June 5, 2023
OPEC Oil Cuts And Russian Fleet Deployments Fracture NATO Unity Facade
By: Sorcha Faal, and as reported to her Western Subscribers
A troubling new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting top Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov expressing concern over reports of a coup against close Russian ally Kyrgyzstan President Sadyr Japarov, with him stating: “So far, obviously, very alarming news is coming in”, says along with videos appearing showing Kyrgyzstan Special Forces rounding up coup plotters, it was reported: “Kyrgyzstan’s State Committee for National Security launched simultaneous operations today against individuals who were found to have attempted a coup in the country…In operations organized in various parts of the country, people who were likely to participate in the coup were detained…According to initial reports, 110 soldiers and bureaucrats were detained”.
In immediate response to the current events, this report notes, the Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced: “In accordance with the training plan for the military command and control bodies of the forces of the Baltic Fleet for 2023, from 5-15 June, an operational exercise began with the Baltic Fleet groupings under in the Baltic Sea and at combat training grounds in the Kaliningrad region under the leadership of the Commander of the Baltic Fleet, Vice Admiral Vladimir Vorobyov…About 40 ships and vessels, over 3,500 military personnel, up to 500 units of military equipment, as well as up to 25 aircraft and helicopters, are involved in operational exercises of the Baltic Fleet” and reported: “Russia’s Pacific Fleet has launched large-scale naval exercises in the Far East, which are scheduled to last two weeks…More than 60 warships and support vessels, 35 naval aircraft, coastal defense troops, and more than 11,000 military personnel will be involved in the drills, which are taking place in the Sea of Japan and Sea of Okhotsk”.
Immediately preceding the current events, this report continues, Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak announced: “Russia will extend its voluntary production cuts of oil by 500,000 barrels a day until the end of December 2024 as a measure of precaution under the agreement with the countries participating in the OPEC+ deal”—an announcement joined by OPEC+ member Saudi Arabia announcing plans to cut production by an extra 1 million barrels per day, starting from July—the effect of which is pushing global oil prices higher for the already battered economies of the socialist Western colonial powers.
Also preceding the current events, this report details, it saw top socialist Biden Regime official National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan declaring about the Ukraine Nazi Regime puppet state yesterday: “Exactly how much, in what places, that will be up to developments on the ground as the Ukrainians get this counteroffensive underway…But we believe that the Ukrainians will meet with success in this counteroffensive…The outcome of the operation will have a major impact on future negotiations”—a declaration followed by the leftist New York Times article “Nazi Symbols On Ukraine’s Front Lines Highlight Thorny Issues Of History”, wherein it revealed: “Ukrainian troops use of patches bearing Nazi emblems risks fueling Russian propaganda and spreading imagery that the West has spent a half-century trying to eliminate…So far, the imagery has not eroded international support for the war…It has, however, left diplomats, Western journalists and advocacy groups in a difficult position: Calling attention to the iconography risks playing into Russian propaganda…Saying nothing allows it to spread”.
Though the socialist Western colonial powers are “in a difficult position” over how to defend the genocidal Nazi demons they flood with weapons in Ukraine, this report notes, Russia knows exactly how to deal with them, and as the MoD reported this morning: “Ukrainian troops attempted to attack Russian forces using six mechanized and two tank battalions…As a result of the actions of the ‘East’ military grouping, as well as owing to air strikes and artillery fire near the settlements of Neskuchnoye and Novodarovka, both of which are some 100km west of Donetsk, the Ukrainian forces incurred significant losses…As a result of the botched attack, in the last 24 hours Ukraine has lost up to 300 service members, 16 tanks, 26 armored and 14 ordinary vehicles…The enemy failed to accomplish its goals”.
With more Americans starting to question why the socialist Biden Regime is supporting demonic Nazi forces in Ukraine, this report continues, it has now become an issue in the upcoming 2024 presidential election, one of whose Republican Party candidates Vivek Ramaswamy assessed yesterday: “The job of the U.S. president is to look after American interests…Militarily backing Ukraine’s continued resistance to Russia’s invasion is a less compelling goal than dealing with Beijing…I think the No. 1 threat to the U.S. military is right now, our top military threat, is the China-Russian alliance…I think that by fighting further in Russia, by further arming Ukraine, we are driving Russia into China’s hands”—after which Republican Party candidate Nikki Haley assessed: “This is bigger than Ukraine…This is a war about freedom, and it’s one we have to win…Everybody wants to know well how does this war end?…It would end in a day if Russia pulls out…If Ukraine pulled out, then we’re all looking at a world war”.
In attempting to understand the contradictory assessments about Ukraine, this report details, world-renowned international affairs expert Professor Glenn Diesen at the University of South-Eastern Norway interviewed former top Pentagon advisor and decorated combat tactical legend retired US Army Colonel Douglas Macgregor, Ph.D.—an interview that saw Colonel Macgregor explaining to Professor Diesen that socialist Western colonial policy makers are deluded warmongering idiots knowing nothing about Russia, while warning that the conflict in Ukraine was stripping the façade off NATO and it will soon disintegrate—and was an interview followed by Professor Diesen releasing his open letter “How The US Military-Industrial Complex Has Used Think Tanks To Hijack EU Policymaking”, wherein he revealed:
Hungarian Justice Minister Judit Varga has warned that the European Union has become a stumbling bystander of history and is increasingly unable to resolve the challenges of its citizens. Varga blames the malaise partly on the absence of political leadership. She believes that the bloc is run by think tanks and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) which dictate how it should be led.
Meanwhile, Clare Daly – an Irish MEP – similarly stated recently in the EU Parliament that “the paranoid imaginations of the security sector think tanks that parade here day after day” are able to dictate policies based on the “flimsiest of evidence.”
NGOs have long been used as an instrument to gain influence in the civil society of various nation states. The US has been an innovator in developing cutouts which it funds and ensures are often also staffed by people linked to official Washington. Eventually, the EU adopted the same practice, albeit in a different way, mainly focused on Europe itself. As a result, state-funded NGOs are now increasingly manipulating Western policies.
As think tanks and NGOs increase their influence over EU policymaking, it begs the question: What are the consequences of outsourcing political leadership to these entities?
Think tanks – when they work in the classic sense – can play an important role in policymaking processes by providing expertise, representing diverse interests, and advocating for specific causes. As the world becomes increasingly complex, politicians must make decisions on a wide variety of complicated topics on which they often have limited knowledge. It is simply unrealistic to expect that elected leaders would have sufficient expertise and in-depth understanding in all areas of policymaking.
However, by relying increasingly on the expertise of think tanks and NGOs, power shifts from elected officials to what can be considered lobbyists and advocacy groups. As the EU emulates the Anglo-American model of think tank governance, it is also necessary to explore its weaknesses and consequences.
In the US, think tanks have acquired an immense influence over policymakers and the public. They provide research reports and analysis for politicians which they base their decisions on. The think tanks also function as a waiting room for politicians who are out of government in a revolving door system, enabling the groups to put their own “fellows” into the highest positions in Washington. Think tanks also provide analysis for Congressional hearings and dominate in the media as a source of expert opinions. As a result, they have become an important center of political power.
As the power of think tanks continues to grow, it begs the question: who funds them – and why?
Overwhelmingly, both liberal and conservative think tanks in the US are financed by the arms industry.
This is related to the sheer power of the military-industrial complex in America.
As a consequence, even with the extreme political polarization in Washington, there is nonetheless reliable bipartisan support for warfare as the solution to most problems as the business places its bets on both political parties.
The option of demilitarizing American foreign policy and reducing the military budget is thus increasingly outside democratic control.
For policy makers in America today wishing to assess Ukraine, this report concludes, they can choose the warmongering neocon Gatestone Institute think tank, whose just released policy paper “Biden Is Not Serious about Ukraine Defeating Russia”, wherein it notes: “Biden’s announcement about sending F-16s to Kyiv could prove to be little more than an empty gesture, one that raises serious doubts about whether the Biden administration really has any genuine interest in Ukraine winning this bloody war”—they can also choose the socialist-globalist Council on Foreign Relations think tank, whose just released Foreign Affairs policy paper “An Unwinnable War” states: “The United States and its allies thus face a choice about their future strategy…They could begin to try to steer the war toward a negotiated end in the coming months…Or they could do so years from now…If they decide to wait, the fundamentals of the conflict will likely be the same, but the costs of the war—human, financial, and otherwise—will have multiplied…An effective strategy for what has become the most consequential international crisis in at least a generation therefore requires the United States and its allies to shift their focus and start facilitating an endgame”—or they can choose the realist Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft think tank, whose just released policy paper “America’s Compulsion To Intervene Is Intact And Ready For More” warns:
Washington’s preoccupation with Ukraine only testifies to the impoverished state of American strategic thinking.
In some quarters, framing the present historical moment as a contest between democracy and autocracy passes for fresh thinking, as does characterizing American policy as focused on defending a so-called rules-based international order.
Neither of those claims, however, can withstand nominal scrutiny, even if it seems bad form to cite close U.S. ties with autocracies like the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and Egypt or to point out the innumerable instances in which this country has exempted itself from norms to which it insists others must adhere.
Think of U.S. participation in the Ukraine War as a means of washing away unhappy memories of its own war in Afghanistan, an Operation that began as “Enduring Freedom” but has become “Instant Amnesia”.
In Central America, the Persian Gulf, the Maghreb, the Balkans, and Central Asia, successive administrations embarked on a series of interventions that rarely produced any long-term successes, while exacting staggering cumulative costs.
Since 9/11 alone, U.S. military interventions in distant lands have cost American taxpayers an estimated $8 trillion and still counting.
And that’s not even considering the tens of thousands of G.I.s killed, maimed, or otherwise left bearing the scars of war or the millions of people in the countries where the U.S. fought its wars who would prove to be direct or indirect victims of American policy-making.
[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]
To learn more click HERE.
June 5, 2023 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.