Why the war is still going on

The war in Ukraine has been going on for almost a year now. There is no doubt that it is a war between Russia and the West, between Russia and NATO, between Russia and the United States. There is also no doubt that Kiev, left to its own devices, would have long since been beaten and conquered and subjugated by Moscow. The constant supply of arms, financial loans and political support coming from the West means that Ukraine continues to fight, albeit not only with its own army, but also resorting to thousands of mercenaries from a variety of nationalities. Polish and British soldiers and officers are said to be operating in Ukrainian uniforms. The West has deployed all its authority, all its diplomatic and economic muscle, to sustain Ukraine’s resistance against Russia. Is it because anyone in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin or Kiev believes that Ukraine can win this war? Is it because anyone in Washington, London, Paris and Berlin or Kiev believes that Ukrainian troops will drive out Russian troops, that Ukraine will regain not only the four provinces that have been annexed to Russia, but also the Crimea? Is it because Moscow, having been repulsed and vanquished, will start paying compensation to Ukraine and the Russian leaders will stand before the international tribunal in The Hague like the former leaders of Yugoslavia and Serbia?

Of course not! So why are they fighting this war? Why are Washington and London, Paris and Berlin encouraging Kiev to resist further? Why are Western governments subjecting millions of Ukrainians to death, starvation, cold and emigration? The answer is self-explanatory. Because if the war goes on as long as possible, then:

① Russia, a rival that the West dislikes (to put it mildly), will be weakened and bled to the maximum;
② Ukraine will incur as much debt and as many obligations to the West as possible, only to repay them for decades, i.e. to relinquish control over its own natural resources, production facilities and population (for how else can Kiev repay these gigantic obligations?); Continue reading →

Wanted: dead or alive?

Служба безпеки України or the Security Service of Ukraine (SSU) has its own website. All those security services the world over have one. This website is in Ukrainian and English. Yes, of course, English is the lingua franca or common language of the global village as we are all aware, so no wonder. The website offers the kind of information about the SSU that one expects: what it does, how it recruits its staff, how it can be contacted, what its guiding principles are and the like. Pretty boring stuff. Yet, if you are patient enough, you will discover an interesting tab: the SSU has a wanted list! You will have recalled the Western movies with their iconic wanted posters, will you not?

As you survey the many pics of the wanted people, you come across men and women, many of them in military uniforms, and you begin to wonder what crime they have committed. With this in mind you click on the image or the name underneath in search of information. What you find are merely such data as – again – the person’s names and surname, date of birth, gender, date of disappearance and place of disappearance, form of deterrence and something that is titled precaution and that contains the article, part or paragraph of the Criminal Code of Ukraine. Thus, you need to consult the Code.

The wanted list

Continue reading →

Quo vadis, Europa?

Is this the European Union that we have dreamt of? Is this the European Union that we have been tempted with? A united continent, with no borders, a continent blessed with peace and fraternity, with the well-being of its residents, blessed with the preservation of everything that singles the continent out from the rest of the world? As it is, European values transpired as the values that are not shared by the overwhelming majority of Europeans. These are same-sex marriages, gender mainstreaming, extirpation of all traditional values and mass immigration that increasingly changes the racial make-up of the European population and – what necessarily follows – the continent’s culture.

Up to very recently it was the Western part of Europe – the so-called old Union – that was subjected to the programmed and systematic influx of peoples from the Third World. The new members of the union – especially Poland, Czechia, Slovakia, Hungary – resisted the policy of mass immigration, running afoul of the Brussels’ commissioners and ruffling a few feathers among Western intellectuals. The year 2015 – that notorious year during which Germany is believed to have accepted between 800.000 and 1,200.000 arrivals – made the blood of Eastern Europeans run cold. They wanted to mingle with the French, the British, the Italians or the Germans, but were totally unprepared to regard the Afghanis or Somalis as new Europeans! The cultural, religious, mental gap was far too large to be bridged as was the pace with which those ethnic changes were effected! It did not go unnoticed either that Third World immigrants were clearly used as a weapon: a look at Turkey’s policy said it all. Also, the acceptance of tens of thousands of Third World immigrants was perceived by both Western and Eastern Europeans as mere virtue signalling and – in the case of the new member-states – as a sign of their submission the Brussels (Paris and Berlin). Add to this the indiscriminate procedure of letting foreigners into European countries: there was no way of screening the masses of arrivals whether they contained common criminals, mafiosi, terrorists and the like. Continue reading →

Turkey builds a parallel State in Europe through its religious organisations

First Published May 2018

Turkish increasing influence and power over the Turks and the Muslims in Europe is the single most imminent threat to European security

The European establishment is looking the other way, while the Turks are slowly increasing their foothold in Europe. the EU prefers to mock Putin rather than confront Tayyip Erdoğan and the AKP. Meanwhile the Turkish state and especially its ministry of the religious affairs uses the Turkish diaspora in Europe to acquire political power on the continent. There is no separation between state and religion in Turkey. The religious organization Diyanet that operates under the Turkish ministry of religious affairs has about 2000 outposts in Europe. The Gefira team located about 1300 of them, mostly mosques. There is no other political or religious organization in Europe with leaders from outside it that has such a widespread network across the European Union, and whose ideology is alien to the native Europeans.

Diyanet in Europe.

Continue reading →

Turkish central bank dismisses chief economist and department managers

Turkey’s central bank demoted at least nine high-ranking officials including chief economist Hakan Kara, two officials said. The bank’s heads of research, banking, risk management and institutional transformation are among those who are getting new roles. This comes after Recep Tayyip Erdogan fired the governor last month for not cutting rates fast enough. Source: Reuters, Bloomberg

Turkish president vows operation in northern Syria will be ‘very soon’

Turkey’s counter-terrorism operations will move forward to a “different phase” in northern Syria soon, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan said on Aug. 6. “We wiII move the process which we started with the Euphrates Shield and Olive Branch operations [in northern Syria] forward to a different phase very soon,” Erdoğan said at the 11th Ambassadors’ Conference. Source Hurriyet daily news

Turkey: the Game Changer

The deal between Ankara and Moscow has been signed and sealed and the first shipments of the S-400 air defence system have just landed on Turkish soil, at a military airbase located at the vicinity of the country’s capital. The second-largest NATO army is acquiring weapons and materiel from a state that by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is viewed as inimical.

Turkey occupies an area which is bridging Europe with Asia and neighbouring some of the war-ridden countries like Iraq and Syria in the volatile region known as the Middle East. It is also strategically important for NATO because it controls the Straits between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea and because it outflanks Russia from the south. A NATO member since 1952 Turkey – although a Third World country – wanted to remain a loyal member of the Alliance with ever closer ties to the Western world. Not only did Ankara join its troops to the NATO but also lent its territory to the pact. The reader will have remembered that it was the American missiles deployed to Turkish territory which caused anxiety at the Kremlin and induced Nikita Khrushchev to retaliate by deploying Soviet missiles to Cuba, which led to the international conflict threatening to culminate in a third world war. The strained relations between the two superpowers were only eased when both the Soviets withdrew their missiles from the largest island in the Caribic and the Americans removed theirs from Turkey.

Turkey’s membership in the Alliance has never meant that Ankara was a patsy in Washington’s hands. It skilfully guarded its sovereignty and pursued its own interests. Thus in 1974 Turkish armed forces landed in Northern Cyprus, establishing there of a separate Turkish state and a permanent – as yet – division of the island predominantly inhabited by Greeks. Thus Ankara dared to thwart the interest of another NATO member – Greece – and Athens could do nothing about it. Turkey was strategically too important and that is why it could afford to act independently of NATO’s most important allies.

Continue reading →