ANALYSIS INFORMATION FROM A EUROPEAN PERSPECTIVE

PETROFILM.COM

INTEGRITY  EMPATHY  RESPECT  DIGNITY

Harald Dahle-Sladek

Founder and Editor-in-chief

 Основатель и главный редактор

 創始人兼總編輯

DEFENDING OUR FREEDOM

NATO EXPAND EASTWARD

US STRYKERs IN POLAND

Hello friends! In a September 2014 speech in the Estonian capital of  Tallinn, President Ba- rack Obama articulated and strongly affirmed that commitment: We will defend our NATO Allies, and that means every Ally. And we will defend the territorial integrity of every single Ally. Because the defense of Tallinn and Riga and Vilnius is just as important as the defense of Berlin and Paris and London. This view is good in theory, but is it wise to risk a global nu- clear melt down because of Tallin and Riga? I don't think so.

General Dynamics Land Systems, IAV, Interim Armored Vehicle Stryker

The newly published RAND Report underlines that despite President Obama’s bold words in Tallinn, a series of RAND wargames clearly indicates that,

NATO’s current posture is inadequate to defend the Baltic states from a plausible Russian conventional attack.

The games employed Russian forces from the Western MD and the Kaliningrad oblast, a chunk of sovereign Russian territory that sits on the northeastern border of Poland, along the Baltic Sea coast, totaling 27 maneuver battalions in a short-warning attack to occupy either Estonia and Latvia or both and present NATO with a rapid fait accompli.

General Dynamics Land Systems, IAV, Interim Armored Vehicle Stryker

In a September 2014 speech in the Estonian capital of  Tallinn, President Barack Obama arti culated and strongly affirmed that commitment:

We will defend our NATO Allies, and that means every Ally. And we will defend the territorial integrity of every single Ally. Because the defense of Tallinn and Riga and Vilnius is just as important as the defense of Berlin and Paris and London.

This view is good, in theory! But is it wise to risk a global nuclear meltdown because of Tallin, Riga and Vilnius? I don't think so! And I think I have Germany with me on this.

"ANAKONDA-16"

A new missile crisis is building, in a mirror image of that which led the Soviet Union in 1962 to deploy nuclear warheads in Cuba, at the doorstep of the United States. Today, the situation is the reverse. At the time, NATO was fighting the Warsaw Pact, today, it is organizing a summit in Warsaw!

THE NATO POLAND BALTIC EXERCISE

The largest war game in eastern Europe since the end of the cold war has started in Poland, as Nato and partner countries seek to mount a display of strength as a response to concerns about Russia’s assertiveness and actions.

The 10-day military exercise, involving 31,000 troops and thousands of vehicles from 24 countries, has been welcomed among Nato’s allies in the region, though defence experts warn that any mishap could prompt an offensive reaction from Moscow.

A defence attache at a European embassy in Warsaw said the “nightmare scenario” of the exercise, named Anaconda-2016, would be “a mishap, a miscalculation which the Russians construe, or choose to construe, as an offensive action”.

NATO IS CARRYING OUT A PROVOCATIVE POLICY OF “ENCIRCLEMENT”

Polish Honor Guard, ANACONDA-16

The continuous eastward expansion of NATO towards the borders of Russia, despite the guarantees given by the West to Gorbachov in 1989 that this would not happen;

The deployment of the Aegis anti-missile defense system in Romania, Poland, Turkey and Spain. These weapons, equipped with MK41 launchers, can be used for defensive missions (air, land, sea), but also for offensive attacks with nuclear weapons; 

The planned permanent rotational deployment in the Baltic States, Poland and Romania, of four battalions of 1,000 troops each, and heavy military equipment;

The creation of a “Nordic Front” against Russia, comprised of an alliance of NATO members Denmark, Iceland and Norway, and of NATO's “Partnership for Peace” (Sweden and Finland); 

The modernization of nuclear weapons, in particular the B61-12 bomb and the Long Range Standoff (LRSO) Cruise Missiles, based in Germany. U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein said of these weapons: "The so-called improvements to this weapon seemed to be designed... to make it more usable, to help us fight and win a limited nuclear war." 

To escape the current countdown to nuclear war, we also call on our government to create without delay the conditions for a new global peace and security architecture, based on the win-win cooperation proposed by the BRICS, cooperation which Europe and the United States, in their own interests, should join in. The vast efforts we deployed in the 20^th Centu- ry for war, must be mobilized today for peace and mutual development!

The German Bundeswehr is planning to deploy its soldiers in Lithuania as part of NATOs mission aimed at containing possible Russian aggression

 Russian Permanent Representative to NATO Alexander Grushko’s

interview with Izvestia, published April 1, 2016

Alexander Grushko

Question: How does Russia assess the U.S. intention to deploy another armour brigade in Eastern Europe?

Alexander Grushko: We need to see how these intentions play out. Nevertheless, we assess these plans not only in terms of what the United States can additionally deploy on NATO’s “eastern flank” but also in the context of the aggregate measures that have already been taken.

Regarding the new force deployment pattern on NATO’s “eastern periphery”, this involves a qualitative change in the configuration of this presence and a significant deterioration of the situation in the military sphere.

Presently, US forces are constantly rotated in six Eastern European countries and there are continuous exercises with the participation not only of US but also European contingents. The naval grouping in the Baltic has been reinforced. Storage depots have been set up for equipment used by rotation units during joint exercises with national contingents.

Troop reinforcement infrastructure continues to be upgraded. Military activity in the airspace along our borders has intensified. The number of reconnaissance flights has drastically increased. There is constant talk about increasing the military presence in the Black Sea.

All of this goes to show that the “containment” policy that was initially declared in word is now followed up by specific military-planning decisions. This creates a long-term negative trend not only for regional security but also for European security as a whole.

Another problem is that no one knows how far this process will go. The decision to deploy an additional armour brigade is announced at a time when nothing critical is happening with regard to NATO interests on the “eastern flank”.

It is becoming increasingly obvious that these military preparations have no basis in reality. There is no direct threat either to Poland or to the Baltic countries but the information campaign continues to gather momentum.

Absurd horror stories to the effect that Russia would have attacked the Baltic countries if NATO had not taken measures and deployed its troops in the region continue making the rounds. All indications point to a serious change for the worse in the military situation.

Question: Are there grounds to say that NATO actions violate agreements with Russia, in particular the Founding Act of 1997?

Alexander Grushko: An additional armour brigade to reinforce the “eastern flank” is in conflict with the spirit of the Founding Act. Meanwhile, NATO alleges that all military efforts are in full compliance with the Russia-NATO Founding Act whereby NATO pledged not to deploy additional significant combat forces on a permanent basis.

We have stated more than once that continuous rotation does not differ in any way from constant deployment. I should point out, however, that two bases of the European segment of the global missile defence system are under construction.

The base in Romania is now at combat readiness and is due to be placed under NATO command in May. The construction of the facility in Poland is in progress. The bases definitely fall under the definition of “significant” and have a permanent character.

Question: In what way will the strengthening of the US contingent impact Russia-NATO collaboration?

Alexander Grushko: In no way. There is no collaboration. In April 2014, NATO countries took the decision to halt all collaboration with Russia and all projects were put on hold. Today, we do not have a positive agenda with NATO.

We often hear NATO representatives say they are ready for dialogue. Dialogue through the permanent mission continues. We have good contacts with the alliance leadership, with all missions to NATO, but these contacts cannot substitute for the Russia-NATO collaboration that was built over the years to ensure the security of all Russia-NATO Council members in a number of areas.

We worked together on Afghanistan. We did a good deal of work in fighting terrorism not only in terms of threat assessment and sharing experience but also in implementing projects designed to rule out tragedies like the one in Brussels.

Question: What is the status of the Russia-NATO Council activity?

Alexander Grushko: Formally, the council activity has not been halted. Upon our initiative, it was convened for an emergency meeting in June 2014 in connection with the start of a punitive operation by the Kiev authorities in southeastern Ukraine. No meetings have been held since. Work is underway for the next meeting but no decision has been made yet.

Question: Can the CFE Treaty be invoked in the present situation?

Alexander Grushko: The US military buildup is proceeding amid the erosion of the arms control regime in Europe. The CFE regime was the cornerstone of European security. It set ceilings on the main categories of weapon systems and ensured effective information-sharing and an intrusive verification regime.

In the early 1990s, it became clear that the treaty did not measure up to the new political realities and adaptation talks began. These efforts ended up with the signing of the Adapted CFE Treaty. It was more in sync with the new realities. In particular, it envisioned specific mechanisms of using political tools in case forces are deployed above the established quota limits.

In 2004, Russia ratified the treaty, but NATO countries dragged their feet on the ratification under contrived pretexts. As a result, it did not come into effect. As the CFE Treaty has lost contact with reality, there is reason to say that the arms control regime in Europe is now dead. This further compounds the security situation. However, this choice was made by the NATO countries themselves.

 NATO "War Games"

By Lyndon LaRouche

                        President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama depart Oslo City Hall                          following the Nobel Peace Prize ceremony in Oslo, Norway, Dec. 10, 2009.

Triggering of a World War III?

If Obama has his way, mankind may well be driven over the edge of the cliff in the form of a thermonuclear war provocation by the United States and NATO against Russia and China, Lyndon LaRouche warned today.

The large-scale NATO maneuvers that began yesterday in Poland and the Baltic states, and that involve 31,000 troops from 24 countries in a 10-day exercise simulating a supposed Russian invasion of the region, in themselves are an immediate potential trigger. Russia’s ambassador to NATO, Alexander Grushko, yesterday explained the danger bluntly, in remarks that Mr. LaRouche considered very much to the point:

"What we are seeing today in the Baltic states, as a matter of fact, is nothing but attempts towards force development with the hostile policy pursued by NATO in the recent time. I would not say that it is a direct threat for Russia but, nevertheless, it obviously creates serious risks as we see an absolutely new military reality forming along our border."

Grushko elaborated that NATO warnings of a non-existent Russian threat can materialize into actions. "The policy of NATO lives in surrealistic reality, and the most dangerous thing is that it now starts taking shape of military planning and military preparations carried out on territories along our borders."

LaRouche emphasized that Russia under President Putin will make their own decision in their own way, in response to these probes. If the British, Obama and NATO want war, they are going to get it, and it will be terrible: thermonuclear World War III--that's what you are talking about.

There is a strategy, long-identified by LaRouche, to defeat this "surrealistic" policy of genocide emanating from the British Empire. It requires the immediate removal of Obama from the White House, both to get his finger away from the nuclear button, as well as to entirely kick over the chessboard of the lunatic U.S. presidential election, which is currently offering Americans a choice between cyanide and strychnine.

And it also requires the U.S. and Europe joining the win-win New Paradigm of science-driven economic development, championed by Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin, and which continues to move forward aggressively across Eurasia.

The issue before us is captured by the title of a major Schiller Institute event that the LaRouche movement will hold in San Francisco on June 8: "Will the U.S. Join the New Silk Road? A Choice of Global Scientific Development or Nuclear World War."







USS Donald Cook US said it would have been within its rights to shoot down the Russian jets. Photo navy.mil

Putin: very prepared for any eventuality