The United States, NATO and Ukraine orchestrate war against Russia
Hostile actions by US officials show America seeks confrontation, not cooperation.
In the 21st century wars are not fought with tanks and planes and they are not carried out by standing armies. The battlefield of the new millenium is an ideological one, where trojan horses masquerated as NGOs do the dirty work for regimes whose goal is to collapse sovereign nations from the inside out.
In this new kind of war, the western Empire led by the United States and its military arm, NATO, provide the best example of how a nation is conquered from within. The United States has empowered organizations such as USAID, NED and others to incite opposition groups in various countries for decades.
The US has been actively pursuing and directly assisting groups of fanatics to carry out “regime change” without having to move one single troop, tank or plane. Its support or color revolutions has been done covertly and through operations that are organized and executed by the Central Intelligence Agency.
The US has provided the funding and training of insurgency groups in different countries by promoting anti-government propaganda, coups d’état, fake popular protests and other activities that intend to destabilize shaky and often times strong nations.
Documented historical record shows many examples of US and NATO intervention in non-aligned countries:
Syria became an independent republic in 1946, but the March 1949 Syrian coup d’état, led by Army Chief of Staff Husni al-Za’im, ended the initial period of civilian rule. Za’im met at least six times with CIA operatives in the months prior to the coup to discuss his plan to seize power.
In 1953, the CIA worked with the United Kingdom to overthrow the democratically elected government of Iran led by Prime Minister Mohammad Mossadegh who had attempted to nationalize Iran’s petroleum industry, threatening the profits of the Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, now known as BP.
The Guatemalan Revolution of 1944-54 had overthrown the US backed dictator Jorge Ubico and brought a democratically elected government to power. The government began an ambitious agrarian reform program attempting to grant land to millions of landless peasants.
In February 1960, the United States planned a coup against the government of Iraq headed by Prime Minister Abd al-Karim Qasim, who two years earlier had deposed the Western-allied Iraqi monarchy. Qasim’s rule has been described as authoritarian and dictatorial.
The democratically-elected government of Brazil, headed by President João Goulart, was successfully overthrown in a coup in March 1964. On March 30, the American military attaché in Brazil, Colonel Vernon A. Walters, telegraphed the State Department. In that telegraph, he confirmed that Brazilian army generals, independently of the US, had committed themselves to acting against Goulart within a week of the meeting, but no date was set.
The election of Marxist candidate Salvador Allende as President of Chile in September 1970 led President Richard Nixon to order that Allende not be allowed to take office. Nixon pursued a vigorous campaign of covert resistance to Allende, first designed to convince the Chilean congress to confirm Jorge Alessandri as the winner of the election.
In April 1978, the communist People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan (PDPA) seized power in Afghanistan in the Saur Revolution. Within months, opponents of the communist government launched an uprising in eastern Afghanistan that quickly expanded into a civil war waged by guerrilla mujahideen against government forces countrywide. This particular example has been publicly confessed as an example of US intervention by current Democratic presidential candidate, Hillary Clinton.
Nicaragua, Panama, El Salvador, Honduras, Ukraine, and many other countries have been victims of American relentless expansionism.
The fact that separates all of the previous examples of US intervention is that never has an American regime been bold enough to openly attempt to overthrow a government that possesses nuclear weapons… until now.
In his latest article titled “Think Tank Warns of NATO-Russia Clash”, Stephen Lendman explains how the European Leadership Network, a London-based organization, is now warning about NATO and Russian war games and how those exercises seem to be preparations for war, rather than only simple and isolated training exercises.
“Everyone is focusing on the deterrent value of big exercises, but there is a downside and that is the risk factor. Politicians have to show political judgment and restraint about when is the right time to scale down what could be a spiraling sequence of exercises,” says the report published by the ELN.
Meanwhile, Lendman explains: “Washington keeps upping the stakes for direct confrontation. Provocative military exercises near Russia’s borders risk the unthinkable. So does America’s empire of bases in areas where it doesn’t belong – notably encircling Russia and China.”
Different from countries like Panama or Nicaragua where American NGOs work by stealth, China and Russia have now understood the strategy behind NGOs like the National Endowment for Democracy and USAID.
Back in July, we reported the Kremlin’s warning that the NED is a “threat to the security” of Russia. According to Russian authorities, NED’s duplicitous mission statement indicates a “dedicat(ion) to the growth and strengthening of democratic institutions around the world.”
NED’s practices are polar opposite to what its missions statement says. The NED is a State Department-funded agency created to undermine democracy wherever it exists.
Moscow’s mid-year 2015 enacted Law on Undesirable Organizations justifiably targets foreign organizations posing a “threat to the constitutional order and defense capability or the security of the Russian state” – subversive groups no governments should tolerate.
Parallel to the actions of organizations such as USAID and NED, “NATO military exercises are intended to enhance security and stability in Europe. All NATO military activities are proportionate, defensive, and fully in line with our international commitments,” warns Lendman.
Just yesterday, Paul Joseph Watson reported on a new plan by the United States to attempt to carry out a color revolution in Russia by funding and training opposition groups led by oligarchs who oppose President Vladimir Putin.
In his video report, Watson explains that “The United States is accelerating a plot to provoke a Kiev-style color revolution in Russia that could lead to a toppling of Putin’s government and place the world in the most dangerous situation since the height of the cold war.”
His report is supported by the statement of a Russian parliamentary, who warned about Russian oligarchs being in negotiations with American corporations and the White House, to iron out the details of what would be Putin’s ouster from power.
“They are conduction a negotiation process with the Russian elites for the extradition of Putin,” said Yevgeny Fedorov. “The same process was conducted in Ukraine, for example, for Yanukovich”, explained Fedorov.
The plan is to collapse the Russian government by way of economic measures that will cause food prices to increase to levels that will prompt hundreds of thousands of Russian people to go to the street.
This type of action has been seen recently in Venezuela, where opposition groups funded by the American government and organized by the CIA attempted to overthrow Hugo Chavez.
“Hostile actions by US officials show America seeks confrontation, not cooperation. Russia changed no borders by force. It’s gone all-out to resolve conflict in Ukraine. It intends whatever defensive actions are necessary to counter US aggressiveness,” says Stephen Lendman, who himseld wrote a book about the Ukrainian coup d’etat.
His book titled “Flashpoint in Ukraine” explains how the American drive for hegemony risks the start of World War III.
“Everyone is focusing on the deterrent value of big exercises, but there is a downside and that is the risk factor. Politicians have to show political judgment and restraint about when is the right time to scale down what could be a spiraling sequence of exercises,” says the ELN in its report.
Today, the puppet President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko, said his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, “wants Europe” and that his expansionism “reaches as far as you let him go.” Rethoric like this one from Poroshenko is abundant in political circles in Europe and the United States and it is echoed by most mainstream media.
“With the annexation of the Crimea and the eastern Ukraine aggression, Putin has broken the international security system,” Poroshenko said in an interview published today in the newspaper Libération. The Ukrainian President considers is now fear-mongering about a possible Russian aggression against Finland, the Baltic countries and the North Sea region.
“When we say that Ukrainians are fighting for their country we mean that they do it not only for the integrity and independence of Ukraine, but also for democracy, liberty and security of the entire European continent,” he said. Poroshenko forgot to mention that he came to power as a result of a US supported coup d’etat that overthrew a democratically elected president.
While NATO’s “aggressiveness represents the greatest threat to world peace. Russia goes all-out to preserve it. Moscow doesn’t threaten or attack other countries,” says Lendman. “America wages endless wars of aggression against invented enemies threatening no one. It prioritizes violence and instability. It spends more on militarism and war-making than the rest of the world combined.”