Schlagwort-Archive: #Wladimir Putin

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT PUTIN

Paul Craig Roberts ruft nach harten Reaktionen Russia’s – zum wiederholten Mal …   

AN OPEN LETTER TO PRESIDENT PUTIN

By Paul Craig Roberts

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov responded to Biden’s unacceptable characterization of Russia’s president as a killer by stating that Biden had made it clear that “he doesn’t want to normalize relations.”  In the Kremlin does hope burn eternal?  It has been obvious to me for many years that Washington does not want normal relations with Russia or any country. Washington wants a hegemonic relationship with Washington as the hegemon and Russia as the obedient puppet as Russia was during the Yeltsin decade.

Just consider the past four years of Trump’s presidency.  Trump declared his intention of normalizing relations with Russia and for this reason his presidency was destroyed by the American Establishment.

There is no prospect of Russia having normal relations with the US and its Empire.  The destruction of Trump’s presidency and the theft of his reelection is proof that the American Establishment will not tolerate a president who intends a normal diplomatic relationship with a sovereign Russia. This one intention was all it took to destroy Trump’s presidency.  Trump was immediately confronted with three years of orchestrated “Russiagate,” followed by two attempted impeachments of Trump on false grounds, and his reelection was stolen. The American judiciary refused to even look at the overwhelming evidence of the stolen election.  Did the Kremlim really believe that Biden was going to repeat Trump’s self-destruction and make friends with Russia?

Despite all the clarity in Biden’s accusation, backed up by White House spokeswoman Jen Psaki that “the Russians will be held accountable,”  Russian Foreign ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova reaffirmed Russia’s interest in “preventing the irreversible degradation” of Russian bilateral ties with the US.

Amazing.  It seems the Kremlin is incapable of acknowledging reality.  In 2016 Hillary Clinton, who was expected to be the next US president, called Putin the “new Hitler.”  How does this differ from Biden calling Putin a killer? It is official Western policy to demonize Putin and Russia. The demonization of Putin and Russia  has been underway for years.

Putin’s forbearance is remarkable. He treats these calculated insults as if they are water off a duck’s back.  But Putin’s response does not serve peace or Russian interests.

Dear President Putin, please permit me to offer an explanation of the threat that you and the entire world face.  Washington and the American foreign policy establishment hates your guts.  They hate you because you restored Russia’s sovereignty and, thereby, put a powerful country in the way of American hegemony.  Remember the Wolfowitz Doctrine (1992):

“Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere, that poses a threat on the order of that posed formerly by the Soviet Union. This is a dominant consideration underlying the new regional defense strategy and requires that we endeavor to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”

(…)  Volltest im Anhang

Gegen Russland und RT: Feindbild-Aufbau und EU-Propaganda

https://www.nachdenkseiten.de/?p=70608

Gegen Russland und RT: Feindbild-Aufbau und EU-Propaganda

10. März 2021 um 11:38 

Ein Artikel von: Tobias Riegel

Das Medium RT DE wird aktuell in Deutschland massiv angegriffen. Gleichzeitig behauptet die aktuelle EU-Propaganda, Deutschland sei das Hauptziel von russischer Desinformation. Diese Angriffe müssen abgewehrt werden: Zu einer friedlichen Koexistenz mit Russland gibt es für Deutschland keine Alternative. Von Tobias Riegel.

Neben vielen anderen großen Medien berichtet aktuell der „Spiegel“ über einen Bericht der „East StratCom Task Force“ des Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes (EAD). Unter dem Titel „EU vs Disinfo“ heißt es in dem Bericht:

„Wie bereits erwähnt, ist Deutschland unter den europäischen Mitgliedstaaten das Hauptziel der russischen Desinformationsbemühungen. Die staatlichen Sender RT und Sputnik haben ehrgeizige Pläne in Deutschland, und der russische Staat erhöht die Budgetzuweisungen an die RT/Sputnik-Holding mit über 550 Millionen Euro für die kommenden vier Jahre.“ 

Das Medium RT DE wird aktuell in Deutschland massiv angegriffen. Gleichzeitig behauptet die aktuelle EU-Propaganda, Deutschland sei das Hauptziel von russischer Desinformation. Diese Angriffe müssen abgewehrt werden: Zu einer friedlichen Koexistenz mit Russland gibt es für Deutschland keine Alternative. Von Tobias Riegel.

Neben vielen anderen großen Medien berichtet aktuell der „Spiegel“ über einen Bericht der „East StratCom Task Force“ des Europäischen Auswärtigen Dienstes (EAD). Unter dem Titel „EU vs Disinfo“ heißt es in dem Bericht:

„Wie bereits erwähnt, ist Deutschland unter den europäischen Mitgliedstaaten das Hauptziel der russischen Desinformationsbemühungen. Die staatlichen Sender RT und Sputnik haben ehrgeizige Pläne in Deutschland, und der russische Staat erhöht die Budgetzuweisungen an die RT/Sputnik-Holding mit über 550 Millionen Euro für die kommenden vier Jahre.“ 

Russland und die Meinungsmache der EU

In dem Zitat klingt auch die aktuelle Kampagne gegen den in Deutschland publizierenden russischen Sender RT DE an. Zu dieser Kampagne folgt weiter unten im Text mehr. Zunächst zum Bericht des EAD und dem Artikel, den der „Spiegel“ daraus gezimmert hat. Der EAD behaupte etwa, dass „die EU analysiert hat, dass russische Medien seit 2015 über 700 Mal Fake News über Deutschland verbreitet haben. Deutschland liege damit an der Spitze aller europäischen Länder“. Selbstauskünfte über die „East StratCom Task Force“ finden sich hier, Infos über „EU vs Desinfo“ hier. Thomas Röper hat den EAD-Bericht in diesem Artikel detailliert besprochen. Sein Fazit lautet, dass der Bericht „keine Auswertung, sondern ein anti-russischer Artikel der EU-Behörde“ sei:

„Aber da ihr Auftrag lautet, russische Fake News zu finden, werden sie sehr kreativ. Als Quellen für russische Fake News führen sie Internetportale an, die teilweise nicht einmal russisch sind. Aber auch bei den russischen Internetportalen wie Newsfront, die sie gerne mal nennen, handelt es sich nicht um staatliche Medien. Es sind Blogger. Das wäre so, als wenn die russische Regierung Artikel vom Rubikon oder den Nachdenkseiten als Fake-News-Kampagne der deutschen Regierung verkauft.“ 

Gemeinsam gegen RT: Medien, DJV, Commerzbank

Parallel zu dieser fragwürdigen EU-Initiative läuft in Deutschland eine Kampagne gegen den russisch finanzierten Sender RT DE: So kündigte die Commerzbank kürzlich an, die Zusammenarbeit mit dem Sender und der Medienagentur „Ruptly“ zu beenden. Der Deutsche Journalisten-Verband veröffentlichte einen infamen Artikel zu RT DE, den Albrecht Müller folgendermaßen kommentiert hat:

„An diesem Artikel des Pressereferenten des deutschen Journalistenverbandes DJV kann man gut sehen, wie heruntergekommen dieser Verband schon ist. Keine freie kritische Stimme, stattdessen eingebaut in die westliche Propaganda und den zu beobachtenden Feindbildaufbau.“ 

Zusätzlich hat die „Süddeutsche Zeitung“ kürzlich kritisiert, dass RT-Mitarbeiter in der Bundespressekonferenz zu kritisch nachfragen, was die NachDenkSeiten in diesem Artikelkommentiert haben:

„Der ganze Artikel der SZ offenbart ein Verständnis von „Pressefreiheit“, das einen fassungslos macht. Schließlich spekuliert die Zeitung noch darüber, worauf sie mutmaßlich hinaus will – den Ausschluss kritischer Stimmen, wahrscheinlich damit die eigene angepasste Rolle nicht ganz so erbärmlich erscheint“ 

Nur kurz darauf hatte der „Spiegel“ nachgelegt, was Albrecht Müller in dem Artikel „Feindbild-Aufbau des ‚Spiegel‘“ analysiert hat. Und nun legt die „Bild“-Zeitung nochmals nach, indem sie RT DE indirekt Spionage gegen das Umfeld des Aktivisten Nawalnyunterstellt. RT DE hat in diesem Artikel nun angekündigt, gegen die Behauptungen von „Bild“ juristisch vorzugehen. Dort wird auch über die Motive für die aktuelle Kampagne spekuliert: 

„Es ist kein Geheimnis, dass RT DE expandiert und in nächster Zeit einen TV-Sender in Betrieb nehmen wird. Diese Ankündigung rief offenbar Konkurrenten auf den Plan, die das verhindern wollen. Denn wenn es eines nicht geben darf, dann einen unabhängigen Sender russischer Herkunft in Deutschland.“ 

Gegenpol zur antirussischen Meinungsmache?

Als aktuelles Beispiel der deutschen medialen Meinungsmache gegen Russland sei hier auf einen Artikel von n-tv verwiesen: Russland sei „der Feind“, wird hier unumwunden behauptet. Zur Einschätzung der wichtigen Rolle, die RT DE in der deutschen Medienlandschaft als Gegengewicht zu solchen infamen Beiträgen spielt, haben die NachDenkSeiten kürzlich geschrieben:

„RT ist als Kontrast zur aktuellen brandgefährlichen Medien-Hetze gegen Russland ein wichtiger Gegenpol zum propagandistischen Einheitsbrei großer deutscher Medien bei dem Thema. Das heißt natürlich nicht, dass RT die einzige Quelle der Information sein muss oder sein sollte. Zudem wird die Finanzierung durch Russland und eine entsprechende Interessenlage nicht verschleiert. Medienkonsumenten können darum die von RT-Artikeln verfolgten Interessen besser einschätzen als die verfolgten Interessen etwa des Springer-Konzerns, der für sich eine unhaltbare ‚Unabhängigkeit‘ behauptet.“ 

Die hier beschriebene antirussische Propaganda muss abgewehrt werden: Zu einer friedlichen Koexistenz mit Russland gibt es für Deutschland keine Alternative. Wer dagegen arbeitet, arbeitet gegen unsere Interessen. Mit einem solchen Bekenntnis zu einer friedlichen Koexistenz mit Russland akzeptiert man selbstverständlich nicht automatisch die innen- oder außenpolitischen Defizite Russlands.

Für die Klärung der mutmaßlichen Motive für die hier beschriebenen Kampagnen gegen Russland und RT sei zum Abschluss nochmals auf das (Aufsehen erregende, m.z.) Video von George Friedman, Direktor des US-Thinktanks STRATFOR, hingewiesen. Ein zentrales Ziel der US-Außenpolitik der letzten Jahrzehnte war demnach, ein Zusammenkommen von Deutschland und Russland zu verhindern:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gcj8xN2UDKc&t=4s

Video mit dt. Übersetzung, Ausschnitt

The Chicago Council on Foreign Relations, 15.06.2015, Dauer: 14:58 

STRATFOR: US-Hauptziel war es immer, Bündnis Deutschland + Russland zu verhindern

3. Februar 2015. Der Gründer und Direktor der weltweit führenden privaten US-Denkfabrik auf dem Gebiet Geopolitik STARTFOR (Abk. Strategic Forecasting) George Friedman über weltweite Geopolitik der USA und speziell in Europa. Zitat: 

„Das primäre Interesse der USA, wofür wir seit einem Jahrhundert die Kriege führen –Erster und Zweiter Weltkrieg und Kalter Krieg – waren die Beziehungen zwischen Deutschland und Russland. Weil vereint sind sie die einzige Macht, die uns bedrohen kann, und unser Interesse war es immer, sicherzustellen, dass das nicht eintritt.“

Original-Quelle:

George Friedman, “Europe: Destined for Conflict?”

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs -Video, 04.02.2015, 1:12:30

Chicago Council on Global Affairs

The Chicago Council on Global Affairs and Stratfor founder and CEO George Friedman present a discussion on the emerging crisis in Europe. Europe has inherent flashpoints smoldering beneath the surface which are destined to erupt again, including half a dozen locations, borderlands, and cultural dynamics that have the potential to upend Europe as we know it, says Friedman. He identifies the flashpoints and discusses how can we prepare.

Chess Grand Master – OrientalReview.org

Chess Grand Master – OrientalReview.org
— Weiterlesen orientalreview.org/2020/02/25/chess-grand-master/

Nice piece about hybrid war in Idlib of Erdoğan vs. Wladimir Putin. Is it all about face keeping for the Turkish supporter of islamic mercenaries aka opposition or rebels in Syria?

In a political match-up between Vladimir Putin and the best computer, I would put all my marbles on Vlad. Not only is he the human reincarnation of the Russian total independence and autonomy ideology, but he’s as cunning and clever as a fox and understands the gears of the world like no one else. Like all chess grand masters, he’s so many moves ahead that he uses the board to set-up traps, where his rooks and horses will take out the Queen and King as if they were simple pawns. For Vlad isn’t facing a computer, but a most faulty opponent that’s been inbreeding for 250 years, called the New World Order.

Syria is lucky to have the best politician in human history by its side. (…)

Revisiting the win-win-win-win outcome in Syria – The Saker

A bird’s eye view of the vineyard

Revisiting the win-win-win-win outcome in Syria

[this analysis was written for the Unz Review]

In his recent article “The Road to Damascus: How the Syria War Was Won” Pepe Escobar summarized the outcome of the war in Syria in the following way:

It’s a quadruple win. The U.S. performs a face saving withdrawal, which Trump can sell as avoiding a conflict with NATO ally Turkey. Turkey has the guarantee – by the Russians – that the Syrian Army will be in control of the Turkish-Syrian border. Russia prevents a war escalation and keeps the Russia-Iran-Turkey peace process alive. And Syria will eventually regain control of the entire northeast.”

This otherwise excellent summary overlooks two out of three members of the “Axis of Kindness”, including Israel and the KSA.  Of course, later in his analysis Pepe does address these actors, and also includes Kuwait. Furthermore, a thorough discussion of what took place would have to also include China, Hezbollah, Yemen and the EU (well, the ones that matter, the UK and France.  The rest are just voiceless colonies of the USA).

Most of the analyses of what just took place focused on the “what”.  I will try to look into the “why” and the “how” of what just happened in Syria.  Still,  I don’t propose to make such a detailed analysis, but I do want to re-classify the actors in a somewhat different way: by their relative strength.

Actor Theoretical Strength
The “Axis of Kindness”:United States+CENTCOM+NATO+Israel+KSA by far the most powerful actor almost by any measure: a bigger military force then all the other actors combined (at least when looked at regionally), huge economic power (the dollar is still THE #1 currency on the planet), total control of the region (via CENTCOM) and quasi unconditional support from Europe (via NATO).  Finally, Israel does pack a powerful military punch.  This actor has only ONE weakness, but more about that later.
Iran+Hezbollah+Houthi+Shia forces in Iraq in regional terms, Iran is the local superpower which can even successfully defy the Axis of Kindness forces (and has done so since the Islamic Revolution of 1979).
Russia+Syria I placed Russia and Syria in the same group and I could have added Iran, but since I believe that Russia objectively has more power over the Syrian government than Iran, I think that it is important to put Russia and Syria together simply because Damascus cannot say “no” to Moscow, but could do so, at least in theory, to Tehran.  Finally, Russia and Iran agree on the main issues, but have different visions for the future of the Middle-East.  Thus this is another reason to look at them separately, even if not necessarily in opposition to each other.  In military terms, Russia is very strong, then very vulnerable, then very strong again, it all depends on your level of analysis (see below)
Turkey+pro-Turkish factions in Syria That one is a difficult one to classify.  On one hand, Turkey does not have any regional allies (the Ottoman Empire left only hatred and deep resentment in its former colonies).  For a while, the pro-Turkish factions, which were liberally showered with weapons, money, training, logistical support, etc, by the US and the KSA, but eventually these factions grew weaker and weaker until they reached a state of advanced impotence leaving Turkey pretty much alone (we will also look into that below).
The Kurds For a while, they sure looked potentially powerful: not only did the Kurds have a pretty big military power (albeit mostly one restricted to infantry), they had the support of Axis of Kindness and, especially, Israel which saw any form of Independent Kurdistan as a great tool to weaken and even threaten Iraq, Turkey, Iran and Syria.  Furthermore, the Kurds happened to control a lot of oil rich regions and they could always retreat in the mountainous areas if needed.
The Takfiris (i.e. the many and constantly name-changing franchises of what used to be called “al-Qaeda”). In reality, the Takfiris really ought to be classified together with the Axis of Kindness since they have been the foot-soldiers/cannon-fodder for the AngloZionist since the 1980s (from Afghanistan then to modern day Syria).  Nonetheless, we will consider them as distinct from the rest of the Axis of Kindness forces.

Of course, and just like any other taxonomy, this one is necessarily somewhat subjective and others might use different criteria or categories.  Now let’s look at what I believe is the key to the control of the entire region: the ability to place “boots on the ground” or the lack of such an ability: (…)

Source: http://thesaker.is/revisiting-the-win-win-win-win-outcome-in-syria/?fbclid=IwAR3FrI33yyB0PDDMmwuuX7GI82o42aT2_zptfyZUj3WdExOqOYpxh7JsP90

 

 

The Russian-Turkish Deal on Syria: Who Won and Who Lost? – Global Research

Andrew KORYBKO 23.10.2019

Presidents Putin and Erdogan reached a deal on Syria that represents a decisive victory for Turkey while being a drastic climbdown for Damascus after President Assad vowed earlier that day that the Syrian Arab Army was “prepared to support any group carrying out popular resistance against the Turkish aggression” only to later “fully support” the […]

Quelle: The Russian-Turkish Deal on Syria: Who Won and Who Lost? – Global Research

Press statement following Russian-Turkish talks

Press statement following Russian-Turkish talks

20:00
Sochi
Press statement following Russian-Turkish talks. With President of Turkey Erdogan Recep Tayyip.
Press statement following Russian-Turkish talks. With President of Turkey Erdogan Recep Tayyip.
7 of 9
Press statement following Russian-Turkish talks. With President of Turkey Erdogan Recep Tayyip.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Mr President, ladies and gentlemen,

We thank the President of Turkey for accepting our offer made during a recent telephone conversation, and today he and representatives of his delegation arrived in Sochi to discuss the developments in the Syrian Arab Republic, including in the northeast, beyond the Euphrates.

Mr Erdogan gave a detailed explanation of the goals of the Turkish military operation along the Syrian border. We have noted many times that we understand Turkey’s desire to take measures that would guarantee its national security.

We share Turkey’s concerns about the growing threat of terrorism and ethnic and religious disputes in that region. We believe these disputes and separatist sentiments have been fueled artificially from the outside.

It is important to prevent members of terrorist organisations, such as ISIS, whose militants have been taken prisoners by Kurd military groups and try to break free, from taking advantage of the actions of the Turkish military units.

Syria must be liberated from illegal foreign military presence. We believe that the only way to achieve strong and long-lasting stability in Syria is to respect the sovereignty and territorial integrity of the country. This is our principled position, and we have discussed it with the President of Turkey.

It is important that our Turkish partners share this approach. The Turks and the Syrians will have to protect peace on the border together, which would be impossible without mutually respectful cooperation between the two countries.

In addition to this, a broad dialogue between the Syrian government and the Kurds living in northeastern Syria must be launched. It is clear that all the rights and interests of the Kurds as an integral part of the multi-ethnic Syrian nation can only be fully considered and fulfilled via such an inclusive dialogue.

Of course, during our talks with the President of Turkey, we discussed further steps to promote the peaceful political process in Syria, which the Syrians will conduct within the Constitutional Committee in cooperation with the United Nations.

The guarantors of the Astana format have meticulously worked on it for many years.

We believe the situation on the ground must not prevent the long-awaited launch of the committee in Geneva next week – October 29–30.

Naturally, we also discussed humanitarian issues. We consider it necessary to continue helping Syrian refugees to return home, which will substantially alleviate the socioeconomic burden shouldered by the countries that agreed to take in Syrians. First and foremost this applies to the Republic of Turkey.

We urge the international community, primarily relevant UN agencies, to be more active in rendering humanitarian aid to all Syrians going home, without any discrimination, politicisation and preconditions. We also used today’s meeting to discuss current bilateral issues.

We noted with satisfaction our growing trade. Last year it increased by 16 percent. We exchanged views on what to do in the near future and expressed confidence that the implementation of the agreements on settlements and payments in national currencies signed in early October will also facilitate the further growth of trade.

We spoke about an important document that provides not only for more active use of the ruble and lira but also broader acceptance of the Russian Mir cards in Turkey and the connection of Turkish banks and companies to the Bank of Russia’s financial messaging system. I believe this is yet another step forward on expanding tourist exchanges.

We spoke about the whole package of our relations, including major projects that we are actively and successfully developing. We are also deepening our military-technical cooperation. I would like to note that cross-years of culture and tourism are held with success in Russia and Turkey.

In conclusion, I would like to thank the President of Turkey and all our friends and colleagues for a business-like and sincere conversation. We intend to further develop our cooperation in all areas on the principles of neighbourliness and respect for each other’s interests.

I am pleased to say that as a result of lengthy and intensive work we managed to make decisions that the foreign ministers of our countries will voice after our statements.

I think these decisions are very important, if not historic, and will allow us to settle the fairly acute situation on the Syrian-Turkish border.

* * *

After the presidents of Russia and Turkey made statements for the press, the foreign ministers of the two countries read out the text of the memorandum of understanding adopted following the Russian-Turkish talks.

Source: http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/61876

News I find relevant