mRNA covid vaccines will result in mass depopulation
By Ethan Huff
(Natural News) The latest drop of pages from the secret Pfizer documents reveals that the pharmaceutical giant is fully aware that its Wuhan coronavirus (Covid-19) “vaccine” will soon result in mass depopulation of the world.
The June 1 dump contains a document called “reissue_5.3.6 postmarketing experience.pdf,” page 12 of which includes disturbing data on getting Pfizer’s Fauci Flu injection during pregnancy and lactation.
It turns out that 90 percent of pregnant women who took the shot ended up losing their babies. This is a shocking figure that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) apparently did not think twice about when granting Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) to the jab.
“Pfizer states in the document that by 28th February 2021 there were 270 known cases of exposure to the mRNA injection during pregnancy,” reports Exposé News. “Forty-six-percent of the mothers (124) exposed to the Pfizer Covid-19 injection suffered an adverse reaction.”
“Of those 124 mothers suffering an adverse reaction, 49 were considered non-serious adverse reactions, whereas 75 were considered serious. This means 58% of the mothers who reported suffering adverse reactions suffered a serious adverse event ranging from uterine contraction to foetal death.”
Of 270 tracked pregnancies, Pfizer lost track of 238 of them
The latest batch of released Pfizer documents also contains a concerning revelation about pregnancies of which the company somehow lost track. Of the 270 pregnancies Pfizer was tracking, a shocking 238 of them just disappeared from the dataset.
Of the 33 pregnancies that Pfizer still tracked, a shocking 23 of them resulted in spontaneous abortion. Two resulted in premature baby death; two resulted in intrauterine death; one resulted in neonatal death; one is listed as “outcome pending;” and only one resulted in a “normal outcome.”
What this means is that almost every pregnant woman who takes Pfizer’s mRNA (messenger RNA) injections for covid will lose her baby. Conversely, only a tiny fraction of fully jabbed women will successfully deliver to term.
Keep in mind that some governments, including that of the United Kingdom, had quietly dissuaded pregnant women from taking Pfizer’s injections – at least up until recently.
“There are no or limited amount of data from the use of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2,” reads a now-altered U.K. government guidance entitled “REG 174 INFORMATION FOR UK HEALTHCARE PROFESSIONALS.”
“COVID-19 mRNA Vaccine BNT162b2 is not recommended during pregnancy. For women of childbearing age, pregnancy should be excluded before vaccination. In addition, women of childbearing age should be advised to avoid pregnancy for at least 2 months after their second dose.”
The new version of the same guidance claims that pregnant women can take Pfizer’s injections, but only “when the potential benefits outweigh any potential risks for the mother and foetus.”
As of this writing, the UK government guidance is recommending that pregnant women take the Pfizer shots just so long as they have evaluated the risks involved. At the same time, these same authorities continue to tell pregnant women to avoid soft cheese, herbal tea, and vitamin supplements because they could be dangerous.
All of this just goes to show once again that governments cannot be trusted. They routinely dispense advice in the form of guidance that, if followed, will probably lead to injury or death. This is true both for vaccines and the covid plandemic itself.
“Covid is a cult and ‘Stay Safe’ is a mantra,” wrote a regular commenter at Natural News. “I personally saw through the delusion in the same way most churches are tools for keeping God as far away as possible from your life.”
“I would rather have the virus than the lockdown and that is a fact.”
To keep up with the latest news about Fauci Flu shot injuries and deaths, visit ChemicalViolence.com.
The old saying goes the only difference between a conspiracy theory and the truth is six months.
A breaking report from the Pentagon has confirmed that the United States has worked collaboratively with Ukraine by providing the country with security, safety, and disease surveillance for 46 Biolabs in the country.
The Pentagon report would go on to say “this work, which was often conducted in partnership with outside organizations, such as the WHO and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), has resulted in safer and more effective disease surveillance and detection”.
The Pentagon would go on to reassure in their report that they are “unaware” if Ukraine has any biological weapons.
ONLY 46 THE PENTAGON ADMITS TO 46 BIOLABS IN UKRAINE:
In a statement released yesterday, the Pentagon admits there are 46 biolabs in Ukraine as part of a project to rid the world of “weapons of mass destruction.”
The United States has also worked collaboratively to improve Ukraine’s biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for both human and animal health, providing support to 46 peaceful Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and disease diagnostic sites over the last two decades. The collaborative programs have focused on improving public health and agricultural safety measures at the nexus of nonproliferation.
This work, often conducted in partnership with outside organizations, such as the WHO and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), has resulted in safer and more effective disease surveillance and detection. Ukrainian scientists have acted consistent with international best practices and norms in publishing research results, partnering with international colleagues and multilateral organizations, and widely distributing their research and public health findings.
Ukraine owns and operates its public health laboratories and associated infrastructure, and the United States is proud to collaborate, cooperate, and provide assistance in support of this infrastructure. These facilities operate just like other state or local public health and research laboratories around the world. Furthermore, all equipment and training provided by the United States is subject to U.S. export control processes, audits, and acquisition laws and regulations, which ensures transparency and compliance with domestic and international laws.
— Al Mayadeen English (@MayadeenEnglish) June 10, 2022
On Thursday, the Pentagon commented on the U.S. collaborative work in Ukrainian biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for both human and animal health.
The Pentagon released Thursday a fact sheet explaining the U.S. actions in support of Ukraine’s biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for human and animal health. The document acknowledges the support offered to 46 various civilian laboratories and health care centers in Ukraine over the past 20 years as part of peaceful programs.
“U.S. Collaboration With the International Community to Reduce Nuclear, Chemical, and Biological Threats in Ukraine, Russia, and Other Countries of the Former Soviet Union,” reads the document.
According to the document, “The United States has also worked collaboratively to improve Ukraine’s biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for human and animal health, providing support to 46 peaceful Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and disease diagnostic sites over the last two decades. The collaborative programs have focused on improving public health and agricultural safety measures at the nexus of nonproliferation.”
Fact sheet on WMD threat reduction efforts with Ukraine, Russia and other former Soviet Union Countries
The History and accomplishments of U.S. collaboration with the International Community to reduce nuclear, chemical, and biological threats in Ukraine, Russia, and other countries of the former Soviet Union
Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, the United States, along with allies, partners, and international organizations, has led cooperative efforts to reduce legacy threats from nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons left in the Soviet Union’s successor states, including Russia. These cooperative threat reduction efforts have helped advance global peace and security, and have supported the global consensus that the world is safer when we work together to increase transparency and reduce the risks from weapons of mass destruction (WMD) programs.
The U.S. Congress created the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction (CTR) Program through the passage of the Soviet Threat Reduction Act of 1991. The CTR Program provided U.S. funding and expertise to: 1) consolidate and secure WMD and WMD-related material in a limited number of secure sites; 2) inventory and account for these weapons and materials; 3) provide safe handling and safe disposition of these weapons and materials as called for by arms control agreements; and 4) offer assistance in finding gainful employment for thousands of former Soviet scientists with expert knowledge of WMD, WMD-related materials, or their delivery systems
The United States has provided this assistance with transparency and in cooperation with our partners, which included Russia prior to 2014, toward mutually-decided objectives, and has been reported on a regular basis.
In addition to the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction work, the Departments of Energy and State have supported nuclear, chemical, and biological threat reduction efforts, often with technical assistance from other U.S. departments and agencies. This work has occurred in collaboration with other countries, such as Canada, the European Union, Japan, Norway, the Republic of Korea, and others; multilateral organizations, and the International Science and Technology Center (ISTC); and the Science and Technology Center in Ukraine (STCU).
Thirty years later, amidst its war of aggression against Ukraine, Russia seeks, with support from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), to undermine that work by spreading disinformation and sowing mistrust in the people and institutions all over the world that contribute to WMD threat reduction.
This Fact Sheet provides an overview of the history of threat reduction and nonproliferation programs supported by the United States, in cooperation with countries of the former Soviet Union, including the Governments of Russia and Ukraine.
Achievements of this cooperation across the former Soviet Union include:
Destroying 2,531 missiles, decommissioning more than 1,300 WMD delivery systems (silos, mobile launchers, submarines, and strategic bombers), upgrading security at 24 nuclear weapon storage sites, and securely moving over 600 shipments of nuclear warheads from less secure storage to more secure storage or destruction (almost all of this work in Russia).
Ukraine’s voluntary and verifiable renunciation of nuclear weapons, with the transfer of Soviet missiles, nuclear weapons, and weapons-usable nuclear materials to Russia or destruction of such missiles, weapons, and materials, and accession to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party in December 1994.
Joint efforts by the United States and partners working with Russia to destroy Russia’s declared chemical weapons stockpile under international verification by the Technical Secretariat of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and ensuring that Soviet scientists with weapons-related knowledge could have sustainable civilian employment—in particular, supporting scientists to remove incentives to seek or accept of terrorist or other state actor employment and financing.
Engagement of thousands of former Russian biological weapons scientists to conduct peaceful biological research projects for public health purposes, with the Russian government’s full approval. (These types of projects were very similar to biological research projects Russia is now criticizing in other former Soviet countries.)
Securing Russia’s active approval of and collaboration, as a full member of the ISTC Governing Board until 2014, in peaceful biological research projects worth millions of dollars to advance public health with Georgia, Kazakhstan, Armenia, and other former Soviet Union countries. (The Russian government repeatedly approved, and often collaborated in, the very projects it is now criticizing.)
Ukraine
Ukraine has no nuclear, chemical, or biological weapons programs. On March 11 and 18, 2022, United Nations (UN) High Representative for Disarmament Affairs Izumi Nakamitsu similarly stated that the UN is not aware of any biological weapons programs in Ukraine. Those comments were reiterated on May 13, 2022, by the UN Deputy High Representative for Disarmament Affairs.
Today, the collaborations in Ukraine remain peaceful efforts to improve nuclear and radiological safety and security, disease surveillance, chemical safety and security, and readiness to respond to epidemics and pandemics such as COVID-19.
Many of these collaborations are multilateral and involve the G7-led Global Partnership Against the Spread of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the World Health Organization (WHO), the OPCW, and other UN specialized agencies.
Ukraine has become a leader in transparency and in promoting nonproliferation and global health security norms. For example, in December 2021, Ukraine completed a voluntary, external, WHO-led evaluation of its capacity to prevent, detect, and rapidly respond to public health emergencies.
Ukraine has no nuclear weapons program
During the Cold War, the Soviet military stationed a sizable number of nuclear weapons in Ukraine, believed to be around 1,800 nuclear warheads as well as strategic bombers and nuclear-armed intercontinental ballistic missiles (ICBMs). There were also several locations in Ukraine where Soviet tactical nuclear weapons were stored. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia retained control of these weapons under the aegis of the Commonwealth of Independent States.
Ukraine assumed obligations under the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START I) in 1992 as a successor state to the Soviet Union, and in 1994 joined the Treaty on Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (NPT) as a non-nuclear-weapon State Party, renouncing the Soviet legacy nuclear weapons that had been deployed or stored in Ukraine.
The transfer of all nuclear weapons from Ukraine to the Russian Federation was completed by 1996, in return for reactor fuel for peaceful uses and security assurances from Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom as set forth in the 1994 Budapest Memorandum. All ICBMs were dismantled or removed from Ukraine, and all nuclear missile silos in Ukraine were destroyed.
As a Non-Nuclear Weapon State Party to the NPT, Ukraine has upheld its obligation not to manufacture or otherwise acquire nuclear weapons or to seek or receive assistance in their manufacture. Ukraine also has met its NPT obligation to accept IAEA safeguards on all nuclear material in the country, and in addition has in force an Additional Protocol to its NPT-required safeguards agreement to enable the IAEA to provide credible assurances to the international community that all nuclear material in Ukraine remains in peaceful activities. The IAEA has repeatedly stated that it has found no indication that would give rise to a proliferation concern in Ukraine.
In a further demonstration of Ukraine’s dedication to nuclear nonproliferation, at the 2010 Nuclear Security Summit hosted by the United States, Ukraine voluntarily pledged to remove its highly enriched uranium (HEU).
Through the U.S. Department of Energy’s National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) efforts, 234 kg of Ukraine’s HEU was repatriated to Russia, the original exporter of this material. The material was then down-blended to low enriched uranium (LEU). In exchange for eliminating this HEU inventory, NNSA provided LEU fuel for the research reactor at the Kyiv Institute for Nuclear Research and supported the development and construction of the Neutron Source Facility at the Kharkiv Institute of Physics and Technology, with both facilities being used for peaceful purposes.
The very small quantity of HEU that remains in Ukraine is intended for specific scientific purposes, such as nuclear forensics, and is well below the amount needed to produce a nuclear device. Ukraine does not possess uranium enrichment or spent fuel reprocessing capabilities, nor does it possess substantial quantities of separated plutonium.
Ukraine has consistently stated that it has no intention of acquiring nuclear weapons and has consistently supported other key elements of international nonproliferation regimes, such as the Nuclear Suppliers Group, the Zangger Committee, the Wassenaar Arrangement, the Australia Group, and the Missile Technology Control Regime. Further, Ukraine has signed and ratified the Comprehensive Nuclear-Test-Ban Treaty.
Ukraine has no biological weapons program
At the time of its dissolution in 1991, the Soviet Union, despite being a State Party to the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), had a large and sophisticated biological weapons program, consisting of dozens of research, development, and production facilities, with tens of thousands of employees, spread across many of its successor states.
In violation of the BWC, this Soviet weapons complex developed a broad range of biological pathogens for use as weapons against plants, animals, and humans, including the weaponization of anthrax, plague, and smallpox.
In contrast, no other European state nor the United States possessed any biological weapon development programs, in compliance with their obligations under the BWC. When the Soviet Union dissolved, it left some newly independent states, like Kazakhstan and Uzbekistan, with legacy biological weapons program facilities, equipment, and materials that were vulnerable to theft, misuse, and unsafe handling and storage. The U.S. Departments of Defense and State funded programs to help transition such former Soviet weapons facilities into peaceful public health facilities.
The United States, through international collaboration, has also worked to address other biological threats throughout the former Soviet Union. Subject matter experts in biology, biodefense, public health, and related fields were engaged from across the U.S. government. These efforts advanced disease surveillance and enhanced peaceful biological research cooperation between former Soviet Union scientists and the global scientific community, consistent with international norms for safety, security, nonproliferation, and transparency.
The United States has also worked collaboratively to improve Ukraine’s biological safety, security, and disease surveillance for both human and animal health, providing support to 46 peaceful Ukrainian laboratories, health facilities, and disease diagnostic sites over the last two decades. The collaborative programs have focused on improving public health and agricultural safety measures at the nexus of nonproliferation.
This work, often conducted in partnership with outside organizations, such as the WHO and the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), has resulted in safer and more effective disease surveillance and detection. Ukrainian scientists have acted consistent with international best practices and norms in publishing research results, partnering with international colleagues and multilateral organizations, and widely distributing their research and public health findings.
Ukraine owns and operates its public health laboratories and associated infrastructure, and the United States is proud to collaborate, cooperate, and provide assistance in support of this infrastructure. These facilities operate just like other state or local public health and research laboratories around the world. Furthermore, all equipment and training provided by the United States is subject to U.S. export control processes, audits, and acquisition laws and regulations, which ensures transparency and compliance with domestic and international laws.
This assistance has directly and measurably improved Ukraine’s preparedness and response efforts to detect and report outbreaks, including COVID-19 response, and has helped protect its food supply in addition to many other benefits that accrued from this partnership.
Ukraine has no chemical weapons program
Ukraine has been a respected member of the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) since ratifying the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) in 1998.
Ukraine has consistently demonstrated its commitment to uphold the international norm against the use of chemical weapons, including through its participation at the OPCW and its implementation of its obligations under the CWC.
Ukraine regularly plays an active role at the OPCW Conference of the States Parties and was most recently a member of the OPCW Executive Council from 2018 to 2020. Ukraine previously held a number of leadership roles at the OPCW, to include chairing the Executive Council from 2012 to 2014.
The United States has been clear since ratifying the CWC in 1997 that it will never under any circumstances develop, produce, otherwise acquire, stockpile or retain chemical weapons, or transfer, direct or indirectly, chemical weapons to anyone; use chemical weapons; engage in any military preparations to use chemical weapons; or assist encourage or induce, in any way, anyone to engage in any activity prohibited to a state party under the CWC.
The United States is committed to the destruction of all chemical weapons around the world and has provided substantial aid and support to numerous countries in the destruction of their chemical weapons, including Russia and Syria.
Award-winning journalist Eva Bartlett joins Clayton Morris in this episode of Redacted Conversations to talk about her coverage of the war in Ukraine.
We’re being censored, and it’s more important than ever to have a home away from these big tech oligarchs. That’s why we built https://redacted.inc Please come on over and sign up for FREE, so we always have a way to stay in touch.
Sign up for our Free DAILY newsletter delivered right to your inbox first thing in the morning. https://morninginvest.com
Elizabeth Mary Truss. Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs
The world order created after the Second World War and the Cold War isn’t working anymore, so the West needs “a global NATO” to pursue geopolitics anew, UK Foreign Secretary Liz Truss argued, in a major foreign policy speech on Wednesday. Truss also urged the US-led bloc to send more “heavy weapons, tanks” and airplanes to Ukraine, and said China would face the same treatment as Russia if it doesn’t “play by the rules.”
“My vision is a world where free nations are assertive and in the ascendant. Where freedom and democracy are strengthened through a network of economic and security partnerships,” Truss said in aspeechat a Mansion House banquet in London.
Dubbing this arrangement “the Network of Liberty,” Truss argued it was necessary because the economic and security structures developed after 1945 – such as the UN Security Council – “have been bent out of shape so far, they have enabled rather than contained aggression.”
“Geopolitics is back,” she announced.
The collective West and its allies need to supply Kiev with “heavy weapons, tanks, aeroplanes – digging deep into our inventories, ramping up production,” Truss said, because the objective is to “push Russia out of the whole of Ukraine” and rebuild the country along the lines of a new Marshall Plan.
“The war in Ukraine is our war – it is everyone’s war because Ukraine’s victory is a strategic imperative for all of us.“
Beyond that, NATO must ensure that “the Western Balkans and countries like Moldova and Georgia have the resilience and the capabilities to maintain their sovereignty and freedom,” and uphold the “sacrosanct” open-door policy, Truss said.
Her ambitions went beyond Europe, though, as Truss denounced the “false choice between Euro-Atlantic security and Indo-Pacific security.“
“In the modern world we need both. We need a global NATO,” she said. “And we must ensure that democracies like Taiwan are able to defend themselves.“
Pointing to London’s unprecedented effort to embargo Russia, Truss insisted that “economic access is no longer a given. It has to be earned,” and that countries who wish to earn it “must play by the rules. And that includes China.“
The UK has sent a large quantity of weapons systems to Ukraine over the past several months, including NLAW anti-tank missiles and Stormer armored vehicles. British Armed Forces Minister James Heappey told Thames Radio on Wednesday it would be “completely legitimate” for Ukraine to use UK-supplied weapons to strike into Russian territory, to which the Russian military warned that any such attack would be met with a proper response.
Truss traveled to Russia in early February to threaten Moscow not to invade Ukraine, but ended up being widely mocked after multiple gaffes concerning geography. She first mistook the Baltic for the Black Sea in a BBC interview, then reportedly fell for a trick question from her Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov and insisted London would “never recognize Russia’s sovereignty” over Rostov and Voronezh – Russian regions she mistook for the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Starting her cabinet career as under-secretary for education and childcare in 2012, she has since held the environmental affairs, justice, treasury, and international trade portfolios, before replacing Dominic Raab as head of the Foreign Office in September 2021.
Watch: BBC Report from 2017 on Ukraine’s Azov Battallion
Grayzone editor Max Blumenthal says the MSM has changed its tune over its reporting of the neo-Nazi Azov Battallion, citing a 2017 BBC report on its formal collaboration with Ukraine’s national police and Interior Ministry. “The main thing that has changed since then is mainstream media’s gaze,” he tweeted. When ex-US marine Brian Berletic called out Western media for reporting on Azov and its links to Kiev from 2014 onwards, he was silenced on Twitter.
During the huge rally, President Trump made a promise to the crowd, and to the millions of viewers watching at home:
Get ready for a comeback!
“We’re going to stage a comeback the likes of which nobody has ever seen,” Trump said to the lively crowd.
He also slammed Joe Biden’s first year in office, and ripped him for his tyrannical vaccine mandates.
The fact that President Trump can still garner this much excitement, despite being censored on social media and only one news organization willing to cover his rally is astounding.
Former President Donald Trump on Saturday promised that he would be staging a “comeback,” his clearest indication yet that he plans to run for the White House in 2024.https://t.co/9TzmRYUb7P
The Washington Times has more on President Trump’s promise to Americans:
Former President Donald Trump on Saturday promised that he would be staging a “comeback,” his clearest indication yet that he plans to run for the White House in 2024.
He said it would be a “comeback the likes of which nobody has ever seen.”
He made the pledge at his first rally speech of the 2022 election season. He also blasted tyrannical vaccine mandates, runaway inflation and a national crime wave in a brick-by-brick takedown of President Biden’s first years in office.
War chest, new slogan show promise as Trump vows ‘comeback’ in AZ, calls Biden ‘more destructive than 5 presidents’ https://t.co/8awzgGFZ8H
🇺🇸 In another indication that he plans to run in 2024, Trump promised he would be staging a “comeback… the likes of which nobody has ever seen” https://t.co/QqPfrxvMCM
Reports are that President Trump had 8 million viewers on his livestream last night as well, and that was with Newsmax as the only network covering the rally.
President Trump had 8 MILLION viewers on his livestream last night and Newsmax was the only major network who covered the event.
President Trump had 8 MILLION viewers on his livestream last night and Newsmax also covered the event on their network.
It’s safe to say with all the live streams combined and Newsmax’s audience, more people tuned in to watch President Trump speak than watch the woke NFL!
By Brian Cloughley Brian Cloughley British and Australian armies’ veteran, former deputy head of the UN military mission in Kashmir and Australian defense attaché in Pakistan
U.S.-Nato military confrontation will continue along Russia’s borders with the aim of provoking Russia to take action, which is a very dangerous policy.
On October 20 the U.S. State Department announced that “Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III met with Ukrainian Minister of Defense Andrii Taran and later with President Volodymyr Zelenskiy today in Kyiv. In both meetings, the leaders affirmed the strength of the U.S.-Ukraine strategic defence partnership, and Secretary Austin pledged continued U.S. support for Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and Euro-Atlantic aspirations.” According to Voice of America he “called on Russia” to “end its destabilizing activities in the Black Sea” (without mentioning that Russia has a Black Sea coastline of 800 km).
On the same day that Russia was rebuked by the United States for supposed and unspecified “destabilising activities”, the Pentagon deployed two B-1B Strategic bombers to fly over the Black Sea. These strike aircraft flew out of the UK’s Royal Air Force station at Fairford, where they arrived earlier in October from Dyess USAF base in Texas, with the reported mission of “enhancing interoperability training with our allies and partners, building coalition strength, and bolstering our ability to respond to all threats with unmatched power.”
It was essential, apparently, for interoperability training to take place along Russia’s borders rather than in the skies of Texas or Fairford, where the local newspaper reported that “If you live in parts of Cheltenham and Gloucester there was no way you weren’t aware of two huge American bombers flying overhead at around 7.30 am on Tuesday. A distinctive rumbling noise got louder and louder and sounded so near it could almost have been mistaken for the sound of a huge lorry rumbling right past your house.”
It was hardly coincidental that the rumbling bombers’ “maritime targeting mission”, accompanied by Polish and Romanian fighter aircraft, was scheduled for the day after Russia’s notification by Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov that as Nato had set up a “prohibitive regime” for Russian diplomats in Brussels by banning them from its headquarters building, and “because of NATO’s targeted steps, proper conditions for elemental diplomatic activity don’t exist… we are halting the work of our permanent representation to NATO, including the work of the main military envoy.” Nato’s actions had come as a surprise, because following a meeting between Mr Lavrov and Nato Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg in New York on September 20, it was announced that “the Secretary General stressed that NATO is committed to risk reduction and transparency, including through meetings of the NATO-Russia Council and through the modernization of the OSCE’s Vienna Document.”
No matter what “destabilising activities” may be alleged about Russia by Nato and several countries associated with the military alliance there is no ambiguity about Washington’s attitude and policy, which continue to be aggressive and confrontational. It will not be forgotten by Russia that Washington encouraged and assisted the coup in Ukraine in 2014 when the then Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs, Victoria Nuland, was photographed together with the U.S. ambassador handing out cookies to rebels in Kiev’s Maidan Square in December 2013. (The goodies were taken to the square by her armed U.S. security guards. Then when the time was right for the cameras she was given the bags and doled them out. It was a gruesome but well-orchestrated little pantomime.) Nuland was up to her ears in the coup, and the BBC’s record of one of her telephone conversations shows just how deeply the U.S. was involved. She is heard saying “I don’t think Klitsch should go into the government. I don’t think it’s necessary, I don’t think it’s a good idea” but that “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience” for the new Ukraine that Washington wanted to create, thereby demonstrating its preference for coups that suit U.S. policy.
Following the antics in Kiev, President Biden showed exactly where he stands vis-à-vis Russia and Ukraine when he appointed Nuland to be his undersecretary of state for political affairs. There is no doubt Moscow (and Kiev) got the intended message, but it was barely credible when Biden sent her to Moscow on October 11 for two days of talks, supposedly with the purpose of improving U.S.-Russia relations. This extraordinary decision was described by Ted Galen Carpenter in the American Conservative as “A Display of Contempt” involving “a terrible choice for such a sensitive diplomatic mission” and it is difficult to see how Biden’s Washington could have been more sneeringly disrespectful of the government in Moscow and, indeed, the entire Russian people, than by sending such an emissary.
Following this pathetic but insultingly provocative charade, and concurrent with U.S. bomber sorties over the Black Sea and discussions between the U.S. Secretary of Defence and his Ukrainian counterpart, on October 21 the defence ministers of the U.S.-Nato military alliance had a conference at which they were reported as approving a “master plan to defend against potential Russian attacks, which could include nuclear weapons, cyberwarfare, hypersonic missiles or space attacks on satellites.” This master plan is to cost an initial billion dollars and was justified by Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg declaring that “We continue to strengthen our alliance with better and modernised plans.” Reuters noted that (unnamed) “diplomats say the ‘Concept for Deterrence and Defence in the Euro-Atlantic Area’ — and its strategic implementation plan — is needed as Russia develops advanced weapon systems and deploys troops and equipment closer to the allies’ borders.”
But while U.S. strategic bombers from Texas are deployed to England to roam the skies above the Black Sea, deliberately menacing Russia, Nato hastened to assure the world that its new Concept for war against Russia is nothing to worry about. As Stratforreported on October 21, “NATO officials stressed that they do not believe any Russian attack is imminent” which raises the question as to why U.S.-Nato is massing troops along Russia’s borders in the appropriately named “Enhanced Forward Presence”.
The statement by Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov on October 18 that “the basic conditions for common work no longer exist” with the U.S.-Nato military alliance, and “we see no reason to pretend that any change is possible in the foreseeable future” was made with regret but, unfortunately, predictable inevitability. It is apparent that the rising tide of anti-Russia provocation is being encouraged to the full by Washington, with President Biden indicating U.S. preparedness to expand its military commitments in Europe and elsewhere.
Not content with declaring that the U.S. “has a commitment” to military action if there is conflict between China and Taiwan (which it does not), President Biden authorised defence secretary Lloyd Austin to “reiterate the U.S. commitment to supporting Ukraine’s forces through security assistance” and achieving “an even stronger and more enduring strategic partnership”, together with boosting the armed forces of Georgia, Bulgaria and Romania in the Nato and “Nato-partner” anti-Russia alliance.
The U.S. has been forced out of Afghanistan by Taliban militants but is continuing other global military manoeuvres while extending its military agreements and groupings. Targeting Russia is domestically popular for both the Republican and Democratic Parties in the U.S., and Brussels Nato is following along, lured by the attraction of even higher military spending and extension of its influence. Washington supports Nato membership by Ukraine and Georgia, with Austin, for example, speaking with approval of “Ukraine’s aspirations to join NATO.”
U.S.-Nato military confrontation will continue along Russia’s borders with the aim of provoking Russia to take action, which is a very dangerous policy. It would be better to engage in dialogue, but Biden’s Washington seems to regard negotiation and compromise as weakness. In the words of the commander of U.S. Air Forces in Europe, General Jeff Harrigian, his forces have “unmatched power.” And that is what it is all about.
Foreign Affairs Intelligence Council 