Robert Parry

Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria
Nuland, speaking to Ukrainian and other business leaders at
the National Press Club in Washington on Dec. 13, 2013, at
a meeting sponsored by Chevron.

Given the very high stakes of a nuclear confrontation with Russia, some analysts wonder what’s the real motive for taking this extraordinary risk over Ukraine. Is it about natural gas, protection of the U.S. dollar’s dominance, or an outgrowth of neocon extremism, says Robert Parry.

A senior U.S. diplomat told me recently that if Russia were to occupy all of Ukraine and even neighboring Belarus that there would be zero impact on U.S. national interests. The diplomat wasn’t advocating that, of course, but was noting the curious reality that Official Washington’s current war hysteria over Ukraine doesn’t connect to genuine security concerns.

So why has so much of the Washington Establishment – from prominent government officials to all the major media pundits – devoted so much time this past year to pounding their chests over the need to confront Russia regarding Ukraine? Who is benefiting from this eminently avoidable – yet extremely dangerous – crisis? What’s driving the madness?

Of course, Washington’s conventional wisdom is that America only wants “democracy” for the people of Ukraine and that Russian President Vladimir Putin provoked this confrontation as part of an imperialist design to reclaim Russian territory lost during the breakup of the Soviet Union in 1991.

More »

David Swanson

How did they imagine they'd get away with it, claiming that Iraq had vast stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons and even nuclear weapons?

Defectors had made clear the chemical and biological weapons (some of them provided by the United States) had been destroyed. Inspectors had searched almost every inch of Iraq and said they'd get to the last few inches if given a few more days. Iraq was screaming that it had no such weapons. Numerous nations around the world were agreeing with Iraq. Colin Powell's own staff warned him that his claims would not be deemed plausible. And yet...

More »

The Saker

Nicknamed "Flanby", "Little Gouda",
and even “couilles molles”...

It appears that François Hollande, aka "soft testicle" (nickname given to him by Martine Aubry, First Secretary of the Socialist Party of France), has outdone even Tony Blair as the US's most docile poodle in Europe. After resisting US pressure for a long time and being fined billions of dollars for doing so, he has suddenly decided to cave in and suspend the delivery of the French Mistrals to Russia. However, the US will not return to 9 billion dollars extorted out of Paribas, now the Russian can impose astronomical penalties on France for breach of contract. Double whammy for Hollande!

Now I suspect that this is a measure which will last exactly as long as the upcoming NATO summit and that as soon it is over the "circumstances for delivery" will magically become "right again". As for Russia - no worries. She will either get the ships or get a huge load of money. A win-win situation for sure. - But that is hardly the point.

First, whether Russia really needs these French ships is an extremely controversial issue in Russia, especially in the military. I did not take a poll, but my guess is that most of the military don't want them and rather spend the money elsewhere. This was a Medvedev purchase which was far from having a unanimity behind it. Personally, I think that the Mistrals are very good ships, very versatile, and that Russia could use on in the Black Sea and one in the Far East. They also come at at time with the Russian shipbuilding industry is over-worked and does not have the capacity to fulfill all the orders of the Russian Navy.

Finally, the Mistrals come with an advanced communication and command infrastructure which the Russian would like to get their hands one. But I have always had a weak spot for French weapon systems and nobody asked me my opinion anyway. Besides, there are cheaper way for Russian to get that kind of capabilities or systems.

More »