https://southfront.org/who-instigating-hot-war-between-nato-and-russia/
If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfront, BTC: 13iYp9CDYZwgSnFXNtpEKgRRqaoxHPr2MH, BCH: 1NE49pQW8yCegnFCMvKuhLUnuxvTnxNUhf, ETH: 0x962b312a9d41620f9aa0d286f9d7f8b1769bfae6
Over the past few months NATO member states have sharply increased their pressure on Russia. The Euro-Atlantic establishment is strengthening the image of Russia as a fierce enemy. It is very useful to have such a foe to justify your own reckless foreign and domestic policy.
The situation has already led to a recognizable deterioration of the relations between the two sides undermining problem-solving mechanisms, like the UN Security Council or the OPCW.
The most alarming result of these actions is a growing military escalation between NATO and Russia in the Black Sea region and in Eastern Europe overall. NATO member states have increased their airspace activity and the number of ground military exercises near Russia’s border.
A notable development of this escalation happened on August 23 when British jets launched from the Mihail Kogalniceanu Air Base near the Romanian city of Constanta aiming to intercept a Russian Be-12 maritime patrol aircraft heading over the Black Sea from Crimea. Earlier, on August 21, two British Typhoon jets from the same Romanian air base scrambled to intercept two alleged Russian Su-30 flanker aircraft launched from Crimea. On August 13, British jets intercepted Russian Su-24 warplanes over the Black Sea.
According to the British side, these interceptions were carried out “to deter Russian aggression” in the framework of “the NATO Enhanced Air Policing (EAP) mission”. In all these cases, the Russian jets were far away from any part of what could be described as NATO airspace. On August 25, the Russian embassy in the UK described these actions as “reckless and provocative”.
Meanwhile, multiple NATO exercises took place in Poland and the Baltic States in close proximity to the Russian border. During summer 2018, the most notable of these were:
- Saber Strike 18 took place in Poland and the Baltic States and involved 18,000 troops from 19 countries.
- Swift Response 2018 was staged across Germany, Poland, Lithuania and Latvia and involved thousands of soldiers from 10 different states.
- The naval drill Baltic Operations 2018 involved about 5,000 personnel, 60 aircraft and 42 ships and a submarine from 22 nations.
Additionally, NATO member states, led by the US and the UK, are carrying out a large-scale anti-Russian propaganda campaign accusing Russia of provocations – for example patrols in neutral airspace over the Black Sea, employing “chemical weapons” in Europe – the Salisbury and Amesbury cases, and intervening into European and US internal politics by various means. In the framework of this narrative, Russian military drills, which it carries out within its own territory, are described as signs of aggressive and obstructive behavior. All attempts by the Russian side to appeal to the voice of reason are denounced by the Euro-Atlantic diplomats and the MSM as propaganda.
Furthermore, the MSM and the NATO leadership are consistently fueling military hysteria among servicemen of the military bloc’s member states. According to experts, the current level of anti-Russian propaganda has reached that of the hottest days of the Cold War and in some cases even exceeded it.
The current tense situation as well as continued attempts by NATO member states to pressure Russia by military means contribute to the increased probability of incidents involving the two sides. In a worst-case scenario, these military incidents could lead to deaths on both sides, local hostilities and, if a de-escalation mechanism is not developed, to an open conflict.
This approach poses a direct security threat to Eastern Europe nations unwittingly involved in this dangerous game.
Another important fact is that recently Russia has changed its military doctrine. Earlier, the Russian military doctrine, as well as the Soviet one, was to allow the use of nuclear weapons only in response to an aggressive attack by nuclear strike carried out by the enemy. The modern Russian military doctrine allows the use of nuclear weapons as a defensive measure in case of a conventional attack on its territory.
Russia has the world’s second most powerful military, but its ground forces are still outmatched by the combined ground forces of NATO. This factor also contributes to the possibility of a nuclear response by Russia if a fully-fledged war starts. The question appears to be what do the US and British elites hope to achieve by fueling anti-Russian militarism?
Could it be that their goal is to provoke a big regional conflict in continental Europe? Indeed, this would allow them to achieve several goals. On the one hand, they would draw Moscow into a large-scale conflict far away from their own borders and put Russia in a situation where it could suffer irreparable damage. On the other hand, the same kind of irreversible damage would be caused to the continental industrial complex and the European economy in general.
The west needs a war, especially the British and the US, 10 years of austerity, hatred of the bankers and establishment and the media is at an all time high, the establishment want the brexit farce reversing, all over the west you have people turning to radical politics either of the right or the left (thats another red flag for the UK Corbyn waiting in the wings with good old socialism and equality, the bete noir of the banking state) In short, the western elites have lost control, too many problems non of which they can do anything about, a US on the permanent brink of civil war, crumbling infrastructure but rising ‘defense’ expenditure, the only answer is war, war, war! The way to cow the rebellious masses is to slaughter them in a pointless war, even if they can’t win that war it doesn’t matter, as so often with US military thinking, winning isnt the point, war is good for business and would serve the elites in such a positive manner, tying up a myriad of unsolvable neo liberal difficulties in one fell swoop. Any conventional war would grind to a halt shortly after the border with Russia but also attacking from Ukraine and other areas would manage to last for several months and kill many and lets be honest, the US and most of its allies cant wait for Russia and China to get any stronger. The only feeble hope is European resistance to yet another war on their soil, the likes of Macron and Merkel could be the only sound minds in the whole thing. By the looks of things its all revved up in the US, moves are afoot to impeach Trump and replace him with the compliant and evangelical neocon Dr Strangelove Mike Pence. Putins constant concessions can only go on for so long and resistance to Russo-Syrian efforts in Idlib to finish off the hybrid NATO/Jihadi menace will meet resistance by their Israeli/US masters, Putins Lao Tzu and Tao hybrid will only deflect for so long.
“The question appears to be what do the US and British elites hope to achieve by fueling anti-Russian militarism?”
I’m not expert on these matters, but I would have thought, back during the April op in Syria, that the UK was provoking the US into taking out one of its “peer competitors,” the Rus, by starting a limited, East-Med war, one that would be over quickly, causing the Rus (according to the UK plan) to limp home in humiliation. But this time, given that they are running the exact same script yet again, at least in public, I suspect there is rather more desperation on the UK side. It looks to me like the UK is working for a regional, East-EU expansion into war, apparently with the notion that it can be contained to wiping out disposable countries while continuing to keep the Eurasian land mass divided, which supports the US effort to destroy Xi’s BRI plans.
Casey
The US and UK represent Atlantic powers, namely sea powers who pursue a globalist policy, whose chief enemy is Eurasia, namely Russia and China, backed by Germany. In other words we have a conflict between Atlantic and Continental powers. Eurasia is the key. He who controls Eurasia influences future economic and political policies. This explains the animosity of the US towards Russia and China.
RT America
Idlib Standoff: Syrian Government Aims to Take Back Province
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0PEeIaDLmI
Your News From Israel – September 5, 2018
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6at2MKZgkls
United Nations
Full-Scale Military Attack must be Avoided in Syria’s Idlib: UN Negotiator
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKSmjTZ6eXU&t=876s
As shown in this article, one of Europe’s leaders is admitting that it cannot rely on the United States for its security:
https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2018/08/can-europe-rely-on-united-states-for.html
At the very least, it is interesting to see that, unlike many decision makers in Washington, France is looking to co-operate and strengthen ties with Russia as part of its move to becoming part of an autonomous European powerhouse that is not at the mercy of the United States.
What I would like to see is for the US to renounce it’s goal of world domination, and agree to help create a world at peace. What is the alternative? Increasing the madness until it destroys all of us. This latter seems the most probable outcome, since the insane power addicts continually pushing for more war, seem incapable of curing themselves of their fatal obsession.
They really want war and RF total surrender.
“We, the leaders of France, Germany, the United States, Canada and the United Kingdom, reiterate our outrage at the use of a chemical nerve agent, known as Novichok, in Salisbury on 4 March… We have full confidence in the British assessment that the two suspects were officers from the Russian military intelligence service, also known as the GRU, and that this operation was almost certainly approved at a senior government level,” the statement read.
https://sputniknews.com/world/201809061067807780-statement-salisbury-attack/
This is where leads the ”our partners” Russian official policy.
war is coming
What is laughable is that NATO countries are accusing Russia of a military gas attack in England which never happened and where nobody died, the “victims” making speedy and quite remarkable recoveries. On the other hand NATO both created and backed ISIS in Syria, where some 300.000 people got killed. Those 300.000 dead do not count. What does count is fiction, something which never happened, but which is being used as an excuse to vilify Russia and give NATO an excuse to exist.
The ultimate aim of Trump and his British Empire, Banker and Israeli masters is indeed to incite Russia to attack Europe by using NATO to provoke it. Because Europe, especially Germany, and Euro currency is getting too powerful and will eventually overwhelm the Dollar economy, unless the Anglo/NATO mafia stop it. The aim is for Europe and Russia to mutually destroy each other.
Trumps mother was born in UK and every one of his kids married a Jew. USA has been taken by a coup. We will for sure see Ivanka stand for president and win thanks to the corrupt Electoral College system. The Republic of United States is gone, and will be ruled by the Monarchy of the House of Trump-Kushner. Most americans are too weak minded to even notice.
Dead on! The pressure should be put in them, on their territory! We’ll see if they will s**t in their pants!
I have to disagree with this article, as it gives a misleading impression. There is nothing worse then when you manipulate with numbers.
Yes, NATO overall is “superior” to Russia in numbers (men and material). However, what does this in reality mean ? It means playing with paper. It also means forgetting that there is a difference between quantity and quality.
NATO is an alliance. It’s backbone is the US, whose forces are spread all over the world. The US would even have a tough time concentrating it’s forces for a conventional war against Iran. In this article the author has included all NATO members, their manpower and material, and thus concluding that NATO is “superior” to the Russian military. The truth is quite the opposite.
Inside the NATO alliance you will not find too many members who are willing to fight against Russia. The US might count on Britain, and even this is debatable. Some years back the best regiments of the British Army
were undermanned, and I don’t know if they were brought back to full strength. However, during BREXIT the bulk of the British military voted for exit from the EU, being “sick of Americas wars”. The US might count on Poland, but even this is debatable, as there are quite a number of Poles who are questioning their country’s membership of both the EU and NATO. Will the US count on the Baltic countries, where more than 25 % of their populations have emigrated ? Anybody else ? Who ?
As I have written before, there is no mood in Europe for World War Three, as the two previous ones were more than enough. Why should the bulk of Europe fight for the interests of Wall Street ?
On the other side we have a rejuvenated Russia, whose military has been professionalized, receiving high tech, some of which is superior to that of NATO. About two years ago even Pentagon generals admitted that NATO could not defeat Russia in a conventional war.
So, what do we have now ? More of the same. As far as I can see, NATO is living in the past, basing their strategy on old plans whose place is in the history books. It’s masters are still hoping that Russia will implode, so that NATO can march into Russia, introducing “democracy”, and in the name of “democracy” breaking up the country, so that private corporations and banks can plunder it. It will never happen. That kind of reasoning is some 18 years out of date.
NATO is a white elephant. It has no reason to exist. However, those who control it dare not terminate it, because if they do, they will terminate their globalist imperial plans. As things stand now, Russia is comfortably staying at home, having built up a professional military backed by high tech, strong enough to defeat any NATO conventional attack against it. It is also watching NATO implode financially, as this alliance cannot be maintained permanently due to it’s enormous costs. Russia is playing the waiting game, and not only as far as NATO goes.
intercept a Russian Be-12 maritime patrol aircraft heading over the Black Sea from Crimea. What do I read here?! There is still a Be 12 Chaika operational?! What a photo opportunity for the intercepting British pilots.
in the event of escalation to regional war, Russia should have a stated military doctrine as follows : first nuke London 2nd nuke Israel third Washington and eastern us seaboard. then deal with the regional patsies.
The US by “guaranteeing” security for other countries, i.e. NATO and Israel, in essence guarantees or insures or underwrites a form of ‘moral hazard’ by those same countries. Now the US must support and ultimately pay the claim, so to speak, for reckless provocations by others against others. Not a good position to be in. Like the old Yiddish proverb, “Hey, let’s you and him fight.”