IN 1994, EVEN RUSSIA’S ALCOHOLIC PRESIDENT CALLED A SPADE A SPADE AND UPBRAIDED CLINTON OVER NATO EXPANSION PLANS

28 YEARS LATER, THESE PLANS ARE A REALITY AS IS THE PROSPECT OF WIDER NATO WAR WITH RUSSIA

On December 5, 1994, the Russian president Boris Yeltsin barged in on 52 heads of state gathered at the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (OCSCE) in Budapest and upbraided Bill Clinton in front of everybody for his duplicity regarding the NATO expansion plans.

Budapest, Dec 5, 1994

Yeltsin said that the “domineering” U.S. was “trying to split [the] continent again” through NATO expansion.

At the time, Clinton, talking out of both sides of his mouth (as usual), kept assuring Yeltsin any NATO enlargement would be slow, with no surprises, building a Europe that was inclusive not exclusive, and in “partnership” with Russia. In a phone call on July 5, 1994, Clinton told Yeltsin “I would like us to focus on the Partnership for Peace program” not NATO.

At the same time, however, “policy entrepreneurs” in Washington were revving up the bureaucratic process for more rapid NATO enlargement than expected either by Moscow or the Pentagon, which was committed to the Partnership for Peace as the main venue for security integration of Europe, not least because it could include Russia and Ukraine.

A trove of until now secret documents from which the above details emerged became available as a result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the National Security Archive. They include a series of revelatory “Bill-Boris” letters in the summer and fall of 1994, and the previously secret “memcon” of the presidents’ one-on-one at the Washington summit in September 1994.

TRUTH IN MEDIA ALSO WARNED CONTEMPORANEOUSLY ABOUT NATO/CLINTON DUPLICITY

At the same time – in 1994/1995 – this writer penned the following Truth in Media editorials which which condemned the duplicitous Washington and described the NATO “Partnership for Peace” as a new thinly disguised “Drang Nach Osten” (Hitler’s term for “Push Toward the East”). Here’s an excerpt…

“Napoleon tried it. It didn’t work. Bismarck eventually also gave up on the idea. The German Kaiser and the Hapsburg emperor, as well as later Adolf Hitler, provoked two world wars in this century pursuing the “Drang Nach Osten” (“Eastward Push”) goal. Having caused the suffering by millions of people, including their own, they also failed.“

“Yet, kicking Russia out of Europe is still the objective of the current U.S. developed, and Washington-Berlin executed strategy, thinly veiled under the “Partnership for Peace” slogan. It’s just that the modern version of the “Drang Nach Osten” power play isn’t a frontal assault – a mistake most of Russia’s adversaries had made in the past. It’s more akin to an “end around play,” to borrow a football jargon. The “world’s only superpower” and its junior partner are using dollars and marks respectively, instead of bullets and bombs, to achieve the same goal – projecting their power deep into the soft underbelly of the former Russian empire. Already, no less than 18 former Russian dominions, have turned into American/German minions” (see the map).

From “Partnership for Peace” – Modern-day Version of “Drang Nach Osten” Strategy — Taming the “Russian Bear” (April 1994/95)

Twenty years later, we published this map (updated from 1994) which shows what we termed the New Iron Curtaiin in Europe (NATO) and prophesied that Ukraine will be the next station on the NATO Drang journey.

TWENTY EIGHT YEARS LATER, NATO EXPANSIONS IS A REALITY AS IS THE PROSPECT OF WIDER NATO WAR WITH RUSSIA

And now, 28 years later, this is what NATO’s expansion looks like:

Today, after more than two months of war and carnage, Ukraine has still not given up hope that it will end up in NATO.

“Ukraine ‘has not abandoned’ its intention to join NATO, Ukrainian Deputy Prime Minister for European and Euro-Atlantic Integration Olga Stefanishyna has said, while criticizing the US-led bloc for its “hesitation.”

In an interview with El Pais today, Stefanishyna claimed NATO’s hesitation to admit Ukraine, which received an invitation from the organization in 2008, led to the current military conflict with Moscow and brought Russian President Vladimir Putin “to where he is now.”

“Received an invitation (from NATO) in 2008?” That’s another example of duplicitous comments out of the mouths of Ukrainian officials. This young lady, who was 9 when Clinton lied about NATO’s “Partnership for Peace” program (in 1994), simply revered the words “invitation” and “application.”

For, in 2008, Ukraine applied for NATO membership. Which is slightly different from having been invited.

Oh well. The Ukrainian actor-president (Zelensky) and his neo-Nazi cronies are guilty of much worse lies and distortions.

Meanwhile, the only thing that is certain that Ukraine will become a part of NATO only over Russia’s dead body. Which means if there is no longer either NATO or Russia. Or Ukraine .

And that’s the kind of a future scenario these madmen from Kiev and Washington are stoking. For example…

UKRAINE SEEKS RUSSIA’S TOTAL CAPITULATION

During an TV interview on Monday, Alexey Danilov, the head of Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council (NSDC), was asked about international security assurances for Kiev and possible peace with Russia.

Danilov replied: “With Russia we can only sign an act of its capitulation. The sooner they do it, the better it will be for their country.”

The official noted earlier in the interview that President Volodymyr Zelensky’s office handles the talks and not the NSDC. “We have our own views. The president knows my stance on the issue,” he said. He added that he believes Zelensky will not violate Ukraine’s constitution, which guarantees the country’s territorial integrity and aspirations to join NATO.

Later on Monday, Zelensky’s adviser Alexey Arestovich brought up Danilov’s remarks during a chat with activist and YouTuber Mark Feygin. “The statement is very simple: there will be no peace treaty with Russia. There will only be the capitulation of the Russian Federation,” Arestovich said.

“Mad as a hatter,” as they say. And so are the nutcases in Washington who are egging on these Ukrainian madmen.

AMERICAN EU/NATO STRATEGY: A BEAR IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING

“The oft-used term “America’s European allies” is one of the greatest oxymorons of our time. “America’s European vassals” would be more appropriate. For, the American government’s policy is virtually destroying our so-called “allies,” while aiding the multinational corporations.”

The preceding paragraph was published in 1998, as a lead to my column A BEAR IN SHEEP’S CLOTHING (1998), which appeared in the Chronicles magazine of Chicago as well as in Truth in Media that year.

The absolute same comment could be also made today – in May 2022.

EUROPE: ALL PAIN, NO GAIN (Apr 2014).

The absolute same comment could be also made today – in May of 2022.

In other words, nothing has changed. Washington’s anti-European policies have been consistent during the last three decades. And so have been the betrayals of the European leaders of their countries’ interests. They have continued to act as American vassals while pretending to be US allies.

In the US, getting rid of Russian oil is merely a chance of corporate profiteers to get rich off the Ukrainian war. As war profiteers have been doing for centuries. But for Europe, that’s a harakiri.

Which is why we should revisit our warning from that 1998 article:

“Now take all six globalist bear claws together – build-up of the EU bureaucracy, the “euro,” the “Y2K,” the two “enlargements,” plus the “immigration” – ripping and gripping Europe SIMULTANEOUSLY! Only the devil himself could have devised such a way to “help” Europe.”

As you can see, “the more things change, the more they stay the same” [“plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose”], as Jean-Baptiste Alphonse Karr wrote in 1849.

Clinton, Bush, Obama, Biden… they are all merely actors in a drama whose scenario was written long ago, riding the same cow (Europe) to keep the tensions high and the wars going on the Old Continent.

The New World Order “elite,” the playwrights, need the wars to keep up their dominance and oppression. Thus, “perpetual war for perpetual commerce” is their motto, we noted in the early 1990s. Not, “world peace through world trade,” as they profess.

As in any scenario, to create conflicts, they need the villains. We have been saying all along that Russia was and is their Bogey No. 1, even when they talked about the “Partnership for Peace” in the 1990s. The gullible and corrupt Yeltsin swallowed that promise line, hook and sinker. As did Putin, too, in the early days of his presidency (see IS PUTIN NAIVE OR COY?, 2014).

But no more. Now he drew a line in the mud – somewhere on the border between Poland and Ukraine.

Thus back to our 1998 article’s conclusion:

If the globalists’ “thesis” is a centralized, integrated European Union, and it is; then the “antithesis,” resulting from a popular backlash against this devil’s plan, may be Europe Undone, i.e., a disintegration of Europe.

As Winston Churchill noted about Europe and Hitler, the appeasers are merely “hoping that the crocodile will eat them last.”

That’s what the European leaders have been doing for the last three decades.

WILL UKRAINE END UP AS RUSSIA’S AFGHANISTAN II?

PUTIN IS LOSING PROPAGANDA WAR BUT WASHINGTON MUST NOT PAINT HIM INTO A CORNER

“Those who do not learn from history are DOOMED to repeat it,” goes an old saw.

When Breznhev invaded Afghanistan on December 24, 1979, the Soviets expected accomplish the mission and return home “within six months or a year.”

They stayed nearly 10 years and returned home with a tail between their legs. Just as the Americans did over 30 years later (se AFGHANISTAN: A DON QUIXOTIC WAR ENDS IN AMERICAN DEFEAT).

When Putin decided to invade Ukraine on February 24, this writer assumed that he had a strategic plan for how to carry out a “Blitzkrieg.” Get in, take over Kiev government institutions, remove Zelensky, install a temporary government, and get out. Maybe “within six months or a year.”

For, any protracted engagement would surely result in a global condemnation of Russia, just as the world protested against the American interventions in Vietnam or in Iraq or the bombing of Serbia. Or the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan.

Yet, here we are, almost three weeks into the conflict, and Russia has still not taken any of the major cities (Kiev, Kharkov, Mariupol, Odessa). It appears, therefore, that Putin is a poor student of history. For, he, too may be doomed to repeat it and experience the defeat and humiliation that Brezhnev and Biden did in Afghanistan.

For the time being, Putin is certainly losing the propaganda war. And the longer the war goes on, the worse it will be for Russia.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian president Zelensky, a former actor, is playing beautifully the role of his life – that of a helpless victim who is heroically defending his homeland against a foreign bully. David vs. the Goliath. With the help of the western media hucksters.

The media have uniformly given Zelensky a microphone and a stage from which to broadcast his message. Which is magnifying it manyfold.

By contrast, Putin is starting to look like a bumbling hapless idiot who has sent his troops to “a bridge too far.” Even if he were to eventually take Kiev and remove Zelensky, there is virtually no chance that he can recover from this PR disaster.

Which means that the West (read – Russophobic NWO “elite”) will have achieved their goal. They’ve got themselves a Cold War II with a weakened and isolated Russia for years to come.

They’ve got to be careful, though. For, they, too, appear to be poor students of history. As Nicolo Machiavelli warned, writing in 1573 in “The Prince,” “there is nothing more difficult to plan, more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to manage, than a creation of a new order of things.”

Why? Because desperate men do desperate things. “Tempt not a desperate man,” warned another great writer – Shakespeare.

“What concerns me most is the potential for accidental use by either side as a result of misjudgment or miscalculation … especially if Putin finds himself backed into a corner,” Steve Schwartz, a fellow at the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists, told Newsweek (Mar 12, 2022), echoing this writer’s concern.

Meanwhile, Russia isn’t just any other country. It has the largest arsenal of nuclear weapons in the world. What’s even more important, it has the new hypersonic nuclear weapons which “will be impossible to shoot down,” military experts warned when Putin unveiled them in 2020 (see London Express, Aug 1, 2020).

Maybe that’s why the Pentagon is being cautious in not making any moves that would suggest a nuclear response to Putin’s threat. A routine unarmed Minuteman missile test in California was canceled so as to not provoke the Kremlin. No nuclear exercises have been held, reports the Newsweek.

When asked during a hearing with the Senate Armed Services Committee last week as to how the United States might respond to the use of a tactical nuclear weapon in Ukraine, STRATCOM commander Adm. Charles A. Richard said he could only address the question in closed session.

Which was wise. For if Washington continues to humiliate Putin and leaves him no way out of the corner into which they have painted him, he may do what desperate men do – blow up the planet.

And who will be the winner of that war, Messrs. Biden, Johnson, Macron, Stolz et. all.?

PS: Just saying… notice that Brezhnev invaded Afghanistan on the 24th day of the month? As Putin did in Ukraine (Feb 24).