrov’s above critical observation that was repeated again today in this PR released after the meeting of Russia’s Foreign Policy Board. I took the results of both meetings along with today’s CSTO Summit in Moscow to write and publish the article those meetings demanded, “The Outlaw US Empire Has Declared War Against Russia and the Multipolar World”. Besides other similar substance, here’s the profound sentence being overlooked:
“The choice we have taken is made easier by the fact that the “collective West” has declared a total hybrid war against us.”
And it must be combined with this paragraph from the PR linked above:
“On May 16, a meeting of the Board of the Russian Foreign Ministry was held, which considered the tasks of Russian foreign policy in the radically changed geopolitical realities that have developed as a result of the hybrid war against our country unleashed by the West – under the pretext of the situation in Ukraine – unprecedented in scale and ferocity, including the revival in Europe of a racist worldview in the form of cave Russophobia, an open course for the “abolition” of Russia and everything Russian. It is stated that Washington, having completely subjugated the “collective West”, has passed the point of no return in its obsession at any cost to assert its total dominance in the world and suppress the objective process of forming a multipolar world order. Thus, the United States and its satellites directly violate the principles of the UN Charter, including respect for the sovereign equality of states, demand recognition of the right to interfere in internal affairs and use force anywhere in the world at their discretion.”
Again, ” the hybrid war against our country unleashed by the West,” followed by the explanation that the Outlaw US Empire led Collective West has completely abandoned and violated the UN Charter and its International Law which essentially invokes Article 51 to protect Russia in its defense given the de facto and de jure instigation of war against it.
Just as when no media made a headline when Putin one month ago said Russia’s SMO was resulting in the destruction of the USA’s unipolar world order no similar media notice is being made of this very significant acknowledgement of the current state-of-affairs–Hybrid World War Three is now a declared reality, not some conspiracy theory–a reality that’s forcing Russia’s MFA to alter the Foreign Policy Concept it’s employed since November 2016.
Taken altogether, the cited paragraph details why this war ought to be called The Second Great Patriotic War for NATO’s plot is very similar to Hitler’s General Plan Ost. In Congressional hearings and in written documents, the Outlaw US Empire doesn’t hide the fact that it indeed wants to attain Plan Ost’s outcome, which is why the bioweapons are being developed.
“NATO’s plot is very similar to Hitler’s General Plan Ost… why the bioweapons are being developed.”
There is a persistent splinter in the mind, in the context of a [seemingly] languid SMO with most crack Russian troops held in reserve and a watershed psychological development in the world at the understanding of the purpose of the rabid neo-nazis and the true nature of their ostensibly civilized handlers.
These increasingly insistent Russian demarches at the UNSC and other fora regarding American biological weapons on its borders inside Ukraine appear to be culminating in something.
Is Russia skipping the EU poodles to focus directly on USUK and Oceania? Have secret ultimatums been issued, heralding larger fireworks soon, unless USUK/Oceania cleans their house of the satanists? Coexistence is not possible with those deploying race- and gene-specific bioweapons.
Clearly the SMO is one track of a coordinated process. The larger aim deals with the Anglo-Zionists behind the global hybrid war. It makes no sense to defeat the local nazi proxies (Ukies or Europeans) and leave a free hand to the pyromaniacs behind it all. It will result in unending war with all sides losing. Russians are not known to lack sense. So what is this UNSC process building to? It feels like a dénouement is in the works, which will obviate the need to mobilize and to march to the Channel again. That would also be playing according to the enemy’s attritional playbook, and current demographics are not accommodating as well.
Putin promised (1) there would not be another war on Russian soil, and (2) in the presence of the cute airline pilots around the table, that there would no general mobilization. Hence this will go all-out conventional missiles throughout NATOstan, and if that fails to correct the course of the madmen, what then? He did once note that Russians would be martyred and they can go to Hell without the chance of even repenting. But a prior move seems afoot, in coordination with China-India and others horrified at what the dropped masks reveal.
Karlof1, I respect your insights but I do not like that Russia keeps pointing out historical and undeniable facts. Clearly this has no effect on the venom from the west.
China has been doing that for years pointing out the rabid accusations they always face but why?
Maybe Russia believes that they can make Europe see the error in their ways and move away from Zion USA. That is a pipe dream.
That China sitting on the fence, taking insults everyday and keep replying in words makes me wonder if they think making money is better than self esteem.
This Avostal plant is one of the keys to this war and they obviously have more supplies than we imagined. How long more?
In the meantime, the west piles on their propaganda.
The west has never abided by or obeyed any rules and the UN is a paid surrogate of America. I don’t know why this sh.t is pointed out time and time again.
It has never worked in the countless wars that USA/NATO has unleashed against this world.
So then, in your opinion what should Russia have done instead?
The results from a new poll in China:
The Chinese treat Russia best in the world
82% of Chinese believe that Russia has a strong influence on China, 79% of Chinese believe that Russia’s influence is positive
79% of Chinese believe that their attitude towards Russia has improved over the past 3 years. At the same time, 59% of Chinese have a worse attitude towards the United States.
79% of Chinese consider Russia an important country for economic development
74% of Chinese are in favor of friendship with Russia, and 61% are in favor of a tougher policy towards the United States
71% of Chinese consider Russia the most attractive country in the world in terms of culture
58% of Chinese consider Russia the most desirable country for tourists to visit
52% of Chinese consider Russia the most preferred country for higher education
“CRYSTAL OF GROWTH”: earlier polls showed that 92% of Americans consider good relations between Russia and China to be a big problem for the United States.
https://ceias.eu/wp-content/uploads/2022/05/CN-poll-report-final_may11.pdf
Seargei Lavrov is not only the best diplomat in the world now, but he so easily demonstrates by his perception and humour, that life following the rules of the UN charter and agreed to by the West as well as the countries which already try to follow them would enable peace and cooperation in world affairs. Whether this ever happens depends on the people in the West exhorting their “leaders” to seek cooperation and compromise, not dominance and destruction.
Lavrov, when only the best will do. For 60 years there’s been nobody like him anywhere in the collective West. The ones that were of like peaceful minds were Jack and Bob Kennedy and the people that kill people killed THEM for wanting the wars over. Those that actually fought wars and lost family in wars wanted peace but the West, driven by the U.S. military/industrial/political/economic gangsters wouldn’t stand for it. And here we stand many wars and millions upon millions killed later. And we’re being promised more.
Americans haven’t been drafted in 40 years, we’ll see if they resist their darling, soft, fat children being taken off to slaughter as in Vietnam. With Lavrov-style diplomats in the U.S. we could negotiate all this away in a week and start doing business together, but there’s nobody; not in State, Defense, Intelligence, especially, the White House cabinet heads of those departments. What we have is a collection of mediocrities and EEOC picks selected entirely for their race and histories of corruption via American defense contractors (Think Lloyd Austin, SecDef). As vacant and empty a suit as ever sat in tht chair, a robot, signing off on what he’s told, Lloyd hasn’t had an original thought in his entire career and has had a rather outsized say in all the losses the U.S. suffered the past fifty years. I could go on, but enough, we know the truth.
Blinken vs. Lavrov? Lavrov: when only the best will do.
A true statesman.