Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

In June 1654, Queen Christina of Sweden, at the age of 27 and unmarried, abdicated the throne. On Christmas Eve, in Brussels, then the capital of the Spanish Netherlands, she secretly converted to Catholicism. When the conversion became public, it caused a great scandal in Lutheran society. The Vatican, on the other hand, received her with pomp and circumstance in 1655, seeing in her a great asset for propaganda.

There is an excellent work on the life of the eccentric queen: Christina of Sweden and Her Circle, by Susanna Åkerman. More than Christina’s circle, the work sheds light on the intellectual environment of the 17th century, showing that, far from being a prelude to the Age of Reason, it was a period of hallucinatory messianism and occult fever, especially in the Jewish and Calvinist worlds – but with penetration into the Catholic world, especially among Jesuits and Germans (because of the credulous Emperor Rudolf II). In the years 1664 and 1665, two comets gave occultists certainty that the end times were approaching, and in 1666 Sabbatai Zevi proclaimed himself messiah, enthusing Jews all over the world.

Christina’s life illustrates this mentality. She had a cousin who would succeed her if she had no heirs. Thus, he secretly sponsored an astrologer to tell her that she was not fit for conception. After the abdication, her cousin did indeed gain the throne, and he was expected by Protestants in Eastern Europe to be the Lion of the North, who would liberate them from the Catholic yoke. They believed in the prophecies of a Polish Calvinist woman named Kristina Poniatowska.

It would be inaccurate to portray Christina as simply credulous. On the one hand, she believed in alchemy and astrology; consequently, in alchemists, astrologers, and other occultists. But this was part of her self-image as Christina Minerva, which included, since she was queen, the ambition to transform Stockholm into a center of free thought in Europe, welcoming all types of religious people (including Jews and Muslims), except Unitarians (due to a prior issue in Sweden, not Christina in particular – incidentally, she would be a financier of the Polish Unitarian agitator Lubieniecki in exile).

The most illustrious philosopher Christina ever met was René Descartes, who went to Sweden to be her teacher. However, she did not have much appreciation for him, and shortly after his death she invited his Epicurean rival Gassendi. After her conversion to Catholicism, Christina caused some scandal by telling her acquaintances that her religion was that of the philosophers, which, although imprecise, is best expressed by Lucretius’s De rerum natura – a pioneering work in explaining religion as a simple consequence of ignorance and anxiety.

Despite her Lutheran upbringing and conversion to Catholicism, Christina is best understood as a heretical freethinker, as credulous as the rationalists of the time, who sought in Kabbalah and occultism a supposed ancient and true knowledge, forbidden by the Catholic Church (a subject we have already seen when discussing Francis Bacon). If she had this profile, then why did she insist on changing religion and losing a throne? Susanna Åkerman’s interesting thesis in Christina of Sweden and her Circle is that the queen had a theological-political plan sustained by the credulity of the time. Christina was power-hungry and never gave up on conquering a crown – even if it was the Swedish crown, when her cousin died and her plans further south were thwarted.

While still in Sweden, Christina secretly negotiated with Spain through Jesuits. Not surprisingly, it was on Spanish soil that she converted to Catholicism. Her initial plan was to win a crown in Flanders or Naples, both Spanish dominions. When Christina saw that Spain would not grant her any regency (in fact, Spain wanted her to stay in Sweden and marry a Catholic), she secretly switched sides to France and incited the French to invade Naples with the aim of giving her the island’s crown. In short, Christina converted to Catholicism because she had greater ambitions than the Protestant world could offer her. She had universalist ambitions refrained by Luteranism. And to see what those ambitions were, one must look at Marrano messianism, that is, the messianism of the more or less Christianized Portuguese Jews.

When Christina abdicated, she moved to the home of a rabbi in Antwerp, Spanish Netherlands, and left her income in the hands of Jewish bankers, so that it would multiply. What would be the interest of the Jews in this queen without a throne? Given her intellectual profile, “if indeed Christina’s intent was to rise up as a liberal, Catholic regent in Flanders, or when that failed in Naples, then the hopes of Jews and intellectuals for a new realm of freethought in Europe (of a type they knew existed in Amsterdam) were no longer just a dream” (Åkerman, 223-4). A Catholic Amsterdam in Naples was what Christina aspired to along with the Jews. If occultists were making prophecies to manipulate politicians, it is quite possible that the young queen, orphaned of father and daughter and insane mother, was being guided from before her abdication.

After the abdication, it is known that three messianic figures surrounded Christina: La Peyrère, Menasseh Ben Israel, and Antonio Vieira. The first was a French New Christian raised as a Calvinist, of probable Portuguese origin (since Peyrère is a Frenchified Pereira). In 1654, as secretary to Prince Condé, who aspired to the throne of France, La Peyrère moved into a house adjacent to Christina’s residence. His most famous work is Prae-Adamitae, printed in 1655 with money from the newly Catholic Christina. In it, he states that Adam is the ancestor only of the Jews, that Mosaic law applies only to them, and that the Jews have a different relationship with God than the Gentiles – who descend from other men older than Adam, the pre-Adamites. The book enraged both Catholics and Protestants, and in 1656, supposedly repentant, La Peyrère followed in his patroness’s footsteps and converted to Catholicism.

The Portuguese rabbi Menasseh Ben Israel, born Manoel Dias Soeiro, lived in Amsterdam and is famous for having negotiated with Oliver Cromwell permission for Jews to establish communities in England (so that, by spreading further across the earth, they would hasten the coming of the Messiah). Another activity of his was Jewish proselytizing to the Christian public. He translated the Talmud into Spanish (perhaps omitting parts offensive to Jesus?) and wrote the curious work El Conciliador, which “which compiles 210 Hebrew and 54 Greek, Latin, Spanish and Portuguese sources to show that the proposed inconsistencies of the Bible all can be rendered plain with correct exegesis. Authorities such as Euripides and Vergil, Plato and Aristotle, Augustin, Albertus Magnus and Duns Scotus are cited along with the Zohar and the Midrash, Maimonides and Leon Hebreo, Gabirol and Nachmanides, Paul de Burgos and Nicholaus de Lyra, Isaac Luria and Moses Cordovero. As the sheer length of this list of Greek and Jewish philosophers, poets, and Kabbalists indicates, the work is a gigantic attempt to bring philosophical thought, Christian and Jewish, to the problem of biblical interpretation. Grounded in Jewish traditional reasoning, the work also introduces Kabbalist methods and Apocalyptic projections.” (Åkerman, p. 185) You know those neo-Pentecostals full of Judaizing prophecies? Well, Menasseh Ben Israel was accessed as a repository of biblical knowledge, especially by Calvinists, since he resided in Amsterdam and there was this search for a non-Catholic authority. It would be worthwhile to conduct research to discover how much of the Scofield Bible theology draws from on this 1632 work.

The Jesuit Antonio Vieira, as Ronaldo Vainfas points out in his book Antônio Vieira, was probably of Jewish origin on his mother’s side. He did not have a very special known role in Christina’s political life. However, it was an important sign of status for her to have him as her confessor in Rome, since he was the favorite orator of the celebrities of the period.

Of the trio, the one who had the greatest direct importance was Peyrère. Another controversial work of his is Du rappel des juifs (1643), where he intends to establish a universal monarchy based in the Holy Land. Prince Condé will become King of France, defeat the Turks, return the Jews to the Holy Land and rule the world from there. Apparently, Peyrère followed the work Le Thresor des propheties de l’univers (1547) by a Christian Kabbalist named Guillaume Postel (1510-1581), according to whom there are two Messiahs: Christ, the universal messiah, and a descendant of the King of France, who would be the political and particularist messiah expected by the Jews. This work was available in Antwerp, and with Christina, Israel Ben Menasseh probably met Peyrère.

Now let’s go to Vieira, the emperor of the Portuguese language. A very useful article is “Antonio Veira, Menasseh Ben Israel et le Cinquième Empire”, by A. J. Saraiva. It is well known that Vieira had numerous problems with the Inquisition, and that the genius of rhetoric was not quite right in the head. For example, a trial began after he wrote to the Bishop of Japan that John IV of Portugal would be resurrected. To make matters worse, instead of renouncing his own ideas (which was the norm), Vieira tries to convince the inquisitors that he is right and the Church is wrong. The fact that he escaped only shows the extent of his political power.

Well, thanks to this extravagance, Vieira’s heretical ideas are well known, and in the aforementioned article Saraiva argues that he was repeating Menasseh Ben Israel, whom he himself told the inquisitors was his interlocutor, and the messianic scheme of the Rappel des juifs. The two important issues learned from Menasseh Ben Israel were: 1) that of the lost tribes and 2) the nature of the Messiah. The Jews believed that the lost tribes of Israel were hidden, and in 1644 our rabbi made known the “discovery” that the Indians of South America were, in fact, lost Jews (is that why Vieira defended it so much?). The fact that they had appeared indicated the approach of the Millennium, and Vieira was repeating a completely fictitious story of the Sabatic River, invented by the rabbi. As for the Messiah, the term designates two different things: the one of the Christians and the one of the Jews, the latter being the man who will free the Jews from captivity and lead them back to the Holy Land. While Christ is spiritual and universal, the Jewish messiah is earthly and particularistic (referring to the Jews). Thus, if King John IV were to resurrect, confront the Turks, and lead the Jews to the Holy Land, he would be the Messiah of the Jews, and would begin the Millennium. In it, a new religion would emerge, which would surpass the Church in the same way that the Church surpassed the Synagogue. It would be a new universal religion for the new universal kingdom.

Let’s leave the details of Vieira’s beliefs for another time, so as not to go on too long. What I wanted to highlight here is that Christian Zionism as we know it has clear precedents in the 17th century, and that Menasseh Ben Israel is a key figure. There was this attempt to create a new Catholic Amsterdam in the Mediterranean, and, with Vieira, there was a notorious attempt to maintain or restore a new Calvinist Amsterdam in the Brazilian Northeast. Both projects were opposed to the Spanish Empire, and took place amidst the Thirty Years’ War and the Restoration War (which followed the end of the Iberian Union).

Would Menasseh Ben Israel be a geopolitical genius of the caliber of the Zionist Henry Kissinger? We should abandon the 20th-century vice of explaining the world solely through materialistic causes and seek the intellectual/spiritual origins of a warlike messianic ideology that seems to have been active and successful at least since the 17th century.

Junte-se a nós no Telegram , Twitter e VK.

Escreva para nós: info@strategic-culture.su

Em junho de 1654, a rainha Cristina da Suécia, aos 27 anos, solteira, abdica do trono. Na véspera do Natal, em Bruxelas, então capital dos Países Baixos espanhóis, ela se converte secretamente ao catolicismo. Quando a conversão foi tornada pública, tornou-se grande escândalo na sociedade luterana. O Vaticano, por outro lado, em 1655 recebe-a com pompa e circunstância, vendo nela um ótimo ativo para propaganda.

Há uma excelente obra sobre a vida da excêntrica rainha: Christina of Sweden and Her Circle [Cristina da Suécia e seu Círculo], de Susanna Åkerman. Mais do que do círculo de Cristina, a obra trata do ambiente intelectual do século XVII, mostrando que, longe de ser um prelúdio da era da Razão, era um período de messianismo alucinado e febre ocultista, especialmente nos mundos judaico e calvinista – porém com penetração no mundo católico, em especial entre jesuítas e germânicos (por causa do crédulo Imperador Rodolfo II). Nos anos de 1964 e 1965, dois cometas davam aos ocultistas certeza de que o fim dos tempos se aproximava, e em 1666 Sabbatai Zevi se proclama messias, entusiasmando judeus do mundo inteiro.

A vida de Cristina ilustra essa mentalidade. Ela tinha um primo que a sucederia, caso ela não tivesse herdeiros. Assim, ele patrocinou secretamente um astrólogo para dizer-lhe que não estava apta para a concepção. Após a abdicação, de fato o primo ganhou o trono, e era esperado por protestantes do Leste Europeu como o Leão do Norte, que iria libertá-los do jugo católico. Eles acreditavam nas profecias de uma calvinista polonesa chamada Kristina Poniatowska.

Seria uma imprecisão representar Cristina como uma simples crédula. Por um lado, ela acreditava em alquimia e astrologia; por conseguinte, em alquimistas, astrólogos e demais ocultistas. Mas isso fazia parte de sua autoimagem de Cristina Minerva, que incluía, desde quando rainha, a pretensão de transformar Estocolmo num centro de pensamento livre na Europa, recebendo todos os tipos de religiosos (incluídos judeus e muçulmanos), exceto unitaristas (por uma questão prévia da Suécia, não de Cristina em particular – aliás, ela seria uma financiadora do agitador unitarista polonês Lubieniecki em exílio).

O filósofo mais ilustre que Cristina conheceu em toda a sua vida foi René Descartes, que foi para a Suécia ser seu professor. No entanto, ela não tinha muito apreço por ele, e pouco depois de sua morte convidou seu rival epicurista Gassendi. Já depois da conversão ao catolicismo, Cristina causou algum escândalo dizendo aos seus conhecidos que sua religião era a dos filósofos, que, embora imprecisa, é melhor expressa pelo De rerum natura, de Lucrécio – obra pioneira na explicação da religião como uma simples consequência da ignorância e da ansiedade.

Apesar da criação luterana e da conversão ao catolicismo, Cristina é melhor compreendida como uma livre pensadora herética, tão crédula quanto os racionalistas da época, que buscavam na cabala e no ocultismo um suposto conhecimento antigo e verdadeiro, proibido pela Igreja Católica (um assunto que já vimos ao discutir Francis Bacon). Se ela tinha esse perfil, então por que ela fez questão de mudar de religião e perder um trono? A interessante tese de Susanna Åkerman em Christina of Sweden and her Circle é que a rainha tinha plano teológico-político sustentado pelas credulidades da época. Cristina era louca por poder e nunca desistiu de conquistar uma coroa – nem que fosse a coroa sueca, quando seu primo morreu e seus planos mais ao sul foram frustrados.

Quando ainda estava na Suécia, Cristina negociava secretamente com a Espanha por meio de jesuítas. Não à toa, foi em terreno espanhol que ela se converteu ao catolicismo. Seu projeto no início era ganhar uma coroa em Flandres ou Nápoles, ambos domínio espanhol. Quando Cristina viu que a Espanha não iria lhe dar nenhuma regência (na verdade, a Espanha queria que ela ficasse na Suécia e se casasse com um católico), passou secretamente para o lado da França e incitou os franceses a invadirem Nápoles com o fito de dar-lhe a coroa da ilha. Em resumo, Cristina se converteu ao catolicismo porque tinha ambições maiores do que o que o mundo protestante poderia lhe oferecer. Ela tinha ambições universalistas limitadas pelo luteranismo. E para ver que ambições seriam essas, é preciso olhar para o messianismo marrano, ou seja, o messianismo dos judeus portugueses mais ou menos cristianizados.

Quando Cristina abdica, ela se muda para a casa de um rabino na Antuérpia, Países Baixos Espanhóis, e deixa na mão de banqueiros judeus as suas rendas, para que se multipliquem. Qual seria o interesse dos judeus nessa rainha sem trono? Dado o seu perfil intelectual, “se a intenção de Cristina era ascender como uma regente católica liberal em Flandres ou, quando isso falhou, em Nápoles, então os anseios dos judeus e dos intelectuais por um novo espaço para o pensamento livre na Europa (de um tipo que eles sabiam que existia em Amsterdã) não eram mais só um sonho” (Åkerman, 223-4). Uma Amsterdã católica em Nápoles era o que Cristina ambicionava junto com os judeus. Se ocultistas faziam profecias a dedo para manipular políticos, é bem possível que a jovem rainha, órfã de pai e filha e louca, tenha sido teleguiada desde antes da abdicação.

Após a abdicação, sabe-se que de três figuras messiânicas rondando Cristina: La Peyrère, Menasseh Ben Israel e Antonio Vieira. O primeiro era um cristão novo francês criado como calvinista de provável origem portuguesa (pois Peyrère é Pereira afrancesado). Em 1654, na condição de secretário do Príncipe Condé, que aspirava ao trono da França, La Peyrère se muda para uma casa anexa à da residência de Cristina. Sua obra mais famosa é Prae-Adamitae, impressa em 1655 com dinheiro da recém-católica Cristina. Nela, afirma que Adão é ancestral apenas dos judeus, que a lei mosaica se aplica somente a eles, e que os judeus têm uma relação com Deus diferente dos gentios – que descendem de outros homens mais velhos que Adão, os pré-adamitas. O livro enfureceu tanto católicos quanto protestantes e em 1656, teoricamente arrependido, La Peyrère segue os passos de sua patrona e converte-se ao catolicismo.

O rabino português Menasseh Ben Israel, nascido Manoel Dias Soeiro, morava em Amsterdã, e é famoso por ter negociado com Oliver Cromwell a permissão para os judeus constituírem comunidades na Inglaterra (de modo que, espalhando-se ainda mais pela terra, acelerassem a vinda do Messias). Outra atividade sua era a de proselitismo judaico para o público cristão. Ele traduziu o Talmude para o espanhol (terá incluído partes ofensivas a Jesus?) e redigiu a curiosa obra El Conciliador, que “compila 210 fontes hebraicas, e 54 fontes gregas, latinas, espanholas e portuguesas para mostrar que as supostas inconsistências da Bíblia podem ser esclarecidas com a exegese correta. Autoridades como Eurípides e Virgílio, Platão e Aristóteles, Agostinho, Alberto Magno e Duns Scotus são citadas junto com o Zohar e o Midrash, Maimônides e Leão Hebreu, Gabirol e Nachmânides, Paulo de Burgos e Nicolau de Lyra, Isaac Luria e Moisés Cordovero. Como a simples extensão dessa lista de cabalistas, filósofos e poetas gregos e judeus indica, o trabalho é uma tentativa gigantesca de aproximar os pensamentos filosóficos cristão e judeu no problema da interpretação bíblica. Lastreado no pensamento judaico tradicional, o trabalho também introduz métodos cabalistas e projeções apocalípticas. El Conciliador deveria ser uma ponte entre o mundo judaico e mundo cristão.” (Åkerman, p. 185) Sabem esses neopentecostais cheios das profecias judaizantes? Pois é. Menasseh Ben Israel era acessado como um repositório de conhecimento bíblico especialmente por calvinistas, já que residia em Amsterdã e existia essa busca por uma autoridade não-católica. Seria conveniente uma pesquisa que descobrisse o quanto da teologia da Bíblia Scofield não se lastreia nessa obra de 1632.

O jesuíta Antonio Vieira, como aponta Ronaldo Vainfas no seu livro Antônio Vieira, era de provável origem judaica do lado materno. Ele não teve um papel muito especial conhecido na vida política de Cristina. No entanto, foi um importante sinal de status ela conseguir que ele fosse o seu confessor em Roma, já que ele era o orador predileto das celebridades do período.

Do trio, quem teve maior importância direta foi Peyrère. Outra obra controversa sua é Du rappel des juifs (1643), onde ele pretende instaurar uma monarquia universal sediada na Terra Santa. O Príncipe Condé se tornará Rei da França, derrotará os turcos, devolverá os judeus à Terra Santa e governará o mundo de lá. Aparentemente, Peyrère seguia a obra Le Thresor des propheties de l’univers (1547) de um cabalista cristão chamado Guillaume Postel (1510-1581), segundo o qual há dois Messias: Cristo, o messias universal, e um descendente do rei da França, que seria o messias político e particularista esperado pelos judeus. Essa obra estava disponível na Antuérpia, e com Cristina, Israel Ben Menasseh provavelmente conheceu Peyrère.

Agora vamos a Vieira, o imperador da língua portuguesa. Um artigo muito útil é “Antonio Veira, Menasseh Ben Israel et le Cinquième Empire”, de A. J. Saraiva. É bem sabido que Vieira teve inúmeros problemas com a Inquisição, e que o gênio da retórica não era bom da bola. Por exemplo, um processo teve início após ele escrever para o Bispo do Japão que D. João IV iria ressuscitar. Para piorar, em vez de renegar as próprias ideias (o que era o normal), Vieira trata de convencer os inquisidores de que ele está certo e a Igreja está errada. O fato de ele ter escapado só mostra o tamanho do seu poder político.

Pois bem, graças a essa extravagância, as ideias heréticas de Vieira são bem conhecidas, e no artigo supracitado Saraiva convence de que ele estava repetindo Menasseh Ben Israel, que ele mesmo contou aos inquisidores ser seu interlocutor, e o esquema messiânico do Rappel des juifs. As duas questões importantes aprendidas com Menasseh Ben Israel eram: 1) a das tribos perdidas e 2) a natureza do Messias. Os judeus acreditavam que as tribos perdidas de Israel estavam escondidas, e em 1644 nosso rabino tornou conhecida a “descoberta” de que os índios da América do Sul eram, na verdade, judeus perdidos (será por isso que Vieira defendia tanto?). O fato de terem aparecido indicava a aproximação do Milênio, e Vieira repetia uma história totalmente fictícia do Rio Sabático, inventada pelo rabino. Quanto ao Messias, o termo designa duas coisas diferentes: o dos Cristãos e o dos judeus, sendo este último o homem que libertará os judeus do cativeiro e os reconduzirá à Terra Santa. Enquanto Cristo é espiritual e universal, o messias judaico é terreno e particularista (referente aos judeus). Assim, se D. João IV ressuscitasse, enfrentasse os turcos e conduzisse os judeus à Terra Santa, ele seria o Messias dos judeus, e daria início ao Milênio. Nele, uma nova religião surgiria, que superaria a Igreja do mesmo jeito que a Igreja superou a Sinagoga. Seria uma nova religião universal para um novo reino universal.

Deixemos os detalhes das crenças de Vieira para outro momento, para não nos alongarmos demais. O que eu queria destacar aqui é que o sionismo cristão tal como o conhecemos tem precedentes nítidos no século XVII, e que Menasseh Ben Israel é uma personalidade chave. Houve essa tentativa de criar uma nova Amsterdã católica no Mediterrâneo, e, com Vieira, houve uma notória tentativa de manter ou restaurar uma nova Amsterdã calvinista no Nordeste brasileiro. Ambos os projetos eram opostos ao Império Espanhol, e davam-se em meio à Guerra dos Trinta Anos e à Guerra de Restauração (que se sucedeu ao fim da União Ibérica).

Seria Menasseh Ben Israel um gênio geopolítico do quilate do sionista Henry Kissinger? Convém abandonarmos o vício do século XX de explicar o mundo somente por causas materialistas e buscarmos pelas origens intelectuais/espirituais de uma ideologia messiânica bélica que parece estar ativa e exitosa pelo menos desde o século XVII.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

By awarding its peace prize to Trump’s favorite Venezuelan opposition figure, pro-war coup plotter Maria Corina Machado, the Nobel Committee contravened the principles enshrined in its founding documents, as well as Swedish law, Julian Assange alleged in an explosive brief reviewed by The Grayzone.

The Swedish government violated its own laws by awarding the Nobel Peace Prize to Venezuelan opposition figure Maria Corina Machado, according to an explosive legal brief filed by Julian Assange, the Wikileaks co-founder and former political prisoner who was hounded across the globe, confined in harsh conditions, and subjected to physical and psychological torment over the course of a decade by the US and its allies.

The Nobel committee’s decision to award Machado the Peace Prize — and the 11 million Swedish Kroner ($1.18 million USD) reward which accompanies it — means that “there is a real risk that funds derived from Nobel’s endowment have been or will be… diverted from their charitable purpose to facilitate aggression, crimes against humanity, and war crimes,” Assange stated.

The Wikileaks founder pointed to the “ample public statements… showing that the U.S. government and María Corina Machado have exploited the authority of the prize to provide them with a casus moralis for war,” adding that the explicitly stated purpose of the war sought by Machado and her wealthy Latin American backers would be “installing her by force in order to plunder $1.7 trillion in Venezuelan oil and other resources.”

The Nobel Foundation stands accused of a number of violations of Swedish criminal law, including breach of trust, misappropriation and gross misappropriation, conspiracy, crimes against international law, as well as financing of aggression, facilitation of war crimes and crimes against humanity, and breaching Sweden’s stated obligations under the Rome Statute, to which Stockholm says it is “deeply committed.”

Under Swedish law, “Alfred Nobel’s endowment for peace cannot be spent on the promotion of war,” Assange noted. “Nor can it be used as a tool in foreign military intervention. Venezuela, whatever the status of its political system, is no exception.”

By granting Nobel funds to Machado, Assange argues that the Committee is effectively financing “a conspiracy to murder civilians, to violate national sovereignty using military force…” By refusing to end payments, “they flagrantly violate Nobel’s will and clearly cross the threshold into criminality,” he alleged. The Wikileaks co-founder seeks the “immediate freezing of all remaining funds and a full criminal investigation” into Committee members who awarded the prize.

The Nobel Prizes were established in 1901 according to Swedish inventor Alfred Nobel’s last will and testament, which was later incorporated into the Swedish and Norwegian legal systems. The Peace Prize, which is meant to be bestowed on the figure who has contributed most to “fraternity between nations,” the “abolition or reduction of standing armies,” and “the holding and promotion of peace congresses,” has served as a cornerstone of Scandinavian soft power ever since.

Since its inception, however, the prize was marred by controversy due to the violent legacy of its recipients, and the political ambitions of its Norwegian sponsors. In the case of one of the Prize’s first winners, US President Theodore Roosevelt, the Norwegian Nobel Committee was criticized at the time for overlooking the American statesman’s naked warmongering in Latin America in order to curry favor with the nascent US empire. The New York Times sardonically observed that “a broad smile illuminated the face of the globe when the prize was awarded … to the most warlike citizen of these United States.”

The same dynamic is at play in the Caribbean once again, according to Assange, as the Nobel Committee crowns a Venezuelan politician best known for her unhinged appeals for foreign military intervention and her dedication of her Nobel victory to US President Donald Trump.

As Assange explained, Trump’s massive buildup of US military forces off the coast of Venezuela “has already committed undeniable war crimes, including the lethal targeting of civilian boats and survivors at sea, which has killed at least 95 people.”

“The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights labeled these U.S. coastal strikes against civilian boats “extrajudicial executions,” the Wikileaks co-founder wrote. And the “principal architect of this aggression” was none other than Trump’s Secretary of State Marco Rubio, who “nominated María Corina Machado for the peace prize.”

Norwegian Nobel judges tied to influential Venezuelan regime change lobbyist

The awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to a figure as clearly unqualified as Machado – and in apparent violation of Swedish law – raised questions about whether the Committee had been influenced by powerful outside interests. Machado’s nomination for the prize by the US Secretary of State had an undeniable impact on the decision, as the Nobel ceremony serves as a central channel of Norwegian soft power. But inside Oslo, a political powerbroker determined to return to power in his family’s native Venezuela may have also played a role in swinging votes for Machado.

He is Thor Halvorssen Jr., the son of a CIA asset and wealthy Venezuelan aristocrat who held positions in neoliberal Venezuelan governments before the election of Hugo Chavez. Halvorssen is also the first cousin of Leopoldo Lopez, the author of several military coups against Chavez and Maduro, and the founder of the US government-sponsored Popular Will party which has traditionally led the way for the radical opposition.

As the founder of the Oslo Freedom Forum, a self-proclaimed human rights group which openly advocates for toppling governments targeted by the West, Halvorssen presides over a network of Western-backed regime change activists. At the 2024 Oslo Freedom Forum, Halvorssen played host to Machado, who clamored for Maduro’s removal through a video link-up from Venezuela, where she was supposedly “in hiding.” This year’s Forum featured Machado’s top advisor, the Spain-based Pedro Uchuruttu, as well as her daughter, Ana Corina Sosa. When the Nobel Committee awarded Machado with its peace prize in October, the Oslo Freedom Forum issued a press release celebrating the decision for “chang[ing] the dynamics” in Venezuela.

The Norway-based Fritt Ord Foundation is a key link between Halvorssen’s Oslo Freedom Forum and leaders of the Nobel Committee. The Oslo Freedom Forum declares on its website that Fritt Ord “was among the first to endorse” it. While providing funding to Halvorssen’s regime change outfit, Fritt Ord awarded Jorgen Watne Frydnes, the Norwegian Nobel Committee Chair, with its 2021 Freedom of Expression Tribute. During his speech awarding the Nobel Prize to Machado, Frydnes likened the right-wing coup plotter to Nelson Mandela. With geriatric members of the Norwegian royal family seated just a few feet away, he went on to call for Maduro to step down and allow Machado to preside over a “democratic” transition.

Frydnes also happens to be the former director of the Norwegian Helsinki Committee, a think tank focused on supporting the Ukraine proxy war, which is a formal partner and supporter of Halvorssen’s Oslo Freedom Forum.

Among the five judges who awarded Machado her prize was Kristin Clemet, a Norwegian politician who was also awarded the Fritt Ord Freedom of Expression Tribute in 2017. Clemet is the managing director of a liberal Norwegian think tank called Civita which officially partners with and supports Halvorssen’s Oslo Freedom Forum.

Who’s behind Nobel insider gambling scheme?

Even before she had officially received the award, Machado’s entourage drew accusations of corruption and illegal enrichment after a handful of insiders seemingly used advanced knowledge of her imminent win to rake in close to $100,000 on the Polymarket betting site.

The odds of Machado winning surged from 3.75% to 72.8% just hours before the Nobel Committee officially informed Machado of her victory. One unusually prescient bettor won $65,000 gambling on the Venezuelan opposition figure. “It seems we have been prey to a criminal actor who wants to earn money on our information,” said Kristian Berg Harpviken, the head of the Nobel Institute.

Months later, The Nobel committee still has yet to conclude its investigation into the corruption scandal. As of publication, the committee did not respond to a request for comment by The Grayzone.

For what promotes itself as the world’s premiere peacemaking institution, it may be too late to undo the damage wrought by giving the Nobel Prize to an avowed champion of violent regime change.

“Using her elevated position as the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize, Machado may well have” already “tipped the balance in favor of war,” Assange concluded.

Original article:  thegrayzone.com

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Igor Maté

The Tidö parties’ decision to block the questioning of Migration Minister Johan Forssell (M) in the Social Insurance Committee is nothing less than crossing the Rubicon. In a democracy, openness and free discussion are not optional – they are the very core of the system. If a governing bloc decides to close the door to such scrutiny, for whatever reason, it is acting in an anti-democratic manner.

Sweden’s centuries-old tradition of openness – anchored in our principle of public access to information – is not a matter of political taste. It is a constitutional cornerstone. To turn away from it is to turn away from what it means to be Swedish in a political-democratic sense.

This point becomes even sharper when considering Sweden’s role in Europe. Just yesterday, the Swedish government vigorously defended the principle of the rule of law within the EU – a stance deserving of recognition and support, as this principle is crucial for the Union’s integrity.

But external credibility is always strengthened by internal consistency. If Sweden demands that others live up to democratic norms, we ourselves must avoid even the slightest shadow of failing to do so. Limiting legitimate parliamentary scrutiny not only risks accusations of double standards – it risks eroding the democratic identity that has long been one of Sweden’s proudest traditions.

And this is not just a solemn principle for textbooks or formal speeches. The risks are written in leaked data, weakened alliances, and open doors for hostile actors. They directly concern our national security, our foreign policy credibility, and the resilience of our digital defenses.

This is also not a private family matter. It concerns the minister’s official duties, because even indirect connections between his minor son and extremist movements can create vulnerabilities with potential consequences for national security. Whether the child was exploited, manipulated, or involuntarily involved is not the point. The mere possibility that secret information may have been disclosed – even by mistake – must be taken with the utmost seriousness. To dismiss the question is to dismiss Sweden’s security.

The timing could not be more sensitive. The government’s credentials in the security arena are already severely damaged. The embarrassing story of the Prime Minister’s former national security advisor – so absurd it could belong in Monty Python, were the stakes not deadly serious – exposed astonishing lapses in judgment.

Add to this the recent cyberattacks that have hit strategic companies like Volvo and SAS, as well as regional and municipal databases, compromising sensitive personal data for up to 15 percent of Sweden’s population. In such a climate, it is reckless to suppress parliamentary scrutiny of a minister with potential vulnerabilities.

The argument that the opposition would use the minister’s son as a “political bludgeon” is a smokescreen. The issue is not the child. The issue is the minister’s office, the government’s integrity, and the nation’s security. Refusing even to allow questions to be asked breeds suspicion, not trust.

By blocking this questioning, the Tidö parties are undermining not only the Riksdag but the very principle of openness upon which modern Sweden has been built. Anything less than full transparency weakens both Sweden’s democratic identity and the credibility that gives our country its moral authority at home and abroad.

Democracy means letting in the light – always.

Original article: Dagens Nyheter

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Turkey’s position in the new war preparations dubbed as the “European security architecture” is growing stronger both economically and strategically. More and more Turkish companies are developing projects with European partners, filling gunpowder, and selling equipment. All, of course, “under NATO’s watch”…

The Nordic Defence Cooperation (NORDEFCO) – formed by Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway, and Sweden – is taking new steps to “strengthen national defense capacities.”

Within this framework, a facility will be established particularly at the Elling plant in Denmark to fill explosives, primarily for 155mm artillery shells. At this site, both conventional and new-generation high-explosive materials such as TNT, IMX-101, and IMX-104 will be filled. The facility will operate with “high automation” and use advanced technology in ammunition production.

However, the main driver behind this need for “advanced technology” is not innovation per se, but the increasing demand for military support and ammunition supply to Ukraine.

To revive its domestic ammunition production at the Elling plant, the Danish government partnered with the Norway-based defense company Nammo.

This is exactly where Turkey comes into play. Nammo, tasked with handling the production processes of this mission, turned its eyes to Turkey and signed a contract with Turkish defense company Repkon.

According to the agreement, the facility that will carry out the ammunition filling will be established by Repkon. Its ‘operating principle’ is minimal human labor, high automation.

A lesser-known Turkish company

Although not as well-known as Baykar, Repkon has recently signed contracts to establish ammunition production lines with countries such as the U.S., Germany, Spain, Ukraine, Pakistan, and Azerbaijan. It is one of the leading firms particularly in explosive filling technologies. The company has also recently acquired Bowas, a firm active in Austria, Italy, and Switzerland.

Bowas is also one of the expert firms in high-precision metal forming technologies. It operates not only in defense but also in the automotive, aerospace, and oil industries.

What sets the company apart is that despite operating for many years and making significant international investments – especially in the U.S. – as a “private company,” it has rarely come under the spotlight.

Despite its low-profile status, Repkon is one of the rare companies in the world capable of managing the entire process – from metal part production to explosive manufacturing and filling operations – under one roof.

To understand the scale of Repkon’s “successes,” let’s go back to last year. Following a global surge in demand for 155mm artillery shells due to the Russia-Ukraine war, the U.S. Department of Defense decided to establish a new production line in Texas – and awarded the contract to Repkon.

Repkon USA is expected to meet 30% of the U.S. demand for 155mm artillery shells. Additionally, reports have emerged that Repkon will build a TNT production plant in Kentucky with an investment of $435 million.

In other words, a significant portion of the ammunition used in U.S. military operations around the world – particularly in shipments to Ukraine – is being prepared by the Turkish company Repkon.

Where do we know Nammo from?

Back to the beginning. Nammo (Nordic Ammunition Company), which signed the deal with Repkon, is a Norway-Finland defense and aerospace firm established in 1998 through the merger of Norway’s Raufoss, Finland’s Patria, and Sweden’s Celsius AB ammunition operations. The company is 50% owned by the Norwegian Ministry of Trade, Industry and Fisheries, and the remaining 50% by Patria, which is itself 50.1% owned by the Finnish state.

This multinational company based in the Baltics and Northern Europe produces small, medium, and large caliber military ammunition, rocket motors, shoulder-launched weapon systems, demilitarization services, and mobile munitions destruction tools.

Nammo CEO Morten Brandtzæg is a defense industry boss who has publicly criticized European politicians for “still having a peacetime mentality,” advocating more openly for war readiness.

Brandtzæg even went further by calling for a European version of the U.S. Defense Production Act – which gives the president authority to prioritize defense-related contracts:

“In times of crisis, should defense producers in Europe have the right to priority in acquiring production equipment? In the U.S., this is legally possible – but in Europe, it’s not regulated.”

Close ties with Israel

Naturally, this type of arms dealing also intersects with Israel. Nammo’s ties with the Israeli military were first revealed during Operation Cast Lead in 2008.

In the attacks that killed 1,133 people, injured more than 4,000, and displaced tens of thousands in Gaza, it was revealed that Nammo Talley, Nammo’s U.S. subsidiary based in Arizona, sold 28,000 M72 LAW (light anti-tank weapons) to the Israeli military. The deal, which included weapon parts and training missiles, amounted to 600 million Norwegian kroner.

Nammo-manufactured ammunition frequently resurfaces in discussions of Israel’s current attacks on Gaza.

“We didn’t sell it – those we sold to did”

Regarding the use of its ammunition in Gaza, the company defends itself by saying, “We didn’t sell it – those we sold to did.” Although Nammo is partly owned by the Norwegian government, it operates through numerous subsidiaries that are subject to the laws of various countries.

Nammo’s communications director Thorstein Korsvold told the Norwegian press:

“The weapons in question were produced in the U.S. and are subject to American law. Nammo sold these weapons to the U.S. military about 10 to 15 years ago.”

Production in line with NATO standards

This indirect path in arms sales also applies to the company’s relations with NATO. Although Nammo has no official ties with NATO, its products are manufactured to NATO standards. This is directly linked to its active role in Ukraine.

Last year, the Norwegian government approved a technology transfer to allow Nammo to produce 155mm NATO-standard howitzer ammunition in Ukraine. In continuation of this agreement, another deal signed four months ago (March 2025) marked the first time that ammunition produced in Ukraine was registered with a NATO NSN (NATO Stock Number).

Why is Europe suddenly praising Turkey?

In recent months, European officials have made notable remarks about Turkey’s potential role in European defense.

NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte emphasized deep cooperation with Turkey.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk called on Turkey to “take on the highest level of joint responsibility for peace in Ukraine and regional stability,” adding, “We are ready for defense cooperation.”

The Financial Times wrote that Turkey’s defense industry “could become a central player in European defense.”

Estonian Foreign Minister Margus Tsahkna described Turkey as a “decisive partner for European security” at a NATO meeting in Antalya.

There are concrete reasons behind these and similar statements emphasizing Turkey’s role in European defense:

1. The U.S. and Europe are experiencing serious difficulties in supplying ammunition to Ukraine; the need for “fresh blood” in military terms is more pressing than ever.
2. The wavering stance of the Donald Trump administration in the U.S. regarding Ukraine is forcing European politicians to seek defense alternatives – naturally elevating Turkey’s prominence.

The region most emphasized in the European defense discourse is the Baltics and Northern Europe. Expecting that Russia may “attempt to invade Europe” after Ukraine, European leaders are preparing their armies and citizens for a “long-awaited great war.”

Thus, in the context of urgent challenges like ammunition supply and production – seen as a priority in the fight against Russia – Repkon’s selection is due not only to the company’s “industry-leading” expertise and “long-standing” experience, but also to the increasing role of Turkey and Turkish companies.

Although Turkey pursues a policy of balance in the Russia-Ukraine war and has taken on a mediating role diplomatically, it’s clear that many Turkish firms – especially Baykar – are striving to secure a significant position both during the war and in Ukraine’s anticipated post-war “reconstruction” process.

Turkey’s place in the new war preparations called the “European security architecture” is strengthening economically and strategically. Every day, more Turkish companies are developing projects with European partners, filling gunpowder, and selling equipment. All, of course, “under NATO’s watch”…

As for those turning to “democratic Europe” for a solution to Turkey’s domestic political crises – they face a painful period of waiting for much longer.

This infographic shows the countries which get their electricity in the most and least carbon-intensive ways. 

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

[This is part 5 of a 6-part series on Denmark and its support for the U.S. empire. See Parts I, II, III, and IV. —Editors]

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

Part V: War Costs and Profits

When Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen met with President Donald Trump, December 2019, Trump was threatening less support for NATO and European conflicts if they did not use 2% of their Gross Domestic Product (GDP) for defense. What defines “defense” is at issue herein since Denmark, at least, could not meet 2% without using funds for the current war in Ukraine-Russia.

Nearly all liberal, neo-liberal, and most conservative Europeans fear that Trump could win the upcoming election and would stop funding the war. Leaders, such as Frederiksen, EU Commissioner, Germany’s conservative-right leader Ursula von der Leyen, and Annalena Baerboch, former leader of Germany’s Green party, and current Foreign Affairs Minister, push for greater military might, even an EU army, in case Trump would follow through. Some European leaders, such as Poland’s PM Andrzej Duda, suggest EU should have its own nuclear weapons.

Apparently, Green warrior Baerboch is not bothered about military-war pollution to the earth, sea and waters—nor are environment activists, such as Greta Thunberg. The world’s military are the greatest of polluters even when not at war. The U.S. military alone is the polluter No. 1. It “emits more than entire industrialized nations like Portugal and Denmark, yet evades scrutiny.” The U.S. military has a “carbon footprint larger than any other institution on earth.”

President Volodymyr Zelensky meets International Working Group members on the Environmental Consequences of War in Ukraine, including Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg, Swedish ex-minister Margot Wallström, Vice-President of the European Parliament Heidi Gautala, and former Irish President Mary Robinson, June 29, 2023. [Source: firstpost.com]

Baerboch and other “green” leaders, such as social democrat Frederiken, were in the lead to establish a special EU Ukraine Fund, in March 2023. This measure assures that Ukraine would have $9 billion to cover the war-torn country’s budget deficit and keep its economy running.

I have written to several ministries to find answers to how much money is being spent for Ukraine-Russia war, and how that matches with the famous 2% Gross Domestic Product (GDP).

Denmark’s Foreign Ministry reported, May 9, 2024, $7.4 billion in military support directly to Ukraine, and $700,000 in civilian aid since the start of the war.

(Germany’s DW reported $9.36 billion, as I wrote in the first article.)

The Defense Ministry press chief, Morten Kaus, replied that Denmark made NATO’s commitment for 2% of GDP in 2023, doubling 2016 expenditures. This year 2.37% has been spent or allocated.

Denmark’s GDP in 2023 was ca. $400 billion. Two percent for “defense” would be $8 billion. Denmark’s 2024 expected GDP should be ca. $410 billion, and “defense” ca. $8.2 billion.

The Defense Ministry agrees with me that the Defense budget for 2023 was $4.5 billion and in 2024 is $5.42 billion.

According to what Morten Kaus wrote regarding outlays, it appears that without spending huge sums (costs of weaponry) for the war in Ukraine that Denmark would not meet the U.S. requirement of using 2% of GDP for “defense.”

Morten Kaus replied, August 27, that I was mixing pears and bananas, yet he basically had the same sums that I had found. Defense budget, 2024, $5.4 billion plus $760,000 grant; military support in the EU Ukraine Fund of $2.26 billion, plus “a number of other expenses.”

That sum without “other expenses” is $8.4 billion, which is 2%, thus meeting the requirement. Kaus concluded: “Overall, Denmark reports defense expenditures of $10.28 billion, which corresponds to 2.37% of GDP. Kaus cites NATO’s latest report.

That leaves a difference of $1.88 billion, which must have come from other budgets or from the large surplus of 2023 ($13.87 billion) to make the difference.

I realize that all these statistics are not uniform and are confusing. My main point is that Denmark is at the top of NATO countries with its military-war budgets and surpasses U.S. goals regardless of where they take the money to pay for defense and war. Still Denmark needs to be at war to meet its “defense” budget of 2% GDP. The Defense Ministry press chief Kaus did not reply to my point.

With Trump now president, Frederiksen could still dance with him as a favorite NATO ally if he wishes that. Frederiksen is otherwise quite busy now trying to show Greenlanders that she loves them and will no longer treat them as her underlings.

Frederiksen is still a Social Democrat but shares power with the other two parties. During Trump’s first presidency, Frederiksen’s Social Democrats ruled alone. She had offended Trump by saying that his bid to buy Greenland—a semi-autonomous colony where the U.S. secretly placed atomic bombs—was “absurd.” Trump replied that due to her “nasty” remark he would not travel to Denmark. Instead, they med in London at a NATO conference.

As I outlined in my first article in this series, Frederiksen recalled that following that disagreement the two “can count on one another” and they “swing well together”, and, she still “has a good relation with Trump.”

She reminded her constituents, and Trump across the Atlantic, that she increased Denmark’s defense budget to over the two percent that Trump had demanded of all NATO countries. She added that Trump speaks directly, and her Danish government “is ready for that. For example, with continuing to support Ukraine in its war with Russia.”

”We also intend to lean quite heavily into this, because with all the turmoil in the world, the transatlantic ties are absolutely crucial.”

Overall Military Expenditures

The Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG, also known as the Ramstein group) is an alliance of 57 countries (all 32 NATO members and 25 other countries) and the European Union supporting Ukraine by sending military equipment and money.

Since January 2022 until March 2024, Western nations, mainly, have pledged more than $380 billion in aid to Ukraine, including nearly $118 billion in direct military aid from individual countries. U.S. “donated” $52 billion as of May 2024, and appropriated $113 billion. That brings total U.S. military donations to $165 billion (or $175 bn, according to the Council on Foreign Relations.

The EU established another fund, European Peace Facility, which has acquired $6.24 billion to spend on military elements for Ukraine. It pledges another $5.57 billion. I don’t know if that sum is included in the figures above.

The list of equipment from bullets to bombs is longer than this series entirety. From hundreds of millions rounds of ammunition and artillery rounds to about 100 fighter jets, thousands of tanks and other armored vehicles, and missiles-rockets-drones galore.

The first of 65 F-16 jets pledged have been delivered to Ukraine. Other jet types are also being sent. [Source: nyheader.tv2.dk]

According to The New York Times, Ukraine spent $64.8 billion to its military just in 2023. “That accounted for 58 percent of the government’s overall spending last year and 37 percent of the country’s gross domestic product. Only seven other countries spent more on military and defense costs than Ukraine in 2023, analysts found.”

How much of Ukraine’s military expenses are directly related to the war is not stated. In 2021, before the war, its military budget was just under $6 billion. Two years later that sum represented under 10% of what was spent on military.

[Source: wsj.com]

What has Russia spent? In February 2024, the Pentagon estimated $211 billion in total costs. Russia has not reported publicly any figures. On top of that, enemy sanctions are astronomical.

“On 1 March 2022, the French finance minister Bruno Le Maire said the total amount of Russian assets being frozen by sanctions amounted to $1 trillion.” The frozen funds are being used by the West to support Ukraine.

When the war began, Russia’s Central Bank holdings in foreign-exchange reserves amounted to $630 billion. Had the government been planning to invade Ukraine, as U.S./NATO claimed for months that it would, they would have moved those assets to their own banks.

Besides government sanctions and donations, hundreds of corporations make sanctions and donations, as do churches, civic organizations and individuals, on and on. It is impossible for me to find total costs of this war after many hours over several days research, but it is reaching trillions.

Now that most NATO countries have reached the required two percent of GDP for “defense”, its leadership is gearing to increase the quota to three percent.

Finland, Sweden, Norway, Iceland Costs for Ukraine Proxy War

The first Danish woman prime minister was Social Democrat Helle Thorning Schmidt (2011-15). Her enthusiasm for war included offering President Barack Obama her military might for “regime change” in Syria. She seemed disappointed that a full-scale war to remove Bashar al-Assad had been averted when Syria turned over all its chemical weapons for destruction to the U.S., at the gullible encouragement of President Vladimir Putin.

War lovers Barack Obama and Helle Thorning Schmidt share a laugh. [Source: mitindo.it]

“Denmark is one of those countries that deliver most. We are at the level with Americans, and in that way we also consider Denmark a strong, active and very solidarity NATO land,” PM Schmidt declared on September 2, 2014.

Barack Obama seemed to echo Schmidt when he welcomed Denmark’s next prime minister, Lars Loekke Rasmussen, and the other four Nordic leaders, to a State Dinner on May 13, 2016.

Obama and Lars Loekke Rasmussen in the Oval Office. [Source: commons.wikimedia.org]

Finland and Sweden had remained out of NATO until this war. Most Western progressives and many leftists, even most communist parties accuse Russia of committing a war crime for invading Ukraine. This pushed almost all neutral Scandinavians to join the U.S. war machine. While it is evident that the military incursion did influence many voters, the reality is also that most Finnish and Swedish politicians have wanted to be in the Western war club for a long time. The Obama presidential state dinner shows that.

Finland and Sweden leaders were so impressed by the dinner that they signed an agreement to end their neutrality and, in effect, join NATO. Sweden signed a “Host Country Agreement with NATO” giving the war alliance rights to military troops and exercises in Sweden and even the right to war on Swedish territory “if a crisis” warrants it. Finland signed a similar agreement.

Following the dinner, Denmark’s Foreign Minister, Kristian Jensen, made no bones about Denmark’s total loyalty: “In relationship to Syria our goal is to remove Assad, as one of the worst dictators in the world at this time.”

In 2016, only 27% of Finns supported joining NATO. In 2012, only 17% of Swedes so desired. Yet Sweden’s politicians prepared for a NATO future by assisting U.S. Middle East war with military training for pro-U.S. Kurdish and some Iraqis. Polls in 2023-4 showed 63% Swedes and 80% Finns supported joining the NATO war machine.

Fifteen countries have recently signed Defense Cooperation Agreements. Finland’s agreement grants Washington access to 15 of its military bases for U.S. forces and allows it to bring defense equipment, supplies, and materials to Finland.

Antony Blinken in signing ceremony for Finish defense pact that will allow U.S. soldiers ability to be stationed on Finnish soil. [Source: fi.usembassy]

The vote on Sweden’s defense pact was preceded by a heated debate, with critics warning the treaty could lead to the deployment of nuclear weapons and permanent U.S. military bases in Sweden. There were also protest demonstrations when Sweden signed a Memorandum of Understanding, September 4, 2014.

“On May 13th, Prime Minister Ulf Kristersson suggested in an interview that he would not rule out the possibility of hosting U.S. nuclear weapons on Swedish territory during wartime… This is a significant decision that Swedish citizens have not been consulted on.”

Ulf Kristersson [Source: thepneninsulaqstar.com]

In Finland, however, lawmakers took steps to assure that DCA treaty applies to national law about no nuclear weapons, whose import and transit is prohibited on Finnish territory. Nevertheless, we will not know if the Yankees will obey that law since no national inspections are permitted.

Even before the DCA agreements were signed several hundreds of U.S. troops engaged in military exercises in Sweden and Finland, April-May 2023.

“We are eager and excited to be able to train with and learn from our Nordic Allies, including NATO’ two newest members,” concludes Major General Greg Anderson, commanding general of the 10th Mountain Division. This is the first time U.S. troops trained in Finland.

“A NATO headquarters will be established in Mikkeli to oversee the military operations, reporting directly to the alliance’s headquarters in Norfolk, on the US East Coast…Finland joined NATO in 2023, ending a 75-year period of neutrality. As a result, NATO’s shared border with Russia doubled, stretching to 2,600 kilometers.” [author’s emphasis]

“September 2024, it became known that the Rusich sabotage and assault reconnaissance group would guard the border along with the FSB. Rusich is a Russian neo-Nazi military organization, known for committing war crimes on the territory of Ukraine since 2014. The group’s leaders have been sanctioned by the U.S. and EU for ‘extreme cruelty’ during fighting in Ukraine…” according to the anti-Russian government Moscow Times.

How many enemy troops patrol at U.S. borders? How many guarding 2,600 kilometers of borders?

As of June 2024, Finland provided $2.4 billion military hardware, and $3.2 billion in civilian aid.

Sweden Expenditures

From neutrality overnight to the Yankees are coming to 17 military bases.

Since February 24, 2022 Sweden has sent military support amounting to $4.3 billion to Ukraine. It has appropriated an additional $2.5 billion each year 2024 to 2027.

These expenditures led to cut downs in public services, schools and the health sector. While no organizations support Russia directly, many groups and three left political parties (Left Party, Environment Party, Communist Party) protest NATO. Yet most people are passive, frightened by MSM demonizing President Putin as a dictator.

Norway Expenditures

During 2022, Norway used $420,000 in military support and $1.5 billion per year since. An additional $1.65 billion for civilian aid. What they used for destroying Nord Stream Pipelines is unknown.

Iceland Expenditures

Iceland has donated $220,000 through NATO and the International Ukrainian Fund for ammunition, telecommunications, fuel trucks and military training.

With the new DCA agreements, U.S.-ARME now has access to 41 military bases in Scandinavia, 15 of them at the Artic to assure that Russia cannot compete for whatever riches, especially fossil fuels, that can be found there. Sweden=17; Finland=15; Norway=4; Denmark=3; Greenland=1; Iceland=1. That is for starters.

The latest figures on how many bases US-ARME has in the world has grown from 800 to 918 in 98 countries, according to U.S.’s largest peace organization, World Beyond War.

[Source: youtube.com]

How many military bases has Russia outside of its territory? Wikipedia says 21—10 bases and 11 military facilities, such as radar posts. Most of them are in former Soviet Union Republics. None of them anywhere near the U.S. (China has one in Djibouti, Africa to prevent ship raiders.)

“Ukraine must win. Russia must be defeated,” stated EU last April. To reach that goal, “Western military support to Ukraine needs to reach 100 billion euros [$110 billion] annually. Western democracies should use 0.25% of their GDP for military help for Ukraine.”

The only objection came from the right-wing PM of Hungary, Viktor Orbán. Nevertheless, he backed down to allow it to pass—as in all other occasions when Orbán objects to EU and U.S./NATO military lust, such as letting Finland and especially Sweden enter NATO.

Ukrainian Refugees Are Also War Costs

Add to those direct sums of weaponry and money, Scandinavia (as well as all of Europe, The U.S. Commonwealth countries, and elsewhere) spends untold billions caring for several million Ukrainian refugees—at least 6.5 million abroad, and up to 8 million internally displaced out of 38 million population.

Scandinavia: Ukrainian refugees receive the same benefits as permanent residents: economic aid, schooling, health care, jobs. These figures come from searching each government’s records.
Norway=70,000 (June 2024) 11,000 at work
Finland=45,000 (June 2024)
Denmark=44,262 (June 2024) 11,000 at work
Sweden=42,000 (June 2024)
Iceland=4, 000 (June 2024)

2022 Nordic population statistics show:

Norway=5.425 million (about 1.5% Ukrainians)
Finland=5,548 million (about .08% Ukrainians)
Denmark=5,873 million (about .075% Ukrainians)
Sweden=10,452 million) about .04% Ukrainians)
Iceland=376,250 (about 1.1% Ukrainians

War Profits

Mine remover at Denmark’s Industry weapons arms fair, August 2024. 200 firms represented and 12,000 participants. [Source: nyheder.tv2.dk]

“There is money in war,” headlines TV2 media.

A report by a Danish research organization, IRIS, reported recently that Denmark weapons industry has rapidly grown to include 500 firms producing parts for weapons, mainly for “defense” industry and government “defense” ministries. All are private, and 25 produce 97% of the products.

After the first year of war, Denmark’s el industry quadrupled its earnings from $600 million to $3 billion.

AP Moeller-Maersk shipping company always profits from U.S. wars but this one tops all records. The first year of the war, its profits were $30 billion—highest every—compared with $4 billion in 2021. The company pays only about 4% in taxes.

[Source: dr.dk]

Other industries lose profits due to inflation, lack of parts and raw materials. I couldn’t find figures for the medicine industry, which surely profits incredibly, nor for its growing weapons industry.

However, the Danish government is bent on buying 8 to 10 more F-35A on top of its 27, even though most of them have not arrived. More profit for Lockeed-Martin, which has sold 990F-35s as of March 2024.

F-35s in various stages of production by Lockheed Martin at Air Force Plant 4 in Fort Worth, Texas. [Source: defensenews.com]

Lockheed-Martin is the world’s largest military aircraft company. It sold $66 billion in 2022 netting $6 billion. In 2023, sales were $67.6 billion netting $6.9 billion. Its chairman, James Taiclet’s net worth is nearly $100 million. His salary-compensations, in 2021, amounted to $18,111,211.

UN Secretary-General António Guterres said it was “immoral” that major oil and gas companies are reporting “record profits” while prices soar. “The combined profits of the largest energy companies in the first quarter of [2022] are close to $100 billion,” he said, urging governments to “tax these excessive profits, and use the funds raised to support the most vulnerable people through these difficult times.”

The UN chief added that during 2022, 345 million people in 82 countries will be “acutely food insecure” or “at a high risk of food insecurity”, an increase of 47 million due to the impact of the war in Ukraine.

“War is ‘good for business,’ a recruiter for BlackRock” said in June 2023, “acknowledging how such turmoil can create opportunities for profit. BlackRock is one of the world’s largest asset management company and holds shares in several defense industry enterprises.”

The recruiter’s words exposed the fact that Ukraine has unfortunately become a gold mine for the U.S. military-industrial complex (MIC).

It is impossible to find statistics of all the profits that weapons industries are earning worldwide from this war. U.S. big five—Boeing, General Dynamics, Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon—earned $150 billion from Pentagon contracts in the first year of the war.

The Russia-Ukraine crisis is “a huge profit center for the big companies: Lockheed Martin and Raytheon and Boeing,” said William Hartung, a senior research fellow at the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft.

“The US MIC continues to profiteer from the Russia-Ukraine conflict as it heads into its second year. The country’s weapons and defense contractors reportedly received nearly half – $400 billion – of the $858 billion earmarked in the 2023 defense budget.”

“Nearly 700 former high-ranking government officials in the U.S. now work for defense contractors, including former generals and admirals, revealed a report released by the office of Senator Elizabeth Warren in April.”

The oil companies are going bananas with profits.

“The ‘super-majors’—BP, Shell, Chevron, Exxon Mobil and Total Energies—have made $281bn (£223bn) since the war began in February 2022, according to Global Witness.” The Guardian, February 19, 2024.

The rebuilding construction industry will earn more than billions after the war. Ukraine has already been forced to offer all its government assets and much of its bread-basket grain industry for U.S. and EU “loans” of military machinery.

Original article: CovertAction Magazine

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

Recientemente, tras la repercusión de la solicitud de información del Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos a la empresa sueca Saab sobre la venta de 36 aviones de combate Gripen a Brasil, el presidente Lula denunció que la acción del gobierno estadounidense era una “intromisión” en los asuntos brasileños y de Suecia.

En general, se ha subrayado que esta petición se debe al inconformismo de Washington porque Boeing perdió la competencia frente a Saab en la licitación de 2014 -aunque el acuerdo con los suecos era más favorable a Brasil, que garantizaba la transferencia de tecnología, a diferencia de los estadounidenses-.

Sin embargo, es posible profundizar en esta “intromisión” estadounidense en la industria aeronáutica brasileña. No se trata sólo de buscar un contrato para la venta de algunos aviones de combate. Embraer (que casi fue entregada a Boeing hace unos años) depende de componentes para fabricar aviones de combate. Incluso si intentara fabricarlo ella misma, necesitaría comprar el motor en Estados Unidos y el asiento eyectable en el Reino Unido, porque no tiene la tecnología para producirlos.

Como el Gripen tiene componentes de fabricación estadounidense y Estados Unidos no transfiere tecnología a Brasil, podrían controlar lo que podemos y no podemos comprar. Este es sólo uno de los miles de dispositivos que una potencia imperialista tiene a su disposición para impedir cualquier mínimo intento de desarrollo económico, industrial, científico, tecnológico y militar en un país como Brasil. Además, como Suecia es ahora miembro de la OTAN –y la OTAN es un instrumento de Estados Unidos–, los estadounidenses la mantienen como rehén en este embrollo creado por ellos.

Si el Departamento de Justicia de Estados Unidos continúa con las “investigaciones” sobre la compra del Gripen, probablemente logrará anularla, ya que tanto el vendedor como el comprador tienen el arma apuntando a sus cabezas. De los 36 cazas contratados, sólo ocho ya llegaron al país.

Policía del mundo, EE.UU. se pone en la posición de investigar (y juzgar) las negociaciones bilaterales de cualquier país basándose en su Ley de Prácticas Corruptas en el Extranjero (FCPA). Como informó Arthur Banzatto en su tesis doctoral, Brasil es el segundo país del mundo que sufre más acciones FCPA (24 acciones contra Brasil), sólo detrás de China (43).

China, como es bien sabido, lleva años inmersa en una guerra comercial con Estados Unidos y es considerada el gran enemigo del país por los responsables de conducir la política americana. Entonces, ¿qué podría significar esta cantidad de acciones contra Brasil?

Que también se nos considera enemigo de Estados Unidos. Y un enemigo que necesita ser neutralizado.

Henry Kissinger ya estaba preocupado por las asociaciones de Brasil con el “Sur Global” cuando se lanzó el Mercosur, ya que esto podría “generar una potencial disputa entre Brasil y Estados Unidos sobre el futuro del Cono Sur”. Si Washington ve peligro en el aumento del comercio brasileño con sus vecinos directos, ¿cómo no podría verlo también –y aún mayor– en el comercio con China, Rusia, África, Oriente Medio y Europa?

La necesidad de mantener a Brasil amaestrado para que no compita con los gigantescos monopolios empresariales estadounidenses que dominan el mundo fue una de las razones claves para el golpe de 2016, creado por el Departamento de Estado y el de Justicia. La Operación Lava Jato, que devastó la economía nacional, destruyó aún más nuestra industria y llevó a la quiebra (directa o indirectamente) a empresas que competían con el mercado estadounidense en las más diversas áreas, desde la construcción civil hasta producción y extracción de petróleo. En aquel momento ni siquiera Dolly y JBS se salvaron.

El sabotaje imperialista derrocó a Petrobras, arrestó al almirante Othon Pinheiro para socavar nuestro programa nuclear y boicoteó la expansión de nuestra plataforma continental. El Poder Judicial, el Ministerio Público y la Policía Federal, equipados e infiltrados por la CIA y el FBI (como lo corroboran las investigaciones del periodista Bob Fernandes) estuvieron en la vanguardia del esfuerzo estadounidense.

En 2016, los fiscales de la Operación “Zelotes”, instruidos por Estados Unidos, incluso acusaron al entonces expresidente Lula de interferir indebidamente a favor de Saab en la compra de aviones de combate contra su competidor Boeing. Ellos mismos acabaron reconociendo, entre ellos, que las acusaciones eran un engaño. La investigación fue archivada por Ricardo Lewandowski en 2022.

A pesar del regreso de Lula al gobierno, Brasil no se ha recuperado de nada de ese período desastroso. La Policía Federal sigue siendo una fuerza policial subsidiaria del FBI, la Policía Militar está equipada por Israel y el ejército (adoctrinado por Estados Unidos) depende de la tecnología de Starlink, propiedad de Elon Musk, que vigila el Amazonas. El Congreso sigue infestado de políticos que viajan a EE.UU. para recibir orientación sobre cómo actuar contra Brasil, EE.UU. sigue espiando al gobierno y a los ciudadanos brasileños, los periódicos son meras ramas de la prensa estadounidense, las redes sociales que utilizamos pertenecen a empresarios vinculados con el gobierno estadounidense (ver ahora al propio Musk), las ONG financiadas por los mayores multimillonarios estadounidenses se infiltran en los movimientos sociales y en el Ministerio de Medio Ambiente para presionar contra la explotación de nuestros recursos naturales y el dólar desestabiliza nuestra economía. Funcionarios estadounidenses vienen a Brasil para interferir en nuestros asuntos y, en el extranjero, exigir un alineamiento absoluto a cambio de un supuesto apoyo a un asiento permanente en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU.

Hay muchas posibilidades de una desestabilización completa de Brasil como la de 2012-2016, que culminó en un golpe de Estado. Y, de hecho, esta desestabilización ya ha comenzado. En primer lugar, porque naturalmente no es posible tener estabilidad en beneficio del pueblo brasileño como semicolonia. En segundo lugar, porque un gobierno con las características potenciales del de Lula no es aceptable para Estados Unidos. Tanto es así que Washington puso al gobierno contra la pared nada más asumir el cargo. Y ahora, con una Casa Blanca que ve a Lula como un aliado de “dictadores” y “terroristas”, esta presión podría resultar asfixiante.

Los estadounidenses “se sienten incómodos con la posición de Brasil en el conflicto con Rusia y China”, en evaluación del ex ministro Eugênio Aragão, que formó parte del gobierno depuesto por Estados Unidos hace ocho años. Cree que probarán un nuevo Lava Jato basándose en las investigaciones sobre la compra de aviones de combate suecos. “Esto es muy posible”, dijo a Carta Capital.

La asociación con los BRICS y la Nueva Ruta de la Seda es esencial para que Brasil reduzca la dependencia del imperialismo estadounidense, particularmente en las esferas militar, científica y tecnológica. Ya está muy claro que la “asociación” con Estados Unidos y los países de la OTAN es una trampa que atrapa a Brasil en un barrio de esclavos – o en la picota. China, Rusia, Bielorrusia, Irán e India son socios que pueden satisfacer las necesidades inmediatas de importar materiales, transferir tecnología y ayudarnos a ser autosuficientes.

Sin embargo, una reorganización de la política interna es esencial para hacer posible cualquier intento más audaz en el área externa. No es posible buscar una mayor independencia mientras se mantienen los excesos de los banqueros y los recortes de gastos, incluso en áreas como la educación, como quiere la burguesía vasalla.