Category: Ukraine

  • Here he goes again, cap in hand, begging for the alms of war.  Ukraine’s Volodymyr Zelenskyy has been touring the United States, continuing his lengthy salesmanship for Ukraine’s ongoing military efforts against Russia.  The theme is familiar and constantly reiterated: the United States must continue to back Kyiv in its rearguard action for civilisation in the face of Russian barbarism.  By attempting, not always convincingly, to universalise his country’s plight, Zelenskyy hopes to keep some lustre on an increasingly fading project.

    The Ukrainian president has succeeded most brazenly in getting himself, and the war effort, into the innards of the US presidential election.  In doing so, he has become an unabashed campaigner for the Democrats and the Kamala Harris ticket while offering uncharitable views about the Republicans.  (Electoral interference, anyone?)  The Republican contender, Donald Trump, had good reason to make the following observation about Zelenskyy: “Every time he comes into the country he walks away with $60 billion … he wants them [the Democrats] to win this election so badly.”

    Even as a lame duck president, Joe Biden could still be wooed to advance another aid package.  This seemed to be done, as the White House records, on threadbare details about Zelenskyy’s “plan to achieve victory over Russia.”  According to the readout, diplomatic, economic and military aspects of the plan were discussed.  “President Biden is determined to provide Ukraine with the support it needs to win.”

    Detail was also scarce in a briefing given by White House national security spokesperson John Kirby.  Zelenskyy’s plan to end the war “contains a series of initiatives and steps and objectives that [he] believes will be important”.

    In a statement, Biden announced that he had directed the Department of Defense to allocate the rest of the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative funds by the end of the year along with US$5.5 billion in Presidential Drawdown Authority.  The US$2.4 billion from the Ukraine Security Assistance Initiative is intended to supply Ukraine “with additional air defense, Unmanned Aerial Systems, and air-to-ground ammunitions, as well as strengthen Ukraine’s defense industrial base and support its maintenance and sustainment requirements.”

    In terms of materiel, an additional Patriot air defence battery is to be furnished to Ukraine’s air defences, along with additional Patriot missiles. Training for Ukrainian F-16 pilots is to be expanded.  The air-to-ground Joint Standoff Weapon (JSOW), colloquially known as glide bombs, will also be supplied.

    Ukraine’s fate is being annexed to the US election campaign, with the Ukrainian president keen to make his own boisterous intervention in the election.  On September 22, Zelenskyy paid a visit to a military facility in Scranton, Pennsylvania.  It was calculated for maximum effect.  The facility is not only responsible for manufacturing some of the equipment being used in the war against Russia, notably 155-millimeter howitzer rounds, but is a crucial state for the presidential contenders.  On hand to join him was a full coterie of Democrats: Gov. Josh Shapiro, Senator Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Representative Matt Cartwright (D-8th District)

    Harris is clear that any administration she leads will see no deviation from current policy.  Peace proposals were to be scoffed at, while prospects for a Ukrainian victory had to be seriously entertained.  Stopping shy of playing the treason card in remarks made on September 26, Harris claimed that there were those “in my country who would instead force Ukraine to give up large parts of its sovereign territory, who would demand that Ukraine accept neutrality, and would require Ukraine to forgo security relationships with other nations.”  And such types had endorsed “proposals” identical to “those of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin.”

    That message of sanctimonious chest beating was also embraced by Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who could only see Zelenskyy as a fighter “for freedom and the rule of law on behalf of democracies around the world” while “Trump and his craven MAGA followers side time and again with Vladimir Putin,” one responsible for a “filthy imperialist and irredentist invasion.”  Clearly, the Zelenskyy promotions tour has exercised some wizardry.

    The full soldering of Ukrainian matters to US electoral politics has received a frosty response from various Republicans.  House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) demanded nothing less than Zelenskyy’s dismissal of the Ukrainian Ambassador to the United States, Oksana Markarova.  “Ambassador Markarova organised an event in which you toured an American manufacturing site.”  The tour took place “in a politically contested battleground state, was led by a top political surrogate for Kamala Harris, and failed to include a single Republican because – on purpose – no Republicans were invited.”

    Those on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee, seething at Zelenskyy’s electoral caper, have launched an investigation into the possibility that taxpayer funds had been misused to the benefit of the Harris presidential campaign.  Chairman James Comer (R-Ky.), in a letter to Attorney General Merrick B. Garland, noted that, as the Department of Justice was “highly focused on combatting electoral interference, the Committee requests DOJ review the Biden-Harris Administration’s coordination with the Ukrainian government regarding President Zelensky’s itinerary while in America.”

    Comer could not resist a pertinent reminder that the Democrats had made much the same charge against Trump while in office in 2019. That occasion also featured Zelenskyy, only that time, the accusation was that Trump had used him “to benefit his 2020 presidential campaign, despite a lack of any evidence of wrongdoing on the part of President Trump.”

    GOP dissatisfaction is far from unreasonable.  Zelenskyy’s sojourn is nothing less than a sustained effort at electoral meddling, the sort of thing that normally turns US exceptionalists into rabid hyenas complaining of virtue despoiled.  Only this time, there are politicians and officials in freedom’s land happy to tolerate and even endorse it.  At stake is a war to prolong.

    The post Zelenskyy Joins the US Election first appeared on Dissident Voice.


    This content originally appeared on Dissident Voice and was authored by Kim Petersen.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

    • Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy returned to Washington and met with President Joe Biden and Vice President Kamala Harris as U.S. support for Ukraine’s fight against Russia faces a reckoning in this year’s presidential election.
    • Lawmakers grilled Postmaster General Louis DeJoy at a contentious House Appropriations subcommittee meeting today, questioning the ability of the United States Postal Service to effectively handle mail-in ballots for this year’s presidential election.
    • New York Mayor Eric Adams says he’s “not surprised” by federal corruption charges and has no plans to resign.
    • Community members and immigrant justice groups gathered outside the San Francisco office of Immigration and Customs Enforcement, or ICE, to show support for immigrants detained at the Golden State Annex and Mesa Verde ICE detention centers in Kern County, California.
    • Housing activists protest in Oakland and Sacramento, urging Governor Newsom to fulfill pledge to build one million affordable homes by 2030.

    The post Biden Administration promises $2.7 billion more in aid to Ukraine – September 26, 2024 appeared first on KPFA.


    This content originally appeared on KPFA – The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Denmark’s Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen said in a September 20th Bloomberg TV interview aired in Copehagen on the morning of September 23rd, that NATO nations must remove all restrictions on the use of their weapons against Russia by Ukraine, because Russia’s President Vladimir Putin aims to conquer NATO: “This thinking that if we allow him to take Ukraine or parts of Ukraine, then he will be satisfied, I disagree.” In other words: even for Russia to retain the parts of Ukraine that it currently occupies in Ukraine is entirely unacceptable, and so Russia must be simply conquered, or else Putin’s forces will conquer not only Ukraine but all of NATO and all of the world.

    During America’s invasion of Vietnam, the U.S. Government argued that if Vietnam would be taken over by communists, then all non-communist nations would become “falling dominoes”; and, so, America had to prevent that. Denmark’s Prime Minister is presenting her own “falling dominoes” theory against not communism, but instead Russia.

    She said that “My suggestion is, let us end the discussion about red lines [of Russia]. … It has been a mistake during this war to have a public discussion about red lines,” which are “simply giving the Russians too good a card in their hands.” In other words: Russia’s enemies must ignore the warnings that Russia has issued against any NATO country that will allow its long-range missiles to be fired from Ukraine into the Kremlin (Russia’s central command) or other sites that are crucial for Russia’s national security against NATO. She said simply “I think that the restrictions on the use of weapons should be lifted.” In other words: ignore Russia’s national-security concerns altogether. (What precisely she meant by saying “It has been a mistake during this war to have a public discussion about red lines,” was not clarified: Should that “discussion” be only private, and the public not be allowed to know anything about it; or should there simply not be any consideration given by U.S.-and-allied Governments to Russia’s national-security needs. When she said that for NATO to consider Russia’s red lines would be “simply giving the Russians too good a card in their hands,” she was indicating the latter, which would mean that even private discussions about that matter among NATO nations would be “a mistake.” In other words: she was saying that she is an absolutist against considering Russia’s national-security needs — even privately within NATO.)

    She turned on its head Russia’s statements of what the U.S. and its allies call “Putin’s red lines”: The “most important red line has been crossed already. And that was when the Russians entered Ukraine [on 24 February 2022]. So I will not accept this premise, and I will never allow anyone from Russia to decide what is the right thing to do in NATO, in Europe or in Ukraine.” So: NATO must never negotiate with Russia. Russia must simply accept what NATO does. (Her statement that the war in Ukraine started on 24 February 2022 instead of on 20 February 2014, has been contradicted both by Ukraine’s President Zelensky and by NATO’s Secretary General Stoltenberg.)

    She also broadened her unconcern about the national-security needs of Russia, so as to encompass as being enemies also countries that do not stand with NATO against Russia: “What we see now is a Russia that is getting closer to North Korea and to Iran. And I don’t think that Russia would be able to have a full-scale war inside Europe without help from China, unfortunately. So this is not a European conflict, this is a global conflict.”

    When the Bloomberg interviewer asked her about whether the U.S. Government shares the views that she was expressing about allowing Ukraine to fire deep into Russia the weapons that NATO countries are supplying to Ukraine, she refused to answer: “Frederiksen declined to comment on what the US position was on, for instance, the use of the 19 F-16 fighter jets given by Denmark.” (I have covered elsewhere what U.S. President Biden’s position on this is.)

    Bloomberg News pointed out that, “Frederiksen, 46, is leader of the Social Democrats and has been prime minister since 2019.”

    Shakespeare at around the year 1600 originated the phrase “Something is rotten in the state of Denmark.”

    The post Denmark’s Prime Minister Calls to Ignore Red Lines Against Russia first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Berlin, September 20, 2024—Russian authorities have deployed laws penalizing “foreign agents,” “undesirable” organizations, and those who “discredit” the army to issue fines against 11 journalists, at least five of whom live in exile, and to retaliate against two media outlets in the last two months.

    The latest figures show that Russia’s crackdown has continued apace since CPJ’s previous report in late July, which found that 13 exiled journalists had been targeted in the previous month.

    Russian authorities have clamped down on independent reporting since their full-scale invasion of Ukraine in 2022 while journalists who have fled into exile have been hit with fines, arrest warrants, and jail terms in absentia.

    Harassed as ‘foreign agents’

    Russian authorities have designated hundreds of media outlets and journalists as “foreign agents,” requiring them to regularly submit detailed reports of their activities and expenses to authorities and to list their status on published content.

    • On August 14, “foreign agent” Idris Yusupov of the independent outlet Novoye Delo was fined 30,000 rubles (US$330) for holding a solitary silent picket in Russia’s southwestern Republic of Dagestan calling for the release of jailed journalist Abdulmumin Gadzhiev and expressing support for Palestinians. “Foreign agents” are not allowed to organize public events.
    • On September 13, one of Russia’s last remaining independent print newspapers Sobesednik was designated a “foreign agent.” The outlet suspended publication while it challenges the decision in court.
    Journalists work in the office of Meduza in Riga, Latvia, in 2015.
    Journalists in the office of exiled media outlet Meduza in Latvia in 2015. (Photo: Reuters/Ints Kalnins)

    Criminalized as ‘undesirable’

    More than a dozen media outlets have been labeled “undesirable,” which means they are banned from operating in Russia. Anyone who participates in them faces fines or up to six years in prison. It is also a crime to distribute the outlets’ content.

    The popular news site Meduza, whose CEO Galina Timchenko won CPJ’s 2022 Gwen Ifill Press Freedom Award, has been a key target. The Latvia-based outlet is both a “foreign agent”  and an “undesirable” organization. Meduza’s website was blocked in Russia following its condemnation of the Ukraine war.

    • On July 26, Aida Ivanova, editor-in-chief of the Siberian online outlet SakhaDay, was fined 10,000 rubles (US$109) for posting a Telegram link to Meduza.
    • On July 30, Andrey Soldatov, exiled editor-in-chief of Agentura.ru, which documents the activities of Russian intelligence agencies, was fined 5,000 rubles (US$55) for his reporting and podcast for Meduza.
    • On July 30, Meduza’s exiled journalist Svetlana Reiter was fined 5,000 rubles (US$55) for her reporting, including an interview with the late opposition leader Alexey Navalny’s lawyer.
    • On August 23, Tuyara Innokentyeva was fined 15,000 rubles (US$164) for publishing three links to Meduza in 2020 as the administrator of a now-defunct Telegram channel of the independent newspaper Aartyk.ru based in northeastern Sakha Republic.
    • On September 13, the prosecutor general’s office designated the Poland-based TV channel Belsat as “undesirable,” saying that it had created a negative image of Russia and criticized its “special military operation” in Ukraine.

    ‘Discrediting’ the Russian army

    • Following a police raid on their homes and office in May, the independent newspaper Qirim’s founder Seyran Ibrahimov and editor-in-chief Bekir Mamutov were fined a total of 790,000 rubles (US$8,680) for four offences between June 7 and August 27 for “discrediting” the Russian army and “abusing” media freedom.

    Qirim covers issues affecting the Crimean Tatar ethnic minority in the Ukrainian peninsula seized by Moscow in 2014. The offending articles included a United Nations report on the humanitarian situation in Crimea and an opinion piece on the mobilization of Crimean Tatars into the Russian army in 2022.

    “Fines must be paid within two months of a court decision or they will double,” Ibrahimov told CPJ, adding that the amounts were “unaffordable” for the journalists and that non-payment could result in asset seizure. 

    • On August 16, Pavel Dmitriev, an exiled journalist with Pskovskaya Guberniya newspaper, was fined 30,000 rubles (US$330) for “discrediting” the Russian army in a YouTube video where he criticized President Vladimir Putin over the war in Ukraine. The exiled outlet has faced multiple criminal charges and raids.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Niniko Morbedadze (Georgia), The Orange Clouds on the Boundary, 2018.

    Dear Friends,

    Greetings from the desk of Tricontinental: Institute for Social Research.

    On 13 September, at a conclave in Washington, DC, US President Joe Biden and UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer indicated that it would be acceptable for Ukraine to fire missiles, provided by the West, into Russian territory. No official decision has been announced as of yet, but it is clear where the conversation among North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) member states is headed. After Starmer – whose approval rating with voters sits at 22% – returned to London, his foreign secretary David Lammy told the press that the UK government is in conversation with other allies about lifting restrictions on Ukraine’s use of UK-provided Storm Shadow missiles into Russia. Sir John McColl, a retired senior UK army officer, went further, stating that these missiles would eventually be used against Russia, yet – by themselves – they would not enable Ukraine to prevail. In other words, knowing full well that these missiles will not change the tenor of the war, these men (Biden, Starmer, and McColl) are willing to risk deepening the conflict.

    Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy has made the use of Western-provided missiles a central theme of his conversations with world leaders, claiming that if his military is allowed to fire the Storm Shadow missiles (from the UK), SCALPs (from France), and ATACMS (from the US), then Ukraine will be able to hit Russian military bases on Russian soil. A greenlight by NATO to use these three missile systems, which have already been supplied to Ukraine by NATO member countries, would be a significant escalation: if Ukraine were to use these missiles to attack Russia, and Russia were to retaliate with an attack on the countries that provided the missiles, it would trigger Article 5 of the NATO charter (1949), drawing all NATO member countries directly into the war. In such a scenario, several nuclear powers (US, UK, France, and Russia) will have their fingers on the nuclear button and could very well take the planet down the path of fiery destruction.

    Ion Grigorescu and Arutiun Avakian (Romania/Armenia), The Genius and the Era, 1990/1950s.

    In December 2021, Russia and the United States held a series of consultations that, even at that late hour, could have prevented hostilities from breaking out in Ukraine. A summary of those discussions is vital to highlight the key issues underlying the conflict:

    1.  7 December 2021. US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin held a two-hour video conference. The White House readout, which is only a paragraph long, focused on Russian troop movements on the Ukrainian border. The Kremlin summary is a bit longer and introduced a point that the United States has ignored: ‘Vladimir Putin warned against the shifting of responsibility on Russia, since it was NATO that was undertaking dangerous attempts to gain a foothold on Ukrainian territory and building up its military capabilities along the Russian border. It is for this reason that Russia is eager to obtain reliable, legally binding guarantees ruling out the eventuality of NATO’s eastward expansion and the deployment of offensive weapons systems in the countries neighbouring Russia’.

    2. 15 December 2021. Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov met with US Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Karen Donfried in Moscow. The Russian press release published after the meeting said that ‘they had a detailed discussion of security guarantees in the context of the persistent attempts by the US and NATO to change the European military and political situation in their favour’.

    Maria Khan (Pakistan), Craving for Love, 2012

    3.  17 December 2021. Russia released a draft treaty between itself and the United States as well as a draft agreement with NATO. Both texts made it clear that Russia was seeking firm security guarantees against any destabilisation of the status quo to its west. In these texts, there are explicit and important statements about missiles and nuclear weapons. The draft treaty says that neither the US nor Russia should ‘deploy ground-launched intermediate-range and shorter-range missiles outside their national territories, as well as in the areas of their national territories, from which such weapons can attack targets in the national territory of the other Party’ (article 6) and that both sides should ‘refrain from deploying nuclear weapons outside their national territories’ (article 7). The draft agreement with NATO says that none of the NATO countries should ‘deploy land-based intermediate- and short-range missiles in areas allowing them to reach the territory of the other Parties’ (article 5).

    4.  23 December 2021. In his annual press conference, Putin once more broadcast Russia’s anxiety about NATO’s eastward movement and about the threats of weapons systems being deployed on Russian borders: ‘We remember, as I have mentioned many times before and as you know very well, how you promised us in the 1990s that [NATO] would not move an inch to the East. You cheated us shamelessly: there have been five waves of NATO expansion, and now the weapons systems I mentioned have been deployed in Romania, and deployment has recently begun in Poland. This is what we are talking about, can you not see? We are not threatening anyone. Have we approached US borders? Or the borders of Britain or any other country? It is you who have come to our border, and now you say that Ukraine will become a member of NATO as well. Or, even if it does not join NATO, that military bases and strike systems will be placed on its territory under bilateral agreements’.

    5.  30 December 2021. Biden and Putin had a phone call about the deteriorating situation. The Kremlin’s summary is more detailed than the one from the White House, which is why it is more useful. Putin, we are told, ‘stressed that the negotiations needed to produce solid legally binding guarantees ruling out NATO’s eastward expansion and the deployment of weapons that threaten Russia in the immediate vicinity of its borders’.

    On 24 February 2022, Russian troops entered Ukraine.

    Louay Kayyali (Syria), Then What?, 1965.

    Russia has been anxious about its security guarantees ever since the United States began to unilaterally withdraw from the delicate arms control system. The bookends of this dismissal are the US’s 2001 departure from the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty and 2019 revocation of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty. The disposal of these treaties and the failure to acknowledge Russian pleas for security guarantees – alongside NATO aggressions in Yugoslavia, Afghanistan, and Libya – caused anxieties to grow in Moscow about the possibility that the West could place short-range nuclear missiles in Ukraine or in the Baltic states and be able to strike large Russian cities in the west without any hope of defence. That has been Russia’s main argument with the West. If the West had taken the treaties that Russia proposed in December 2021 seriously, then we might not be in a situation where the Western countries are discussing the use of NATO missiles against Russia.

    A new study by the consulting firm Accuracy shows that arms companies in the United States and Europe have benefited enormously from this war, with stock market capitalisation for the main weapons companies having increased by 59.7% since February 2022. The largest gains were made by Honeywell (US), Rheinmetall (Germany), Leonardo (Italy), BAE Systems (UK), Dassault Aviation (France), Thales (France), Konsberg Gruppen (Norway), and Safran (France). The US companies Huntington Ingalls, Lockheed Martin, General Dynamics, and Northrup Grumman also saw gains, though their percentage increases were lower because their absolute profits were already at obscene levels. While these NATO merchants of death profit enormously, their populations continue to struggle with higher prices due to fuel and food price inflation.

    Askhat Akhmedyarov (Kazakhstan), Geopolitical Soldier, 2014.

    Perhaps the most cruelly ironic part of this entire debate is that allowing Ukraine to strike Russia would not necessarily result in any military benefit. Firstly, Russian air bases have now moved out of range of the missiles under discussion, and, secondly, Ukrainian supplies of these missiles are low. Adding to the looming threat of nuclear war are two recent statements from the US. In August, the US press reported that the Biden administration had produced a secret memorandum about preparing the US nuclear arsenal to combat China, North Korea, and Russia. This came on the heels of another report, in June, that the US is considering expanding its nuclear forces.

    All of this is part of the backdrop of the 79th United Nations General Assembly meeting taking place this month, where member states will discuss a new Global Compact. The draft compact uses the word ‘peace’ over a hundred times, but the real noise we hear is war, war, war.

    Tuvshoo (Mongolia), Tears of Joy, 2013.

    When I was a teenager in Calcutta, India, I would often zip off to the Gorky Sadan theatre and watch the films of the Soviet director Andrei Tarkovsky, which ruminated about life and the human desire to be better. One of these films, Mirror (1975), about the outrageousness of war, is anchored in the poems of the filmmaker’s father, Arseny Tarkovsky. As tensions rise in Ukraine, the elder Tarkovsky’s poem ‘Saturday, June 21’ (referring to the day before the Soviet Union was attacked by Nazi Germany 1941) warns us against mounting threat of war:

    There’s one night left to build fortifications.
    It’s in my hands, the hope for our salvation.

    I’m yearning for the past; then I could warn
    Those who were doomed to perish in this war.

    A man across the street would hear me cry,
    ‘Come here, now, and death will pass you by’.

    I’d know the hour when the war would strike
    Who will survive the camps and who will die.

    Who will be heroes honoured by awards,
    And who will die shot by the firing squads.

    I see the snow in Stalingrad, all strewn
    With corpses of the enemy platoons.

    Under the air raids, I see Berlin
    The Russian infantry is marching in.

    I can foretell the enemy’s every plot
    More than intelligence of any sort.

    And I keep pleading, but no one will hear.
    The passersby are breathing in fresh air,

    Enjoying summer flowers in June,
    All unaware of the coming doom.

    Another moment – and my vision disappears.
    I don’t know when or how I ended here.

    My mind is blank. I’m looking at bright skies,
    My window not yet taped by criss-crossed stripes.

    Warmly,

    Vijay

    The post There Is Only One Night Left to Build Fortifications first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Once upon a time a group of Marxist vegan scientists weren’t happy with the way the world was going.

    They noted that most USians more easily imagined the end of the world than the end of capitalism.

    They also noted that the capybara, a large rodent found in South America, seemed to get along very well with all other creatures, sleeping and playing with turtles, cats, rats, rabbits, humans, monkeys, birds, dogs, sometimes even caimans.

    So these Marxist vegan scientists, building on the work of Harry Harlow’s infamous maternal deprivation experiments on baby rhesus monkeys and Martin Seligman’s dog-shocking experiments at Penn, applied for a government grant to make capybaras turn against other animals and other animals to hate the capybaras. The National Institutes of Health immediately recognized how useful this would be in US-instigated color revolutions and funded the proposal with $100 million.

    However, the Marxist vegan scientists’ real covert plan was to create the “capyvax,” a genetically-engineered treatment that had a happy-sounding name which would make the inoculated humans become more capybara-like and less anti-social and quarrelsome.

    So the Marxist vegan scientists traveled to a capybara sanctuary in Big Sur California to obtain hair and fecal samples – it was the old Esalen – where the capybaras played and mated in the hot tubs on cliffs fifty feet above the Pacific Ocean, listening to the waves and wind roar every day and night. (Capybaras only mate in water.)

    In no time at all the capyvax was created and ready to be tested. One of the scientists said:

    “To be valid, we have to test this on the most violent, hideous anti-social people we can find.”

    “You’re not proposing to use prisoners are you?”

    “Of course not. Here’s the plan: We’re going to use the grant money to go into all the homeless encampments in Los Angeles –”

    “Wait a minute! That’s even more depraved! You’d be making the most disenfranchised members of the working class get even more used to this diabolical system! This is one step away from… from therapy!”

    “Will you let me finish! Jesus, Frankie says relax! We’re going to go into the homeless encampments to find all the homeless vets – there will be former army snipers among them. We’re going to make these people rich with only a fraction of the grant money, equip them with dart guns and then set about inoculating the most depraved people walking the planet.”

    “OK. But who?”

    “We need a diverse, scientifically valid sample population of Nazis – we need the Mississippi K Street delta bluesman Antony Blinken, the pasty blood-sucked actually already dead Jake Sullivan, the rancid Victoria Nuland, the creepy clown John Wayne Gacy Kirby, the blood sucking Matthew Miller (see his happy meal Sullivan above), the box-checked triple threat Karine Jean-Pierre and the least ahimsa-like Indian on the planet and future Breezewood, Pennsylvania Super 8 proprietor, Vedant Patel. We need the master planners like Blinken and Nuland but we also need the little Eichmans and Streichers like Patel, KJP, Count Smirkula, Kirby and members of US state media – like New York Times reporters.”

    “Isn’t The New York Times Israeli state media?”

    “Whatever. Don’t nitpick. These parasites are all war mongering genocide-consent-manufacturing media soldiers. All that matters is that they aren’t reporters. They aren’t journalists.”

    Within weeks of being darted Antony Blinken and Victoria Nuland quit their jobs and began volunteering with Food Not Bombs. (“What a novel idea!” said Blinken. “Previously, I would have started a 501 (c) (3) called Hellfire Missiles Not Food!”) Similar altruistic things happened with all the other Nazi functionaries. They stopped wasting their lives, humiliating and dehumanizing themselves every day with laughable lies and brazen hypocrisies. They stopped being repulsive loathsome abject disgraces to their families, friends and country.

    There were physical changes too. Blinken, Nuland and Count Smirkula, for example, became less rat-like as their snouts grew out and more squarish. They still spoke English and walked on their hind legs but they grew thick hairy coats that covered their bodies and, over time, they shed their clothes altogether, leading Blinken to defend his bare ass – instead of his bare-ass lies – by performing an updated version of Dylan’s “It’s Alright Ma, I’m Only Bleeding”: “Even the real president of the United States sometimes must have to stand naked!”

    As soon as the worlds’ intelligence agencies saw Blinken and Nuland making sun bread and passing out vegan burritos to homeless people they knew something was up in the US.

    Russian spies quickly tracked down the Marxist vegan developers of the capyvax and approached them about selling the formula. The scientists were true US patriots, however, and held firm, saying, “For season tickets to the Bolshoi, decent lifetime healthcare for our babushkas, dachas in Sochi and a Chinese commitment to fix the 405, it’s yours.”

    “Done, comrade veganskya.”

    Vladimir Putin confabbed with China’s President Xi and said, “You know what this means in the end?”

    “Yes, happybaras of the world unite!”

    Even though the vote-harder US working class wasn’t aware of this, the rest of the world understood that nothing positive was able to arise from within the US and Israel. These entities were no longer capable of self-correcting even to save themselves. The last line of defense against barbarism – the working class majority – was now a corrupt, obedient, cowardly, defeated, kiss up, kick down, empathy-less entity. These were Nazi societies of longstanding, Israel for over seven decades and the US since the early 1970s and for US blacks and indigenous peoples, centuries. Every day was 1940 Germany and past the point of no return. Change would have to be imposed on the US and Israel from the outside.

    So Russia quickly sent planeloads of new-fangled cluster munitions to Iran – basically paintballs that released aerosolized versions of the capyvax and, because it was the hard case of Israel, LSD was added. These capyvax/window pane speed balls were trucked from Iran to Syria and into Lebanon for Hezbollah who launched them on occupied Palestine.

    Israel, of course, was still holding raves twenty feet from their new concentration camps in the West Bank – but always in that ironic Israeli post-apocalyptic Hunger Games way, like their soldiers wearing Gaza women’s panties and bras after summarily executing them in their homes, labeling one music festival the Shlomotown Massacre featuring all you can drink Kha-kha-kha-mas Kool Aid. Bibi Netanyahoo, wearing both a kippah and a headband, proclaimed from the nosh pit, “Israel is safe! Israel is back!”

    However, Hebrew-speaking Hezbollah operatives had finished the northern section of the Gaza Metro underneath all of Israel, infiltrated the rave and spiked the Kool Aid. Bibi, taking an Area C-size ladleful, off-handedly said, “Oh, wow, the colors. It’s so amazing. My fellow Israelis, my comets, my bon ami, my ethnic cleansers, maybe we should all go to Miami and be there now with my son, Yair. Don’t bogart those knish edibles, man!”

    Then ravers yelled out: “Right on!” “It’s all coming together!” “I see everything now all at once!” “Yes! The past, the present, the future, that radioactive planet-poisoner Herzl!” “The Zio-tonium half-life of 76 years!” “Those true antisemites behind Balfour!” “Those whack jobs so attached to our ancient Biblical homeland that they originally wanted to put us in Madagascar and Suriname!” “El Al hell yeah!” “We haven’t had this spirit here since 1969!” “No, man, my trip is turning bad – are we in the Zionist roach motel…?”

    Very soon it became apparent that something was happening all over the world. Happybaras were here, there and everywhere. A new slogan went viral: “Four legs great – two legs not so bad!”

    As humans morphed into happybaras, they had to learn the ways of the original capybaras. For instance, people were mating, walking on two legs and speaking their native tongues as always but they now were completely covered with body hair. As one wag said about the mass adoption of body hair and “nudity”: “In the old days, sonny, all I can say is – thank God for clothes! Humans were so out of shape and ugly at nearly all stages of development. It was blind shithouse luck or really hard work to get any of them aesthetically appealing.”

    Sports teams were now proud to be linked to vegan animals like capybaras and manatees – witness the newly-named Chicago Capybearas, the Dallas Seacow Boys and the Cleveland Cavies (nee Cavaliers) who kept their Cavs nickname.

    One crappy thing that people had trouble with is that capybaras are auto coprophagous. Some people excitedly thought this was a new form of sex and others had no idea what it was though a few of them had been doing it for years. Auto coprophagous means that capybaras eat their own feces.

    Like the protein, iron, B-12 and manhood panics, a general alarm sounded across US social media. The Marxist vegan scientists parried back with, “Look, capitalism has been making all of us eat shit for our entire lives. Is this a back road, a bridge too far for a peaceful and just world? We have to evolve. We humans haven’t stepped up to the “plate,” so to speak, and learned how to manage all the waste we create. Our new transition to happybarahood is going to be a boon to the planet. This is more symbolic, more asspirational than literal. It gets us in the mindset of looking closer at what we produce and where it goes.”

    As time passed the savvy cavies cum happybaras assumed prominent positions in waste management, international diplomacy and mediation, replacing lawyers, police and judges. Crime disappeared. Raises and promotions ceased being based on appearance. It was all about the content of the cavy. The capybaras’ practice of alloparenting (it takes a village) became widely accepted. Although capybaras practice the Bumble mating system (females choose males), once male humans learned that there would eventually be twice as many female happybaras for every male happybara they started embracing their inner nutria.

    Capybara (Hydrochoerus hydrochaeris)
    San Martin River, Beni Department of Bolivia.

    Eventually the original capybaras’ barks, chirps, grunts, and purrs became widely influential and understood throughout the world, especially their ability to whistle through their noses. As my high school Spanish teacher once told us, “Class, are you now getting an idea how dumb and difficult the English language is? All these words that sound the same but are spelled differently or look the same but are pronounced differently or mean different things. Compound adjectives and possessive plurals are always a matter of luck. Is a misplaced modifier a big deal really? It’s ridiculous. If you go to a foreign country you need to learn how to say two things: One, how much does it cost? And two, where’s the bathroom? Don’t get it twisted, it’s always socialism or extinction and dinero y bano.” Oh, if she could have lived to see the day when a bunch of evolved commie happybaras didn’t care about either one!

    The capyvax and happybaras ushered in a lazy new world with the capybara replacing the eagle as the US national symbol. The US national motto became what author Henry Miller always wanted it to be: Where Nothing Happens – goof off, stop working so hard, visit friends, there’s nothing noble about money, conquering and wage slavery.

    And that, children, is how the world became a peaceful and just place.

    There was one disturbing thing that happened. A minor internet grifter who once publicly said he wanted to have sex with a horse went to Brazil to have sex with a 100% old-style she/her capybara. He was turned down over 500 times by both male and female capybaras, three anacondas, two peccary swingers and an entire school of piranhas. But there was one blind mentally-challenged underage female orphaned capybara that he succeeded in mating with. Disappointingly, generations of capybaras began appearing that left 5% tips at restaurants, drove slowly in the passing lane, argued about invisible Gods and were soon ostracized by all other creatures. Huh.

    Scientists are now studying the matter.

    The post Empire Fables: How Humans Became Happybaras first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on The Grayzone and was authored by The Grayzone.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that if the United States and the United Kingdom allow Ukraine to strike deep inside Russia with Western missiles, “it will mean nothing less than the direct involvement of NATO countries.” “This is not a question of allowing the Ukrainian regime to strike Russia with these weapons or not. It is a question of deciding whether or not NATO…

    Source

    This post was originally published on Latest – Truthout.

  • Invention is the mother of necessity, and Russia’s response to largely Western-imposed economic and trade sanctions has shown the extent of that inventiveness.  While enduring attritive punishment in its Ukraine campaign, the war remains sustainable for the Kremlin.  The domestic economy has not collapsed, despite apocalyptic predictions to the contrary.  In terms of exports, Russia is carving out new trade routes, a move that has been welcomed by notable powers in the Global South.

    One of the chief prosecutors of sanctions against Moscow was initially confident about the damage that would be caused by economic bludgeoning.  US President Joe Biden, in February 2022, insisted on the imposition of measures that would “impair [Russia’s] ability to compete in a high-tech 21st century economy.”  The Council of the European Union also explained that the move was intended to weaken Moscow’s “ability to finance the war and specifically target the political, military and economic elite responsible for the invasion [of Ukraine].”

    In all this, the European Union, the United States and other governments have ignored a salient historical lesson when resorting to supposedly punitive formulae intended to either deter Russia from pursuing a course of action or depriving it of necessary resources.  States subject to supposedly crushing economic measures can adapt, showing streaks of impressive resilience.  The response from Japan, Germany and Italy during the 1930s in the face of sanctions imposed by the League of Nations provide irrefutable proof of that proposition.  All, to a certain extent, pursued what came to be known as Blockadefestigkeit, or blockade resilience.  With bitter irony, the targeted powers also felt emboldened to pursue even more aggressive measures to subvert the restraints placed upon them.

    By the end of 2022, Russia had become China’s second biggest supplier of Russian crude oil.  India has also been particularly hungry for Russian oil.  Producing only 10% of domestic supply, Russia contributed 34% of the rest of Indian oil consumption in 2023.

    Trade routes are also being pursued with greater vigour than ever.  This year, progress was made between Russia and China on a North Sea Route, which straddles the Atlantic Ocean and the Pacific Ocean, running from Murmansk on the Barents Sea to the Bering Strait and the Far East.  The agreement between Russia’s state nuclear agency Rosatom and China’s Hainan Yangpu Newnew Shipping Co Ltd envisages the joint design and creation of Arctic-class container vessels to cope with the punishing conditions throughout the year.  Rosatom’s special representative for Arctic development, Vladimir Panov, confidently declared that up to 3 million tonnes of transit cargo would flow along the NSR in 2024.

    While that agreement will operate to Russia’s frozen north, another transport route has also received a boosting tonic.  Of late, Moscow and New Delhi have been making progress on the 7,200-kilometre International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), which will run from St. Petersburg in northwestern Russia to ports in southern Iran for onward movement to Mumbai.  While the agreement between Russia, Iran and India for such a multimodal corridor dates back to September 2000, the advent of sanctions imposed in the aftermath of the Ukraine War propelled Moscow to seek succour in the export markets of the Middle East and Asia.

    As staff writers at Nikkei point out, the shipping route will not only bypass Europe but be “less than half as long as the current standard path through the Mediterranean Sea and the Suez Canal.”  One calculation suggests that the time needed to transport cargo to Moscow from Mumbai prior to the initiation of the corridor was between 40 and 60 days.  As things stand, the transit time has been shaved to 25-30 days, with transportation costs falling by 30%.

    Much progress has been made on the western route, which involves the use of Azerbaijan’s rail and road facilities.  In March, Azerbaijan’s Ministry of Digital Development and Transport revealed that rail freight grew by approximately 30% in 2023.  Road freight rose to 1.3 million tonnes, an increase of 35%.  The ministry anticipates the amount of tonnage in terms of freight traffic to rise to 30 million per year.  In June this year, the Rasht-Caspian Sea link connecting the Persian Gulf with the Caspian Sea via rail was opened in the presence of Russian, Iranian and Azerbaijani dignitaries.

    A further factor that adds worth to the corridor is the increasingly fraught nature of freight traffic from Europe to Asia via the Suez Canal.  Iranian-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen have been harrying vessels in the Red Sea, a response to Israel’s ferocious campaign in Gaza.  Russian Deputy Prime Minister Alexei Overchuk suggested back in January that the “North-South [corridor] will gain global significance” given the crisis in the Red Sea.

    Despite the frightful losses being endured in the Russia-Ukraine war, it is clear, at least when it comes to using economic and financial weapons, that Moscow has prevailed.  It has outfoxed its opponents, and, along the way, sought to redraw global trade routes that will furnish it with even greater armour from future economic shocks.  Other countries less keen to seek a moral stake in the Ukraine conflict than pursue their own trade interests, have been most enthusiastic.

    The post Bypassing Sanctions: Russia, Trade Routes and Outfoxing the West first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • “It’s brave to admit your fears” – Ukrainian recruiting poster. Photo credit: Ministry of Defense, Ukraine.

    The Associated Press reports that many of the recruits drafted under Ukraine’s new conscription law lack the motivation and military indoctrination required to actually aim their weapons and fire at Russian soldiers.

    “Some people don’t want to shoot. They see the enemy in the firing position in trenches but don’t open fire. … That is why our men are dying,” said a frustrated battalion commander in Ukraine’s 47th Brigade. “When they don’t use the weapon, they are ineffective.”

    This is familiar territory to anyone who has studied the work of U.S. Brigadier General Samuel “Slam” Marshall, a First World War veteran and the chief combat historian of the U.S. Army in the Second World War. Marshall conducted hundreds of post-combat small group sessions with U.S. troops in the Pacific and Europe, and documented his findings in his book, Men Against Fire: the Problem of Battle Command.

    One of Slam Marshall’s most startling and controversial findings was that only about 15% of U.S. troops in combat actually fired their weapons at the enemy. In no case did that ever rise above 25%, even when failing to fire placed the soldiers’ own lives in greater danger.

    Marshall concluded that most human beings have a natural aversion to killing other human beings, often reinforced by our upbringing and religious beliefs, and that turning civilians into effective combat soldiers therefore requires training and indoctrination expressly designed to override our natural respect for fellow human life. This dichotomy between human nature and killing in war is now understood to lie at the root of much of the PTSD suffered by combat veterans.

    Marshall’s conclusions were incorporated into U.S. military training, with the introduction of firing range targets that looked like enemy soldiers and deliberate indoctrination to dehumanize the enemy in soldiers’ minds. When he conducted similar research in the Korean War, Marshall found that changes in infantry training based on his work in World War II had already led to higher firing ratios.

    That trend continued in Vietnam and more recent U.S. wars. Part of the shocking brutality of the U.S. hostile military occupation of Iraq stemmed directly from the dehumanizing indoctrination of the U.S. occupation forces, which included falsely linking Iraq to the September 11th terrorist crimes in the U.S. and labeling Iraqis who resisted the U.S. invasion and occupation of their country as “terrorists.

    A Zogby poll of U.S. forces in Iraq in February 2006 found that 85% of U.S. troops believed their mission was to “retaliate for Saddam’s role in the 9/11 attacks,” and 77% believed that the primary reason for the war was to “stop Saddam from protecting Al Qaeda in Iraq.” This was all pure fiction, cut from whole cloth by propagandists in Washington, and yet, three years into the U.S. occupation, the Pentagon was still misleading U.S. troops to falsely link Iraq with 9/11.

    The impact of this dehumanization was also borne out by court martial testimony in the rare cases when U.S. troops were prosecuted for killing Iraqi civilians. In a court martial at Camp Pendleton in California in July 2007, a corporal testifying for the defense told the court he did not see the cold-blooded killing of an innocent civilian as a summary execution. “I see it as killing the enemy,” he told the court, adding, “Marines consider all Iraqi men part of the insurgency.”

    U.S. combat deaths in Iraq and Afghanistan (6,257 killed) were only a fraction of the U.S. combat death toll in Vietnam (47,434) or Korea (33,686), and an even smaller fraction of the nearly 300,000 Americans killed in the Second World War. In every case, other countries suffered much heavier death tolls.

    And yet, U.S. casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan provoked waves of political blowback in the U.S., leading to military recruitment problems that persist today. The U.S. government responded by shifting away from wars involving large deployments of U.S. ground troops to a greater reliance on proxy wars and aerial bombardment.

    After the end of the Cold War, the U.S. military-industrial complex and political class thought they had “kicked the Vietnam syndrome,” and that, freed from the danger of provoking World War III with the Soviet Union, they could now use military force without restraint to consolidate and expand U.S. global power. These ambitions crossed party lines, from Republican “neoconservatives” to Democratic hawks like Madeleine Albright, Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden.

    In a speech at the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in October 2000, a month before winning a seat in the U.S. Senate, Hillary Clinton echoed her mentor Madeleine Albright’s infamous rejection of the “Powell Doctrine” of limited war.

    “There is a refrain…,” Clinton declared, “that we should intervene with force only when we face splendid little wars that we surely can win, preferably by overwhelming force in a relatively short period of time. To those who believe we should become involved only if it is easy to do, I think we have to say that America has never and should not ever shy away from the hard task if it is the right one.

    During the question-and-answer session, a banking executive in the audience challenged Clinton on that statement. “I wonder if you think that every foreign country– the majority of countries–would actually welcome this new assertiveness, including the one billion Muslims that are out there,” he asked, “and whether or not there isn’t some grave risk to the United States in this–what I would say, not new internationalism, but new imperialism?”

    When the aggressive war policy promoted by the neocons and Democratic hawks crashed and burned in Iraq and Afghanistan, this should have prompted a serious rethink of their wrongheaded assumptions about the impact of aggressive and illegal uses of U.S. military force.

    Instead, the response of the U.S. political class to the blowback from its catastrophic wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was simply to avoid large deployments of U.S. ground forces or “boots on the ground.” They instead embraced the use of devastating bombing and artillery campaigns in Afghanistan, Mosul in Iraq and Raqqa in Syria, and wars fought by proxies, with full, “ironclad” U.S. support, in Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen, and now Ukraine and Palestine.

    The absence of large numbers of U.S. casualties in these wars kept them off the front pages back home and avoided the kind of political blowback generated by the wars in Vietnam and Iraq. The lack of media coverage and public debate meant that most Americans knew very little about these more recent wars, until the shocking atrocity of the genocide in Gaza finally started to crack the wall of silence and indifference.

    The results of these U.S. proxy wars are, predictably, no less catastrophic than the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. The U.S. domestic political impacts have been mitigated, but the real-world impacts in the countries and regions involved are as deadly, destructive and destabilizing as ever, undermining U.S. “soft power” and pretensions to global leadership in the eyes of much of the world.

    In fact, these policies have widened the yawning gulf between the worldview of ill-informed Americans who cling to the view of their country as a country at peace and a force for good in the world, and people in other countries, especially in the Global South, who are ever more outraged by the violence, chaos and poverty caused by the aggressive projection of U.S. military and economic power, whether by U.S. wars, proxy wars, bombing campaigns, coups or economic sanctions.

    Now the U.S.-backed wars in Palestine and Ukraine are provoking growing public dissent among America’s partners in these wars. Israel’s recovery of six more dead hostages in Rafah led Israeli labor unions to call widespread strikes, insisting that the Netanyahu government must prioritize the lives of the Israeli hostages over its desire to keep killing Palestinians and destroying Gaza.

    In Ukraine, an expanded military draft has failed to overcome the reality that most young Ukrainians do not want to kill and die in an endless, unwinnable war. Hardened veterans see new recruits much as Siegfried Sassoon described the British conscripts he was training in November 2016 in Memoirs of an Infantry Officer: “The raw material to be trained was growing steadily worse. Most of those who came in now had joined the Army unwillingly, and there was no reason why they should find military service tolerable.”

    Several months later, with the help of Bertrand Russell, Sassoon wrote Finished With War: a Soldier’s Declaration, an open letter accusing the political leaders who had the power to end the war of deliberately prolonging it. The letter was published in newspapers and read aloud in Parliament. It ended, “On behalf of those who are suffering now, I make this protest against the deception which is being practiced upon them; also I believe it may help to destroy the callous complacency with which the majority of those at home regard the continuance of agonies which they do not share and which they have not enough imagination to realize.”

    As Israeli and Ukrainian leaders see their political support crumbling, Netanyahu and Zelenskyy are taking increasingly desperate risks, all the while insisting that the U.S. must come to their rescue. By “leading from behind,” our leaders have surrendered the initiative to these foreign leaders, who will keep pushing the United States to make good on its promises of unconditional support, which will sooner or later include sending young American troops to kill and die alongside their own.

    Proxy war has failed to resolve the problem it was intended to solve. Instead of acting as an alternative to ground wars involving U.S. forces, U.S. proxy wars have spawned ever-escalating crises that are now making U.S. wars with Iran and Russia increasingly likely.

    Neither the changes to U.S. military training since the Second World War nor the current U.S. strategy of proxy war have resolved the age-old contradiction that Slam Marshall described in Men Against Fire, between killing in war and our natural respect for human life. We have come full circle, back to this same historic crossroads, where we must once again make the fateful, unambiguous choice between the path of war and the path of peace.

    If we choose war, or allow our leaders and their foreign friends to choose it for us, we must be ready, as military experts tell us, to once more send tens of thousands of young Americans to their deaths, while also risking escalation to a nuclear war that would kill us all.

    If we truly choose peace, we must actively resist our political leaders’ schemes to repeatedly manipulate us into war. We must refuse to volunteer our bodies and those of our children and grandchildren as their cannon fodder, or allow them to shift that fate onto our neighbors, friends and “allies” in other countries.

    We must insist that our mis-leaders instead recommit to diplomacy, negotiation and other peaceful means of resolving disputes with other countries, as the UN Charter, the real “rules based order,” in fact requires.

    The post Who Wants to Kill and Die for the American Empire? first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.

  • Seg1 austin ukraine damage

    Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin has announced more U.S. aid for Ukraine just days after the country was hit by one of the deadliest airstrikes since Russia’s invasion in early 2022. On Tuesday, a pair of Russian missiles struck a military academy and hospital in the central Ukrainian city of Poltava, killing at least 51 people and injuring more than 270. “The sense … is that the U.S. is giving Ukraine enough so that it doesn’t lose, but not enough so that it can actually make significant and needed gains,” says award-winning journalist Arwa Damon, who is in Ukraine providing medical and mental healthcare with her organization INARA, the International Network for Aid, Relief and Assistance. “This has been going on for well over two years right now, and they really want to begin to be able to see a way out.”


    This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • A photo of an aircraft has been shared in Chinese-language social media posts alongside a claim that it shows a Chinese plane disguised as a Red Cross flight entering Ukraine to help Russia. 

    But the claim is false. The photo in fact shows a plane that carried a group of doctors to the Chinese city of Wuhan in 2020 following the outbreak of COVID-19.

    The photo was shared here on X, formerly known as Twitter, on Aug. 24, 2024.

    “China officially sent troops to participate in Russia’s ‘special military operation’ against Ukraine, with the first 15,000 troops entering the war under the name of the ‘Red Cross Forces’,” the caption of the photo reads in part. 

    The photo shows a white airplane on a landing strip with what appears to be China’s flag emblazoned on its tail. 

    1 (22).png
    Several Chinese online users recently claimed that China had officially sent soldiers to fight alongside Russia. (Screenshots/X)

    China has repeatedly denied allegations that it supplies Russia with weapons amid accusations that it has built up Russia’s war machine by providing critical components.

    Beijing exports more than $300 million worth of dual-use items – those with both commercial and military applications – to Russia every month, according to the U.S.-based think tank Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. 

    The think tank added the list included what the U.S. had designated as “high priority” items – necessary for making weapons, from drones to tanks.

    The U.S. in May imposed sanctions on about 20 firms based in China and Hong Kong, saying one exported components for drones, while others helped Russia bypass Western sanctions on other technologies.

    China said it was not selling lethal arms and “prudently handles the export of dual-use items in accordance with laws and regulations.”

    The claim about the airplane carrying Chinese troops to Russia was also shared on X here and here

    But the claim is false. 

    A reverse image search on Google found it was published in Chinese-language media in 2020, as seen here and here.

    According to the reports, the image shows a Chinese plane carrying  doctors to Wuhan following the outbreak of COVID-19 as part of relief efforts and epidemic control. 

    Keyword searches found no credible or official reports about China sending troops to Ukraine to help Russia. 

    Did an unmarked Chinese plane transport aid to Russia? 

    Separately, a photo and a video of an aircraft with no markings were shared on X alongside a claim that they show a Chinese plane transporting prohibited materials to either Russia or Iran.

    2 (14).png
    Several online users claimed China sent prohibited materials to Russia using unmarked planes. (Screenshots/X) 

    But the claim is false.

    A closer look at the photo and the video found the word “ATLAS” written next to the hatch of the plane and the number “704” marked near the landing gear. 

    Keyword searches using these two clues found the plane in fact is from  the U.S. cargo airline Atlas Air and has nothing to do with China. 

    Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Shen Ke and Taejun Kang.

    Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Zhuang Jing for Asia Fact Check Lab.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • Berlin, August 29, 2024—The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns Russia’s recent launch of a spate of criminal investigations into foreign journalists reporting on the Ukrainian army’s advance into Russia’s Kursk region.

    Since the Ukrainian army started its incursion on August 6, Russian authorities have opened probes into seven foreign journalists accompanying Ukrainian forces to report on the conflict in the western town of Sudzha, accusing them of illegally crossing the border. 

    “The prosecution of the journalists covering an important development in the Russian-Ukraine war is another assault on press freedom,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia Program Coordinator, in New York. “These reporters were performing their essential role of informing the public about the ongoing conflict. It is imperative that Russian authorities allow journalists to report on the war from within the conflict zone without the threat of prosecution.” 

    Over a 10-day period from August 17 to 27, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) announced investigations into the following journalists and outlets:  

    • Unnamed Washington Post reporters who visited Sudzha on August 17 accompanied by Ukrainian military personnel. An August 18 Washington Post report said that Siobhán O’Grady, Tetiana Burianova and photographer Ed Ram had traveled to Ukrainian-held territory in Russia. 

    The charge of illegally crossing the Russian border carries a prison sentence of up to five years, according to the Russian criminal code. The FSB said those under investigation will be placed on an international wanted list. 

    CPJ did not receive a response to an email requesting comment on the investigations from Russia’s Foreign Ministry.

    Editor’s note: The first bullet point was updated to correct the characterization of the TV channel.


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Committee to Protect Journalists.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.


  • This content originally appeared on Democracy Now! and was authored by Democracy Now!.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • New York, August 26, 2024 – The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns the killing of Reuters safety adviser Ryan Evans in an attack that also injured three journalists in the eastern Ukrainian city of Kramatorsk.

    “The missile strike that killed Reuters safety adviser Ryan Evans and injured three other journalists is a sad and sobering reminder that the Russian-Ukraine war remains as dangerous for journalists and media workers covering it today as it was when the conflict started with Russia’s invasion of Crimea 10 years ago,” said Gulnoza Said, CPJ’s Europe and Central Asia program coordinator. “We condemn the attack on Kramatorsk’s Hotel Sapphire, where journalists and other civilians were staying. Journalists are civilians protected under international humanitarian law and need to be able to report on the war.”  

    The missile hit the hotel, situated in a Ukraine-controlled area close to the front line, late on August 24. Two Reuters journalists whose names haven’t been disclosed have been hospitalized for injuries sustained during the attack, Reuters said in a statement, adding that it was urgently seeking more information about the attack.

    Polish journalist Monika Andruszewska was injured while driving her car near the hotel at the time of the attack, Polish and Ukrainian media reported. She wrote on her Facebook page that the missile hit near her car and she sustained injuries, mostly to her arm. The journalist posted pictures of her arm covered in blood, cuts on her face and a photo of her vehicle with shattered glass.      

    The three other members of the Reuters team who were in the hotel at the time of the strike were safe, Reuters said.

    Ukrainian authorities said the hotel was struck by a Russian missile. The Russian defense ministry hasn’t responded to CPJ’s emailed request for comment.

    At least 17 journalists and media workers have been killed since the beginning of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022.   


    This content originally appeared on Committee to Protect Journalists and was authored by Arlene Getz/CPJ Editorial Director.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • A claim emerged in Chinese and Russian media reports that the U.S. asset manager BlackRock requested the Ukrainian government to refrain from burying dead Ukrainian soldiers on farm land it owns in the country. 

    But the claim is false. Under Ukrainian law, foreign companies and individuals are prohibited from purchasing arable land.

    The claim was shared in an editorial published by a military columnist Zhao Yongling on the website of Phoenix TV on Aug. 6, 2024.

    “BlackRock purchased 47% of Ukraine’s arable lands … BlackRock has asked the Ukrainian government to stop burying deceased Ukrainian soldiers and look for other ways to take care of them because it wants to use the lands in a different way,” reads the claim in part.

    Zhao cited a Bulgarian politician named Plamen Paskov whose claim about BlackRock’s land ownership in Ukraine was previously shared by Russia’s state-run Sputnik news agency. 

    The same claim was shared on other Chinese websites as seen here, here and here

    1 (9).png
    ‘In an article published in early August, Russian and Chinese media quoted a purported Bulgarian politician as saying that U.S. companies are prohibiting Ukraine from burying its soldiers. (Screenshot /Internet)

    BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world with more than US$10 trillion in assets under management. The New York-based multinational asset manager has a big enough stake in many influential companies worldwide to push them to change decisions and priorities.

    According to a Ukrainian government press release, President Volodymyr Zelensky met BlackRock CEO Larry Fink to discuss how Ukraine could raise national reconstruction funds at the end of 2022.

    In May 2023, the Ukrainian government signed an agreement with BlackRock to provide support services to the Ukraine Development Fund in order to attract funds to rebuild the economy after the war ends. 

    But the claim about BlackRock’s land ownership in Ukraine and its request to the government regarding deceased soldiers is false. 

    Under Ukrainian law, foreign companies and individuals are prohibited from purchasing arable land.

    “Agricultural land cannot be transferred (allotted) to foreigners, stateless persons, foreign legal entities and foreign states,” reads the Article 22 of Ukraine’s Land Code (No. 2768-III of 2001).

    Keyword searches found a similar claim has circulated since 2023, which has been debunked by other fact-checking organizations, including Myth Detector based in Georgia. 

    Dafina Kandova, a journalist with the Bulgarian checking organization factcheck.bg, told AFCL that her organization had checked several similar rumors circulating in Bulgaria at the end of 2023. 

    Dafina added that while Plamen Paskov often appears as a commentator for the Bulgarian nationalist Ataka party, he is not actually an official member of the party and has not been elected to public office. 

    Paskov’s popularity is largely built on social media, gaining followers by spreading conspiracy theories related to hot topics such as COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine, she added. He is also well-known for openly sympathizing with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s policies.

    BlackRock has not responded to requests for comment as of the time of publication. 

    Translated by Shen Ke. Edited by Shen Ke and Taejun Kang.

    Asia Fact Check Lab (AFCL) was established to counter disinformation in today’s complex media environment. We publish fact-checks, media-watches and in-depth reports that aim to sharpen and deepen our readers’ understanding of current affairs and public issues. If you like our content, you can also follow us on Facebook, Instagram and X.


    This content originally appeared on Radio Free Asia and was authored by By Zhuang Jing for Asia Fact Check Lab.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • In 2017, David Leavitt drove to the Northern Cheyenne reservation in Montana to adopt a baby girl. A few years later, during an interview with a documentary filmmaker, Leavitt, a wealthy Utah politician, told a startling story about how he went about getting physical custody of that child. 


    He describes going to the tribe’s president and offering to use his connections to broker an international sale of the tribe’s buffalo. At the same time, he was asking the president for his blessing to adopt the child.


    That video eventually leaked to a local TV station, and the adoption became the subject of a federal investigation into bribery. To others, the adoption story seemed to run afoul of a federal law meant to protect Native children from being removed from their tribes’ care in favor of non-Native families.  


    This week on Reveal, reporters Andrew Becker and Bernice Yeung dig into the story of this complicated and controversial adoption, how it circumvented the mission of the Indian Child Welfare Act, and why some of the baby’s Native family and tribe were left feeling that a child was taken from them. 


    This episode was produced in collaboration with the Investigative Reporting Program at UC Berkeley’s Graduate School of Journalism.

    Connect with us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram

    This post was originally published on Reveal.

  • Comprehensive coverage of the day’s news with a focus on war and peace; social, environmental and economic justice.

    The post The Biden administration will send about $125 million in new military aid to Ukraine – August 23, 2024 appeared first on KPFA.


    This content originally appeared on KPFA – The Pacifica Evening News, Weekdays and was authored by KPFA.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.

  • DNC delegates unfurl banner during Biden’s speech at the DNC. Photo credit: Esam Boraey

    An Orwellian disconnect haunts the 2024 Democratic National Convention. In the isolation of the convention hall, shielded from the outside world behind thousands of armed police, few of the delegates seem to realize that their country is on the brink of direct involvement in major wars with Russia and Iran, either of which could escalate into World War III.

    Inside the hall, the mass slaughter in the Middle East and Ukraine are treated only as troublesome “issues,” which “the greatest military in the history of the world” can surely deal with. Delegates who unfurled a banner that read “Stop Arming Israel” during Biden’s speech on Monday night were quickly accosted by DNC officials, who instructed other delegates to use “We ❤ Joe” signs to hide the banner from view.

    In the real world, the most explosive flashpoint right now is the Middle East, where U.S. weapons and Israeli troops are slaughtering tens of thousands of Palestinians, mostly children and families, at the bidding of Israel’s Benjamin Netanyahu. And yet, in July, Democrats and Republicans leapt to their feet in 23 standing ovations to applaud Netanyahu’s warmongering speech to a joint session of Congress.

    In the week before the DNC started, the Biden administration announced its approval for the sale of $20 billion in weapons to Israel, which would lock the US into a relationship with the Israeli military for years to come.

    Netanyahu’s determination to keep killing without restraint in Gaza, and Biden and Congress’s willingness to keep supplying him with weapons to do so, always risked exploding into a wider war, but the crisis has reached a new climax. Since Israel has failed to kill or expel the Palestinians from Gaza, it is now trying to draw the United States into a war with Iran, a war to degrade Israel’s enemies and restore the illusion of military superiority that it has squandered in Gaza.

    To achieve its goal of triggering a wider war, Israel assassinated Fuad Shukr, a Hezbollah commander, in Beirut, and Hamas’s political leader and chief ceasefire negotiator, Ismail Haniyeh, in Tehran. Iran has vowed to respond militarily to the assassinations, but Iran’s leaders are in a difficult position. They do not want a war with Israel and the United States, and they have acted with restraint throughout the massacre in Gaza. But failing to respond strongly to these assassinations would encourage Israel to conduct further attacks on Iran and its allies.

    The assassinations in Beirut and Tehran were clearly designed to elicit a response from Iran and Hezbollah that would draw the U.S. into the war. Could Iran find a way to strike Israel that would not provoke a U.S. response? Or, if Iran’s leaders believe that is impossible, will they decide that this is the moment to actually fight a seemingly unavoidable war with the U.S. and Israel?

    This is an incredibly dangerous moment, but a ceasefire in Gaza would resolve the crisis. The U.S. has dispatched CIA Director William Burns, the only professional diplomat in Biden’s cabinet, to the Middle East for renewed ceasefire talks, and Iran is waiting to see the result of the talks before responding to the assassinations.

    Burns is working with Qatari and Egyptian officials to come up with a revised ceasefire proposal that Israel and Hamas can both agree to. But Israel has always rejected any proposal for more than a temporary pause in its assault on Gaza, while Hamas will only agree to a real, permanent ceasefire. Could Biden have sent Burns just to stall, so that a new war wouldn’t spoil the Dems’ party in Chicago?

    The United States has always had the option of halting weapons shipments to Israel to force it to agree to a permanent ceasefire. But it has refused to use that leverage, except for the suspension of a single shipment of 2,000 lb bombs in May, after it had already sent Israel 14,000 of those horrific weapons, which it uses to systematically smash living children and families into unidentifiable pieces of flesh and bone.

    Meanwhile the war with Russia has also taken a new and dangerous turn, with Ukraine invading Russia’s Kursk region. Some analysts believe this is only a diversion before an even riskier Ukrainian assault on the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant. Ukraine’s leaders see the writing on the wall, and are increasingly ready to take any risk to improve their negotiating position before they are forced to sue for peace.

    But Ukraine’s recent incursion into Russia, while applauded by much of the west, has actually made negotiations less likely. In fact, talks between Russia and Ukraine on energy issues were supposed to start in the coming weeks. The idea was that each side would agree not to target the other’s energy infrastructure, with the hope that this could lead to more comprehensive talks. But after Ukraine’s invasion toward Kursk, the Russians pulled out of what would have been the first direct talks since the early weeks of the Russian invasion.

    President Zelenskyy remains in power three months after his term of office expired, and he is a great admirer of Israel. Will he take a page from Netanyahu’s playbook and do something so provocative that it will draw U.S. and NATO forces into the potentially nuclear war with Russia that Biden has promised to avoid?

    A 2023 U.S. Army War College study found that even a non-nuclear war with Russia could result in as many U.S. casualties every two weeks as the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq did in two decades, and it concluded that such a war would require a return to conscription in the United States.

    While Gaza and Eastern Ukraine burn in firestorms of American and Russian bombs and missiles, and the war in Sudan rages on unchecked, the whole planet is rocketing toward catastrophic temperature increases, ecosystem breakdown and mass extinctions. But the delegates in Chicago are in la-la land about U.S. responsibility for that crisis too.

    Under the slick climate plan Obama sold to the world in Copenhagen and Paris, Americans’ per capita CO2 emissions are still double those of our Chinese, British and European neighbors, while U.S. oil and gas production have soared to all-time record highs.

    The combined dangers of nuclear war and climate catastrophe have pushed the hands of the Doomsday Clock all the way to 90 seconds to midnight. But the leaders of the Republican and Democratic parties are in the pockets of the fossil fuel industry and the military-industrial complex. Behind the election-year focus on what the two parties disagree about, the corrupt policies they both agree on are the most dangerous of all.

    President Biden recently claimed that he is “running the world.” No oligarchic American politician will confess to “running the world” to the brink of nuclear war and mass extinction, but tens of thousands of Americans marching in the streets of Chicago and millions more Americans who support them understand that that is what Biden, Trump and their cronies are doing.

    The people inside the convention hall should shake themselves out of their complacency and start listening to the people in the streets. Therein lies the real hope, maybe the only hope, for America’s future.

    The post The DNC Fiddles While the World Burns first appeared on Dissident Voice.

    This post was originally published on Dissident Voice.


  • This content originally appeared on Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty and was authored by Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

    This post was originally published on Radio Free.