Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

(Click on the image to enlarge)

Segue nostro Telegram.

Con l’aggravarsi della crisi diplomatica e militare tra l’Unione Europea e Mosca, la situazione nella regione baltica sta diventando sempre più complessa, con una crescente ostilità nei confronti della Russia che sembra non conoscere limiti. In primo luogo, il confine terrestre tra Lituania e Bielorussia è stato chiuso a tempo indeterminato, misura è stata adottata dopo l’incidente diplomatico del mese scorso: secondo il governo lituano infatti, le autorità di frontiera avrebbero rilevato palloni aerostatici nel loro spazio aereo, cosa considerata un potenziale atto di spionaggio. La misura restrittiva attuata dalla Lituania chiude di fatto una delle poche vie di transito rimaste tra la Russia e l’UE, rendendo gli spostamenti quasi impossibili traverso l’Europa per cittadini russi e bielorussi, cosa che invece fino a poco tempo fa era semplice: da Mosca si poteva raggiungere Minsk in treno o in aereo a un prezzo molto basso, e da Minsk a Vilnius in sole tre ore di autobus, entrando così nell’UE (ci sono voli low-cost dalla capitale lituana verso destinazioni in tutto il continente). Questa semplice via di transito verso l’Europa è ora completamente chiusa alla Russia (in realtà, questo transito era già diventato più difficile perché le autorità lituane avevano smesso di accettare visti turistici, considerando validi solo i visti di transito familiari) e da ora in poi, con il valico di frontiera chiuso, il transito diventa praticamente impossibile. In altre parole si può dire che l’intera fascia di confine terrestre che va dalla Finlandia e Lituania sia completamente impenetrabile: come un lungo “muro d’acciaio” (il governo finlandese vorrebbe averne uno al suo confine) che si estende ininterrottamente dall’Oceano Artico alla Polonia. Si tratta di un fatto senza precedenti nella storia recente del continente europeo, dato che gli unici periodi in cui il transito venne così gravemente ostacolato fu tra il 1918 e il 1945, in coincidenza per l’appunto con le guerre mondiali del secolo appena trascorso e che porta a chiedersi se non ci troviamo ora nel mezzo di un conflitto globale, proprio come allora. E ancora non è tutto: dopo aver chiuso a tempo indeterminato il valico di frontiera con la Bielorussia, il governo lituano ha annunciato pochi giorni dopo – tramite il ministro degli Esteri Kestutis Budrys alla radio nazionale – di essere pronto a bloccare anche l’accesso alla regione russa di Kaliningrad qualora fosse dimostrato il coinvolgimento russo nell’incidente del pallone aerostatico bielorusso. Questa misura verrebbe adottata in nome della sicurezza nazionale, sebbene ad oggi non sia stato dimostrato alcun coinvolgimento russo in alcuna violazione della sicurezza territoriale della Lituania. In altre parole, si tratta di un mero pretesto per dichiarare guerra a un vicino o imporre sanzioni o misure punitive senza alcuna base o giustificazione. Tutto ciò, di per sé, illustra il livello di ostilità anti-russa nella regione baltica, soprattutto considerando che misure come queste potrebbero mettere a repentaglio la sicurezza della regione di Kaliningrad. Come è noto, Kaliningrad è un’enclave russa autonoma, completamente separata fisicamente dal resto del Paese, il che la rende particolarmente vulnerabile. Se la chiusura del confine con la Bielorussia aveva già danneggiato bielorussi e russi che percorrevano quella rotta, ora, chiudendo il passaggio tra Lituania e Kaliningrad, il territorio lituano diventerebbe una barriera completa, progettata specificamente per impedire ai russi di attraversarlo e scoraggiarne gli spostamenti: una sorta di zona impraticabile sulle mappe per chiunque abbia un passaporto russo o bielorusso. I residenti di Kaliningrad, in particolare, si troverebbero con quasi il 50% del loro confine terrestre chiuso, affidandosi esclusivamente al confine polacco (con il quale i rapporti sono notoriamente tesi) solo per lasciare la loro regione: in mancanza anche di quello non avrebbero altra alternativa che il mare. Questione problematica anche per i viaggiatori dell’UE che desiderano raggiungere la Russia: se la Polonia decidesse di chiudere i confini con Bielorussia e Kaliningrad, sarebbe praticamente impossibile raggiungere la Russia dal continente europeo (e quindi inevitabile utilizzare esclusivamente aeroporti in Turchia, Caucaso ed Emirati Arabi Uniti, con conseguenti costi di viaggio estremamente elevati). Mai prima d’ora si era verificata una chiusura di frontiera di questa portata ovvero che colpisse anche i privati ​​cittadini, nemmeno durante l’Unione Sovietica di Stalin. Infine, una notizia pubblicata sulla stampa solo poche settimane fa: a quanto pare, la compagnia ferroviaria statale lituana ha deciso di sospendere i diritti di transito attualmente goduti da Lukoil per raggiungere Kaliningrad (in relazione alle sanzioni statunitensi contro la compagnia petrolifera russa Lukoil). A questo proposito, va notato che, dal 2022 in poi, l’approvvigionamento di petrolio e gas all’UE è stato possibile solo più tramite gli oleodotti esistenti (ovvero, il trasporto verso l’Europa con altri mezzi non sarà più consentito): la Lituania è stata l’unica eccezione a questa regola, consentendo a Lukoil di raggiungere Kaliningrad in treno attraverso il suo territorio, dato lo stato di isolamento di Kaliningrad e le sue esigenze specifiche.

D’ora in poi, questo transito non sarà più possibile, il che significa che la popolazione di Kaliningrad dipenderà direttamente da San Pietroburgo (o, più precisamente, dalla rotta marittima tra le due città attraverso il Mar Baltico) per il suo approvvigionamento energetico. Ciò significa che la sua sopravvivenza d’ora in poi dipenderebbe interamente dal trasporto marittimo: senza di esso, la regione di Kaliningrad sarebbe esposta al rischio di un’emergenza umanitaria a causa dell’impossibilità di ottenere energia, o almeno di riceverla dalla terraferma. Quest’ultimo punto solleva ironiche riflessioni sulle attuali dinamiche politiche ed economiche: da oltre un decennio, il motto americano è “Dobbiamo ridurre la nostra dipendenza energetica dalla Russia”, pertanto, è logico che l’UE smetta di acquistare gas russo e di conseguenza, anche i paesi confinanti con la Russia dovrebbero smettere di acquistarlo. Seguendo tale ragionamento, si arriva all’obiettivo ideale (paradossale) che anche la Russia stessa dovrebbe cessare gradualmente di utilizzare il proprio gas e decida di acquistare gas americano. Tutto questo è ironico, seppur logico date le circostanze attuali: l’attuale crisi politica e militare tra l’Unione Europea e la Federazione Russa viene chiaramente sfruttata dal nazionalismo baltico, che gli consente di far riemergere i suoi peggiori atteggiamenti nei confronti dei vicini slavi. Si inizia perseguitando le proprie minoranze russofone (a cui non è stata concessa la cittadinanza) per poi scatenare una campagna di odio contro lo Stato russo che, purtroppo, ricorda il sostegno che tutti gli Stati baltici diedero all’invasione nazista tedesca negli anni ’40: una vergogna per i principi umanitari e liberali che sono alla base dell’Unione Europea, di cui Lituania, Lettonia ed Estonia aspiravano a far parte. Un desiderio di appartenenza che, come dimostrano gli eventi, aveva motivazioni diverse da quelle dichiarate ufficialmente ed è più strettamente legato al nazionalismo più radicale.

Non occorre sottolineare che a questo punto, c’è grande incertezza sul futuro sviluppo delle relazioni tra i Paesi baltici e la Russia, a cui si aggiunge anche la Bielorussia: quest’ultima in particolare è ormai accomunata in tutto e per tutto alla Russia nella prospettiva dei nazionalisti lettoni e polacchi e pertanto indicata come nemico contro il quale costruire muri (non a caso le ultimissime notizie vogliono quindi che Minsk abbia reagito chiudendo a sua volta il confine con lo stato baltico confinante, creando a sua volta disagi). Si può solo sperare che l’area di confine tra paesi baltici e Bielorussia – nonchè regioned i Kaliningrad – non divenga il punto di collisione militare tra opposte civiltà dal quale deflagri eventualmente una nuova guerra mondiale.

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

The claim that Russia will continue to “invade” European countries after Ukraine has become one of the main factors shaping European politics. Despite the rise of “anti-West/NATO/EU” forces across the continent and the back-and-forth peace-seeking rhetoric from Donald Trump in the United States, mainstream European politics is continuing its war preparations at full speed. In this context, the Baltic states have taken yet another significant step.

Lithuania, Latvia, and Estonia have decided to jointly implement mass evacuation plans “to ensure civilian safety against Russia’s increasing threats.” On June 13 in Vilnius, the interior ministers of the three countries signed a formal memorandum initiating a broad cooperation that envisions coordination during cross-border evacuations and acceleration of information sharing.

Lithuania’s Interior Minister, Vladislav Kondratovič, described the plan as follows: “Clear procedures and rapid information flow are vital. This way, we can prevent panic before and during crises and quickly put measures into action.” Kondratovič emphasized that this alliance will play a critical role, especially in “large-scale evacuations.”

What’s in the evacuation plan?

The three countries will share information about their evacuation capacities, potential evacuation routes, and the condition of border crossings. This data will be used to ensure the safe and swift transfer of civilians. It was also underlined that people with disabilities, the elderly, children, and other vulnerable groups will receive special priority in evacuation procedures.

The core objective of the memorandum was outlined in the official statement as follows:

“Our main aim with this memorandum is to strengthen regional cooperation on mass evacuations among Baltic countries, prepare joint evacuation plans, and solve common challenges through rapid information sharing.”

As of now, there is no publicly announced budget for the signed memorandum; official sources have not provided any expenditure figures. However, looking at the past, Lithuania alone allocated approximately 285 million euros in 2024 for mass evacuation infrastructure, which provides a sense of the scale involved.

This is neither the first nor the last of such steps taken by the Baltic countries. Previously, serious war-preparedness plans were made—from distributing brochures on wartime preparedness to calculating the capacity of cemeteries across the region.

Moreover, at the end of last month, the interior and civil defense ministers of Belgium, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Finland, and Sweden gathered in Brussels to call for strengthened European civil defense capacity. They emphasized the need to be prepared not only for military threats, but also for internal security, stability, and resilience against various crises.

Before Zapad 2025

The decision by the Baltic countries came ahead of the “Zapad 2025” joint military exercise, set to take place between Russia and Belarus this September. Every time such drills occur, the West tends to describe them as “rehearsals for a new attack.”

Meanwhile, Belarus announced that the scale of the exercises would be significantly reduced and relocated. Although this move was allegedly intended to prevent further escalation with NATO, it seems insufficient to ease the tension.

Health sector preparing for war too

While military build-ups and broad-based war-preparedness rhetoric grow louder, Europe’s healthcare systems are also making preparations “against an attack from Russia.”

Some hospitals in Lithuania have taken precautions against electricity and water outages and built helicopter landing pads. In Estonia, ambulance teams have been equipped with bulletproof vests and satellite phones. Estonia is also making further preparations to bolster its emergency response.

In this context, Politico recently published a striking article on Eastern Europe’s war preparations. The article, “Europe’s border states prepare their hospitals for war,” by Giedre Peseckyte, contains notable statements that reveal how politics and society alike are adjusting to a war footing:

Estonia’s Deputy Health Board Chief Ragnar Vaiknemets: “We have bad neighbors here — Russia and Belarus. This is no longer a matter of ‘if they attack’ but ‘when they attack.’”

Poland’s Deputy Health Minister Katarzyna Kacperczyk: “For front-line countries, preparation is no longer optional; it’s a necessity.”

Norway’s Health Directorate chief Bjørn Guldvog: “Wartime needs can be three to five times those of peacetime.”

Doctor Rūdolfs Vilde of the Pauls Stradiņš Clinical University Hospital in Riga: “Most doctors who are parents do not want to leave their children behind and go to work in a war.”

Latvia’s Health Ministry Undersecretary Agnese Vaļuliene: “We must prepare for the worst, but we hope it will never happen.”

Yet, the most vulnerable first responders will face these threats with limited capacity.

Estonia, for instance, has only half the per-capita number of health workers as Germany. And there is no certainty they would even stay if war breaks out. A survey in Lithuania showed that 25% of healthcare personnel would flee in wartime, while 33% were undecided.

While Europe averages 11.5 intensive-care beds per 100,000 people, this number is insufficient under wartime conditions. Even at 150% capacity, most hospitals would only be able to cope for 24 to 48 hours. However, Eastern European hospitals are making plans to turn their basements into operating rooms.

Civilian participation on the rise

Alongside war preparations and evacuation planning, Baltic countries plan to conduct a large number of exercises this year. What stands out most is their emphasis on “civil defense,” with key themes such as casualty evacuation and emergency response training.

The big picture that emerges is this: The Baltic states do not believe that military forces alone will suffice in a war with Russia. Hence, they are constructing a new model of civil-military mobilization where civilians—from doctors and nurses to firefighters and hospital staff—are directly involved.

And what would happen if Russia were to actually attack? Would there still be a meaningful distinction between civilian and military casualties? That remains an open question.

The Baltic region has convinced itself that it will be the first target if a war breaks out on Europe’s eastern flank. According to its leaders, preparing for a possible Russian attack is no longer only a soldier’s duty; it is a duty for the entire society—every doctor, nurse, firefighter, hospital, and citizen.

In this environment, the Baltic countries are operating on a hypothetical threat. The idea that Russia will attack them after Ukraine remains a prophecy at present. But the ever-growing NATO military presence in the region might just turn that prophecy into a self-fulfilling one.

Segue nostro Telegram.

Il sistema elettrico di Estonia, Lettonia e Lituania faceva parte della rete elettrica BRELL (Bielorussia, Russia, Estonia, Lettonia, Lituania), istituita negli anni ’50 durante l’era dell’Unione Sovietica. Inizialmente costituito da 16 linee di trasmissione, questo sistema collegava gli Stati baltici alla Russia attraverso collegamenti terrestri diretti, linee attraverso la Bielorussia e cavi sottomarini nel Mar Baltico.

Anche dopo il crollo dell’Unione Sovietica, questi paesi, che hanno ottenuto l’indipendenza negli anni ’90, non sono stati in grado di controllare le proprie infrastrutture energetiche e hanno fatto affidamento su Mosca per la stabilizzazione della frequenza. La rete IPS/UPS, gestita dalla Russia, collegava anche gli Stati baltici alle exclave russe come Kaliningrad. Per anni, i politici europei hanno definito questi collegamenti come “dipendenza dalla Russia”.

Dopo lo scoppio della guerra tra Russia e Ucraina, tutte le forme di dipendenza dalla Russia, compresa l’elettricità, sono state gradualmente interrotte. Il passo finale di questo processo è stato compiuto durante una cerimonia tenutasi nella capitale lituana, Vilnius.

A partire dal 9 febbraio 2025, questi paesi si sono ufficialmente scollegati dalla rete elettrica dell’era sovietica e si sono completamente integrati nel sistema energetico europeo. Questa transizione verso il mercato interno dell’UE è stata finanziata con 1,23 miliardi di euro di sovvenzioni dell’UE, con il 75% dell’investimento coperto da fondi dell’UE. L’Ucraina e la Moldavia avevano compiuto un passo simile nel 2022 integrando i loro sistemi elettrici nella rete dell’UE.

Inizialmente, gli Stati baltici hanno mantenuto la propria frequenza elettrica sincronizzata con quella della Polonia. Dopo aver raggiunto la sincronizzazione di frequenza, si sono fusi in un sistema energetico condiviso con la Polonia. Ciò significa che i paesi baltici hanno prima dimostrato la loro capacità di controllare in modo indipendente la frequenza polacca e successivamente si sono allineati completamente con la Polonia per formare una rete energetica unificata.

Dopo aver completato con successo i test di regolazione della tensione e sincronizzazione, gli Stati baltici hanno dichiarato la loro “vittoria” in una cerimonia a Vilnius, alla presenza dei loro capi di Stato e della presidente della Commissione europea Ursula von der Leyen.

Il presidente lettone Edgars Rinkēvičs ha celebrato il risultato con le parole: “Ce l’abbiamo fatta”. Il leader lituano Gitanas Nausėda ha celebrato la transizione dicendo: “Addio Russia, addio Lenin”. Nel frattempo, i leader di Estonia e Polonia hanno sottolineato la spesa per la difesa e l’importanza geopolitica delle infrastrutture energetiche.

Tuttavia, i festeggiamenti sono stati offuscati da un improvviso aumento delle bollette dell’elettricità. Il giornalista lettone Arnis Kluinis, scrivendo per Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze (NRA), ha riferito che la bolletta dell’elettricità di una famiglia è passata da 17,68 euro a 22,06 euro, con un aumento del 24,8% solo nel primo giorno.

I funzionari avevano precedentemente assicurato al pubblico che l’impatto della sincronizzazione non avrebbe superato il 5%. Eppure, il vero aumento dei prezzi si è rivelato cinque volte superiore alla cifra prevista. Il ministro estone per il clima Yoko Alender ha affermato che il passaggio degli Stati baltici dalla Russia alla rete dell’UE costerà al consumatore medio un euro in più al mese, definendolo “un prezzo che vale la pena pagare per l’indipendenza e la sicurezza”.

Gli Stati baltici già devono fare i conti con alcuni dei prezzi dell’elettricità più alti d’Europa. Al 10 febbraio, la media regionale era di 146,83 euro/MWh. In netto contrasto, i prezzi dell’elettricità in Scandinavia erano in media di soli 8,83 euro/MWh, mettendo in luce la crescente disparità. La chiusura della centrale nucleare di Ignalina e il fallimento del progetto del cavo sottomarino Finlandia-Estonia hanno solo esacerbato il problema cronico dei costi energetici della regione.

Mentre l’“indipendenza energetica” degli Stati baltici viene salutata come un trionfo geopolitico, rischia di trasformarsi in un peso economico. Gli sviluppi del primo giorno indicano che potrebbe essere così.

Il successo dell’Europa in questa transizione dipenderà dalla sua capacità di bilanciare le misure di sicurezza che ritiene necessarie con la richiesta di stabilità economica dei suoi cittadini. Per ora, il significato ideologico della rottura con la Russia è direttamente collegato all’aumento delle bollette dell’elettricità che gli europei devono affrontare.

While the Baltic states’ “energy independence” is hailed as a geopolitical triumph, it risks turning into an economic burden.

Join us on Telegram, Twitter, and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

The electricity system of Estonia, Latvia, and Lithuania was part of the BRELL (Belarus, Russia, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania) power grid, established in the 1950s during the Soviet Union era. Initially consisting of 16 transmission lines, this system connected the Baltic states to Russia through direct land links, lines via Belarus, and underwater cables in the Baltic Sea.

Even after the Soviet Union collapsed, these countries, which gained independence in the 1990s, could not control their energy infrastructure and relied on Moscow for frequency stabilization. The IPS/UPS network, managed by Russia, also connected the Baltic states to Russian exclaves such as Kaliningrad. For years, European politicians have framed these connections as “dependency on Russia.”

Following the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine war, all forms of dependence on Russia, including electricity, were gradually severed. The final step in this process was taken at a ceremony held in the Lithuanian capital, Vilnius.

As of February 9, 2025, these countries have officially disconnected from their Soviet-era electricity grid and fully integrated into the European power system. This transition into the EU’s internal market was financed with €1.23 billion in EU grants, with 75% of the investment covered by EU funds. Ukraine and Moldova had taken a similar step in 2022 by integrating their electricity systems into the EU grid.

Initially, the Baltic states maintained their own electricity frequency in sync with Poland. After achieving frequency synchronization, they merged into a shared energy system with Poland. This means that the Baltic countries first demonstrated their ability to independently control the Polish frequency and later fully aligned with Poland to form a unified energy network.

After successfully completing voltage regulation and synchronization tests, the Baltic states declared their “victory” at a ceremony in Vilnius, attended by their heads of state and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Latvian President Edgars Rinkēvičs marked the achievement with the words, “We did it.” Lithuanian leader Gitanas Nausėda celebrated the transition, saying, “Farewell Russia, farewell Lenin.” Meanwhile, the leaders of Estonia and Poland emphasized defense spending and the geopolitical significance of energy infrastructure.

However, the celebrations were overshadowed by a sudden spike in electricity bills. Latvian journalist Arnis Kluinis, writing for Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze (NRA), reported that a household’s electricity bill had risen from €17.68 to €22.06—an increase of 24.8% on the first day alone.

Officials had previously assured the public that the impact of synchronization would not exceed 5%. Yet, the real price hike turned out to be five times the projected figure. Estonian Climate Minister Yoko Alender claimed that the Baltic states’ shift from Russia to the EU grid would cost the average consumer an additional €1 per month, calling it “a price worth paying for independence and security.”

The Baltic states already struggle with some of Europe’s highest electricity prices. As of February 10, the regional average stood at €146.83/MWh. In stark contrast, Scandinavia’s electricity prices averaged just €8.83/MWh, exposing the growing disparity. The shutdown of the Ignalina Nuclear Power Plant and the failure of the Finland-Estonia underwater cable project have only exacerbated the region’s chronic energy cost problem.

While the Baltic states’ “energy independence” is hailed as a geopolitical triumph, it risks turning into an economic burden. The first day’s developments indicate that this could be the case.

Europe’s success in this transition will depend on its ability to balance the security-driven measures it deems necessary with its citizens’ demand for economic stability. For now, the ideological significance of breaking away from Russia is directly linked to the rising electricity bills Europeans are facing.

Únete a nosotros en Telegram , Twitter  y VK .

Escríbenos: info@strategic-culture.su

El asedio a Rusia no se limita al ámbito militar, comercial, institucional o financiero. Antes de esto, se implementó otra barrera —mejor dicho, se «fomentó»—, con el fin de constituir una especie de «cordón sanitario» agresivo y activo, constituido por los Estados cuyas fronteras se comunican, por tierra o mar, con la Federación Rusa.

Este «cordón sanitario», conceptualizado a partir de lo que sabemos es el marco mental de las clases dominantes occidentales, tiene un carácter profundamente ideológico y pretende tocar, de manera repulsiva, los valores más profundos encarnados en la historia rusa del último siglo y, a través de esta conexión, provocar una relación antagónica caracterizada por un efecto de repulsión recíproca, impidiendo cualquier comunicación humana que pudiera establecerse entre las partes.

La fuerza soberana que reside en la cultura multinacional, multiétnica y multirreligiosa rusa, responsable, desde el principio, por su capacidad para aglutinar fuerzas que hicieron posible la derrota del nazifascismo durante la II Guerra Mundial, es también lo que separa las fuentes minerales, humanas, energéticas, entre otras, de las garras del capitalismo occidental y su impulso alimentado por la fase imperialista en la que se encuentra.

Si la brutalidad de una ideología como el nazifascismo encarnó, en la primera mitad del siglo XX, el combustible que alimentó la agresión contra la entonces patria soviética, fue su preservación y recuperación históricas —en un proceso de revisionismo y blanqueo sin precedentes— lo que ha hecho posible, ya en las primeras décadas del siglo XXI, su uso como munición para el llamado «cordón sanitario» alrededor de Rusia. Pasados cien años, la receta se repite, aunque con las claras limitaciones que le impone la desesperación.

¿Qué podría ser más antagónico y mutuamente repulsivo que el nazismo en contacto con lo que podría considerarse el «alma rusa» reestructurada según con los acontecimientos del siglo XX? ¿Qué imagen puede ser más vívida y carnal, en su brutalidad y violencia, y que, especialmente, trascienda la pesadilla sufrida por el pueblo ruso, a manos del terror nazi?

Los primeros en sufrir el efecto de este «cordón sanitario» fueron los ciudadanos de origen ruso que, tras el colapso de la URSS, acabaron en Estonia, Lituania o Letonia, y que hoy residen allí. Además de prohibir los medios de comunicación rusos, vulnerando su derecho a la opinión y a la información, basándose en una supuesta política de lucha contra la «propaganda del Kremlin» (algo que también se ve en toda la UE y fuera de las constituciones nacionales de diferentes países), Letonia incluso fomentó la eliminación de la enseñanza del idioma ruso en los planes de estudios escolares, lo que provocó la preocupación de los expertos en derechos humanos de la ONU con respecto a la protección de los derechos de las minorías étnicas. Ya quienes acusan a Rusia de no tenerlos en cuenta…

De acuerdo con este guión, el Kremlin se vale de la lengua rusa como arma, que luego utiliza como vehículo de su propaganda, perpetrada a través de los llamados «medios estatales», así adjetivados todos los medios que, financiados o no por el Ejecutivo ruso, no estén alineados con la narrativa occidental.

Lo que nunca mencionan es que, después de todo, el uso del ruso como vehículo de propaganda no será, como dicen, exclusivo de fuentes rusas, ya que la propia Letonia financia vehículos como Meduza, que, escribiendo en ruso, sólo pretenden transmitir información muy acorde con la narrativa occidental. Sin ser tan radical como Letonia a la hora de eliminar el idioma ruso de los planes de estudios escolares, Estonia es, sin embargo, un ejemplo de la destrucción de los monumentos alusivos a la victoria soviética sobre el nazismo. Principalmente bajo el mandato de Kaja Kallas, el proceso de eliminación de monumentos se aceleró, incluso siendo discutido en el marco europeo, proceso que incluyó la retirada del tanque soviético a las afueras de la ciudad de Narva. Según la propia Kaja Kallas, el tanque es un «arma criminal» —quizás su «crimen» haya sido derrotar a los nazis— «porque se mata a personas en Ucrania con ese mismo tipo de tanque».

Pero esta persecución a la cultura y a la memoria soviéticas —no sólo rusa— nos dice que la propagación de una lógica rusofóbica incorpora una dimensión que va más allá de la mera confrontación étnica, representada, por ejemplo, en la discusión sobre limitar la adquisición de bienes inmuebles a ciudadanos rusos en Letonia, propuesta planteada por las autoridades finlandesas. Quienes alegan que el pueblo ruso está oprimido, no parecen enterarse de este tipo de acciones.

La relación entre el enfrentamiento étnico con las poblaciones rusófona y rusa, con su pasado soviético y la memoria de la victoria sobre el nazifascismo, encuentra su origen en la ola de colaboracionismo y simpatía con la ideología nazique se produjo en estos países, por parte de una cierta camada de la población y de las clases dominantes, antes, al comienzo, y durante la II Guerra Mundial. Responsabilizar a la Federación de Rusia, como la única depositaria de la memoria histórica colectiva por la victoria del Ejército Rojo multinacional sobre las hordas nazis, tiende un puente entre la codicia por los vastos recursos que posee Rusia y la necesidad de encontrar bases ideológicas, teóricas, psicológicas y emocionales que justifiquen esta agresión.

En mi opinión, dicha justificación teórica e ideológica la proporcionan el neonazismo y la glorificación del pasado colaboracionista con las fuerzas de Hitler. La potencia de esta ideología anticomunista, racista y supremacista blanca, colocada en primer plano, combinada con el proceso de revisionismo histórico y el blanqueamiento del terror nazifascista, estabece un nexo entre pasado y presente, entre el anticomunismo que justificó la agresión contra la URSS y la rusofobia que sirve de excusa para su actual asedio.

Ahora, para impulsar ese «cordón sanitario» alrededor de la Federación Rusa, cuya función es impedir el contacto saludable entre Europa (Alemania, principalmente), Rusia, las repúblicas euroasiáticas y China, ha sido necesario recuperar el activo histórico que constituye la ideología nazi para Estados Unidos y las clases dominantes del Occidente colectivo. Como le sucede a cualesquier acervos, sólo se recuperan aquellos que ya existen per se. La recuperación del patrimonio histórico nazi es el resultado de un proceso más largo de preservación y revitalización de tal herencia.

Actualmente, cuando atestiguamos la glorificación de los «Hermanos del Bosque» —un grupo abiertamente anticomunista— surgido en los países bálticos e integrado por ex miembros de las Waffen-SS locales, que lucharon contra lo que denominaron como la «ocupación soviética», incluso después del final de la II Guerra Mundial, y siendo responsables de horribles crímenes contra civiles y policías soviéticos, operado con información de inteligencia occidental, o somos testigos del blanqueo y la entronización de organizaciones como el «Sonderkommando A» que, colaborando con las fuerzas nazis, y valiéndose de letones y lituanos, asesinaron a casi 250.000 judíos en Lituania, hasta 1944, descubrimos que la herencia histórica nazi está muy viva y más fuerte que nunca desde el final de la II Guerra Mundial.

Para hacer posible su resurgimiento y recuperación, ha sido necesario implementar todo un proceso de revisionismo, minimizando los daños y blanqueando sus crímenes. En Lituania, se homenajeó al general Povilas Plechavicius, que luchó junto a los nazis. En 2008, el parlamento lituano equiparólas ideologías comunista y nazi, lo que supuso una normalización y recuperación histórica del nazismo (frente a una demonización, como muchos defienden) y, en 2010, los tribunales lituanos declararon la esvástica «parte del patrimonio cultural del país», demostrando que la igualdad ideológica no es más que un proceso de recuperación histórica de dicho pasado.

El hecho es que, desde 1991, miles de comunistas han sido perseguidos en Lituania, mientras que se han permitido manifestaciones con símbolos nazis y consignas racistas. ¡Sintomático! Como decía Jean Pierre Faye en el prefacio del libro «El archipiélago de sangre», escrito por Chomsky y Herman, el acto de incluir al nazismo y al comunismo en el saco del «totalitarismo», le permitió a Estados Unidos apoyar a las fuerzas más regresivas, reaccionarias y tiránicas, siempre y cuando no afirmaran ser partidarios del «totalitarismo». Así, equiparando las ideologías comunista y nazi, lo cierto es que las autoridades lituanas, como hoy muchas otras en la Unión Europea de los «valores» y la «democracia», persiguen a los comunistas, pero toleran —por decir lo menos— las manifestaciones de la extrema derecha. Por cierto, la profusión de gobiernos abiertamente reaccionarios y racistas en la Unión Europea prueba, casi irrefutablemente, las razones que sirvieron de base para tal comparación. El hecho es que en todos estos países se persigue a los comunistas, mientras que a los nazis se los acepta. ¡Nada como la práctica como criterio para medir la verdad!

En el caso lusitano, un grupo como el «1143», alineado con las facciones más extremistas de Portugal y con personas que tienen un historial de persecución —y asesinato— de inmigrantes y minorías de cualquier tipo (comunistas, homosexuales, negros, asiáticos o musulmanes), en los principales medios de comunicación es caracterizado como un simple «grupo nacionalista». ¿Qué tendría esto que ver con el apoyo de André Ventura, del partido Chega, contra lo que denominó «inmigración descontrolada»? ¿Y por qué el mismo André Ventura, —en los medios que le dan voz y espacio, y los poderosos intereses que lo apoyan — no menciona que quienes contratan a inmigrantes son las empresas, que son asociaciones patronales que, junto con los gobiernos, piden la apertura de fronteras que, dado el caso, son los UBER que más explotan a la inmigración y que es la propia Unión Europea, a la que defiende André Ventura, la que fomenta, provoca y legitima toda la inmigración que vemos? ¿Y por qué no se oponen al turismo descontrolado que destruye a Lisboa, actividad en la que trabajan la mayoría de los inmigrantes?

Ahora bien, esta lógica racista, concatenada con el anticomunismo, pretende vincular a la Rusia contemporánea, como siendo la única depositaria del pasado soviético y en base a su demonización actual, justificar la agresión, el aislamiento y la opresión que hagan posible su saqueo —como sucediera con Boris Yeltsin,durante los terribles años 90 del siglo XX— encuentra un claro ejemplo en el consentimiento por parte de Meta (Facebook, Instagram, WhatsApp), para que sus usuarios expresen mensajes de odio contra los rusos.

Esta perspectiva rusofóbica, absolutamente inaceptable para una Europa que se autodenomina «de los valores», representa un pilar fundamental de la adhesión de estos países a la OTAN y sugiere qué mecanismos utiliza Estados Unidos para lograr que los países «elegidos» hagan de su adhesión a la Alianza Atlántica una cuestión de defensa ante Rusia, pero, sobre todo, una necesidad existencial. Y el nivel de extremismo implementado es tan grande que, basta oír en qué términos la élite que compone el régimen de Kiev habla de los rusos, sin hacer distinciones, para que nos demos cuenta de que el odio es indiscriminado, profundo, visceral, como sólo puede serlo algo irracional, como el racismo. Y la propia supervivencia de la OTAN depende de este odio irrazonable y animal.

Para preservarlo en el tiempo, recuperar y revitalizar el patrimonio histórico nazi, un país en concreto ha cumplido este papel como ninguno: ¡Canadá! Incluso hoy, Canadá se resiste a proporcionar las identidades de los 900 nazis fugitivos que encontraron allí su santuario.

En un artículo anterior expuse el verdadero museo viviente que son la Universidad de Alberta y la sociedad canadiense, para los fugitivos de los juicios de Nuremberg, especialmente los de la 14ª división de las Galitzia Waffen SS. Sin embargo, el legado canadiense, en este aspecto, va mucho más allá, habiéndose convertido este país en un refugio pacífico para científicos, soldados y otros fugitivos nazis.

Si bien en este país, entre 1985 y 1986, y luego de mucha presión política y popular, se realizó una investigación sobre el tema, en su momento llamada Comisión Deschênes, llegando incluso a recopilar nombres, lo cierto es que la labor dejó mucho que desear y se llevó a cabo para producir resultados que fueron, en el mejor de los casos, ambiguos.

La comisión no investigó materiales conservados en la Unión Soviética o en los países del Bloque del Este, por lo que pasó por alto pruebas cruciales encontradas allí. El juez Deschênes estableció condiciones estrictas para consultar pruebas de estos países, pero como la respuesta soviética a la consulta no llegó hasta junio de 1986, se consideró demasiado tarde para que la comisión viajara y examinara, lo que sugiere que el estudio de la realidad material posiblemente no estaba contemplado como el principal objetivo de dicho comité.

La comisión no investigó una lista de 38 nombres adicionales proporcionada al final de la averiguación, debido a lo que consideró limitaciones temporales; la investigación de una lista de 71 científicos y técnicos alemanes quedó incompleta; la segunda parte del informe final de la comisión, que contiene acusaciones contra personas específicas y recomendaciones sobre cómo proceder en ciertos casos, sigue siendo confidencial y no se ha hecho pública; una copia sin editar del informe de Alti Rodal a la Comisión Deschênes, que contiene relatos detallados de cómo los criminales de guerra entraron en Canadá y la responsabilidad del gobierno en su entrada, no ha sido publicada en su totalidad; los archivos del Departamento de Justicia y de la Real Policía Montada de Canadá, sobre los criminales de guerra nazis retenidos por esos organismos, no se han hecho públicos; no se examinaron pruebas de las actividades anteriores de miembros de la División Galitzia, en particular las que se referían a posibles crímenes de guerra cometidos en otras unidades de la policía alemana antes de unirse a la división; un estudio secreto realizado por la comisión encontró que las autoridades británicas y estadounidenses transportaron a colaboradores nazis a Canadá desde Europa del Este poco después de la II Guerra Mundial, sin informárselo al gobierno canadiense y con un escrutinio mínimo.

Incluso hoy en día, la retención de esta evidencia genera debates continuos sobre la exactitud e integridad del trabajo de la comisión, y muchos argumentan que, en cambio, el trabajo del citado comité ayudó a encubrir el registro histórico de los criminales de guerra nazis en Canadá. Parece que la Comisión Deschênes pretendía más bien blanquear el pasado que realmente evaluarlo y juzgar los crímenes cometidos.

Todo este dossier se reactivó durante la polémica sobre la recepción de Yaroslav Hunka en el parlamento canadiense. Las acusaciones de blanqueo se han multiplicado, lo que no es de extrañar teniendo en cuenta que fue esta misma comisión la que declaró inocentes de crímenes de guerra a los miembros de la División Galitzia de las Waffen SS, ya que, según ella, estos habían sido examinados cuando ingresaron al país.

Actualmente, después de toda esta presión, se argumenta que la divulgación completa del trabajo de la comisión, además de poder dejar marcas en la credibilidad del gobierno canadiense, también puede «ayudar a Rusia», ya que colabora en reforzar la narrativa del Kremlin sobre la «desnazificación». Ahora bien, no es algo que ya no se supiera; el problema es ingorar la verdad, además de demonizar a Rusia, desacreditar su versión de los hechos y justificar la continuación de la guerra.

Lo que demuestra esta realidad, más que nunca y, especialmente, cuando escuchamos a Blinken mencionar que Estados Unidos es un país ártico y que quiere formar, con Canadá y los países europeos bálticos, una organización para mantener esa región «libre de conflictos» (y este sería un buen momento para reírnos a carcajadas), es que Canadá no sólo ha constituido un importante «acervo museológico» para la preservación, protección y recuperación de los bienes nazis, sino que ahora también pasa a formar parte del «cordón sanitario» que EEUU promueve en todo el mundo en torno a Rusia. Todo esto también demuestra que Canadá no es más que una república bananera y un campo de retiro de activos humanos importantes para el imperialismo angloestadounidense.

Lo que nos enseña esta triste realidad es que el revisionismo histórico que pretendía comparar el comunismo con el nazismo no se propuso simplemente normalizar al segundo, e históricamente desactivar al primero, borrando la contribución de la URSS a la victoria aliada en la II Guerra Mundial; aspiraba a mucho más que eso. Su objetivo era crear una barrera repulsiva entre Rusia y los que serían, geográficamente, sus aliados naturales, los países europeos… Por coincidencia, hay que aclararle a quienes acusan a Putin de «fascista» y de «extrema derecha», que es la Europa de los «valores» y de la «democracia» la que ha optado por tomar partido por los nazis…

La recuperación del nazismo no sólo coloca a Rusia en el otro bando… ¡Nos pone a todos, los pueblos occidentales, al lado y bajo la influencia nazifascista!

This article will show you how much the Baltic states and Finland have been radicalized not realizing that they are fascist and follow the principles of Hitler’s National Socialism.

❗️Join us on Telegram, Twitter , and VK.

Contact us: info@strategic-culture.su

This article will survey how much the Baltic states and Finland have been radicalized, that they are fascists and follow the principles of Hitler’s National Socialism. The sinister development has serious implications for the entire European Union in its relations with Russia.

Ironically, the Baltic states and Finland proclaim to be democracies, not realizing that they conform to the principles of National Socialism as was preached by the German political party NSDAP (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei) led by Adolf Hitler in the 1930s and 1940s.

Recently, there was yet another incident, one of many, this time in Estonia, where in the town of Johvi, the monument of two SS veterans from the Second World War was taken out of the cellars of the museum, cleaned up, and put on display again.

Georg Sooden was a volunteer in the SS 20th Estonian Division (the Waffen-Grenadier-Division der SS). About 70,000 mostly volunteers fought in this battalion, mainly against the Soviet Red Army, notably in the battle of Krivasoo. Georg Sooden was killed in this battle as was his comrade Raul Jüriado also mentioned on the monument. A member of the Johvi council inaugurated the commemoration.

In the Western news media, there is hardly any talk about these kinds of incidents. Nor is there any criticism of the Baltic states’ routine apologetic argument that they were “forced” to fight for the Nazis.

However, the Germans are known for their accuracy in documenting everything. The archives attest that the SS battalions in the Baltic States (as in the Netherlands, Belgium, and France) consisted of volunteers.

In Estonia, around 70,000 men voluntarily joined the SS.

In Latvia, the 1st Latvia 15th Waffen Grenadier Division of the SS together with the 2nd Latvia 19th Waffen Grenadier Division consisted of 87,500 men.

Lithuania did not officially have a Waffen SS battalion but called itself the Lithuanian Territorial Defense Force. But most of them collaborated as policemen and carried out raids on Jews, Communists and dissidents. Almost all Jews of Lithuania were killed in the Second World War by Lithuanians, who carried out the executions. Lithuania is the southernmost of the Baltic states. During the Holocaust, about 90 percent of all Lithuanian Jews were murdered, one of the highest victim rates in Eastern Europe. The Netherlands had the highest victim rate of Western Europe.

In 2023, a BBC investigation on Lithuania (Dailymotion) found that almost all Lithuanians were involved in the Holocaust, and to this day it is not allowed to be talked about in public. Also, all the SS battalions mentioned were perpetrators in the siege of Leningrad (St Petersburg) and Operation Barbarossa in Russia, killing and murdering Russians, Jews, Communists and other Slavs.

Sinisterly, though, history is being rewritten to erase this horrific European complicity in the Nazi genocide. Latvia (and the other states as well) is trying to do this historical whitewash with the help of all kinds of European Union funds. Meanwhile, Latvia and the other Baltic states continue spewing anti-Russian hatred and concealing the horrendous genocidal crimes committed by their citizens during the Second World War in collaboration with the Nazi Third Reich.

The revisionism of historical crimes by the Baltic states took on urgency after the Soviet Union dissolved in 1991 and these gained nominal independence, later joining the European Union and NATO.

Finland is a different story. The Finns didn’t have such a big SS battalion during WWII, but since WWII the national politics have increasingly acquired a fascist attitude. Finnish politicians and citizens have adopted a hostile view toward Russia.

Recently, Finnish President Alexander Stubb spoke on CNN and stated: “I felt that there was a potential existential threat coming from Russia.” He provocatively said the “road to peace goes through the battlefield” and bragged that Finland has the highest population percentage in Europe who are willing to die for their fatherland.

Stubb also claims that Finland tried to cooperate with Russia after the Cold War (1991) but it didn’t work because Russia is not a “normal” state that respects international law.

In June 2023, Finland’s Minister for Economic Affairs apologized for appearing at a rally organized by NeoNazi groups; apologized too for making a joke about the number 88 which can mean “Heil Hitler” to right-wing extremists, and said that he condemns the Holocaust.

The NeoNazi party in Finland is called the Nordic Resistance Movement, which has many followers also in Sweden, Denmark, Norway and Iceland.

Furthermore, remarkably enough, Wikipedia states that their allies are the Ukrainian Azov battalion, which was associated with NeoNazism until 2022. The Western media and politicians airbrushed away Azov’s Nazi affiliation, and the group was given a new image falsely claiming the group had “rejected their Nazi ideology”.

A major player in the European Union is the biggest Russophobe Kaja Kallas, who recently was the prime minister of Estonia. She is due to become the EU’s foreign minister. It is alarming to think that a politician from Estonia, the country that recently erected a monument to SS Georg Sooden and his comrade, is now responsible for European foreign policy at a dangerous time of geopolitical conflict with Russia.

Kallas is notorious for her Russophobia and grew up with an immense hatred for Russia. Her mother was deported to Siberia, according to her Wikipedia page. She has German roots on her paternal side. Her father was prime minister of Estonia in the 1990s and an EU commissioner. She is not interested in striving for good neighborliness with Russia.

Thus, a toxic cocktail of hatred and revenge now imbues the European Union, amplifying the influence of fascism and belligerence in the Baltic states and Finland.

Also, the era of communism has never been closed in their minds, which is why such great traumas have arisen and this trauma has inflamed the rest of the European countries and infected them with hatred against Russia.

Shamelessly and without scruples, Kaja Kallas writes in the American magazine Foreign Affairs that there can only be peace when Putin is in jail. That is how far the hatred goes, and the so-called democracies in the European Union, such as the Netherlands, France and Germany, who speak of antisemitism at every opportunity, tolerate this woman and the Baltic states and call them democracies without regard to the terrible past and the present.

NeoNazis are once again marching through the streets, not only in the Baltic states and Finland, but through the streets of Kiev, Odessa and Lvov with burning torches spewing their hatred towards Russians, Jews, Arabs, Africans and all other foreigners. Just like in the Second World War, maybe even a degree worse.

The politicians and many civilians of the Baltic states and Finland are glorifying the Azov battalion that has thousands of deaths on their hands, killing the Russian population in Mariupol and other Donbass cities, towns and villages. They are supported by European politicians who now claim that they have been de-Nazified.

The truth is that de-Nazification only began in 2022 when Russia launched the Special Military Operation to save the Russian-speaking population in the Donbass from these fascist Nazi monsters who started a full-blown pogrom against them in 2014, supported by the U.S. and Europe.

The European Union sponsors NeoNazi legions such as the recently emerged Georgian Legion or the so-called Russian Liberation Army, all of which are probably deployed in the attack on the Kursk region. The head of the Russian Liberation Army is Denis Kapustin, promoted by Western media as a tough German NeoNazi who also had a Russian passport (revoked), a Russian-German who is considered influential in the right-wing extremist scene and radicalized in Germany. Years ago, he founded the NeoNazi fashion label “White Rex”, which, according to the German media, helped professionalize the NeoNazi martial arts scene throughout Europe. He was also a role model for the Azov battalion, whose tour was recently canceled in Europe after some media outrage.

❗️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

Yeah, darlin’ gonna make it happen
Take the world in a love embrace
Fire all of your guns at once
And explode into space

Steppenwolf, Born to be Wild, 1967

The world has got to be thankful to the deputy chairman of the Russian Security Council Dimitri Medvedev.   Paraphrasing that iconic Cold War era string of ads about a beer that refreshes the parts other beers cannot each, Medvedev refreshes those – sensitive – parts the Kremlin and the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, for diplomatic reasons, cannot reach.

As astonishing tectonic shifts keep turning geopolitics and geoeconomics upside down, and the Angel of History looks East while the United States, corroded from the inside, desperately clings to scraps of its dwindling Full Spectrum Dominance, Medvedev makes no bones about how much he enjoys “smoke and lighting”, not to mention “heavy metal thunder”.

Exhibit One is something for the ages. It deserves a full quote – complete with colorful English translation:

“Western politicians who have shat their pants and their mediocre generals in NATO have once again decided to scare us. They launched the largest military exercises since the Cold War.

These involve 90,000 soldiers from 31 countries of the Alliance and ‘almost block’ Sweden, about 50 warships, 80 aircraft, 1,100 ground combat vehicles, including 133 tanks.

Some stages are expected to take place in the most blatantly Russophobic and most disgusting countries to us, such as Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia, that is, in close proximity to Russia’s borders.

The NATO blabbers were afraid to directly say who these exercises are aimed against, and limited themselves to empty chatter about ‘practicing defense plans and deterring potential aggression from the nearest opponents’.

But it is quite obvious that this convulsion of flabby Western muscles is a warning to our country. It’s like they’re saying, shouldn’t we properly threaten Russia and show the Russian hedgehog a fat transgender European ass.

It turned out not scary, but very significant.

After all, if the Alliance itself decided to conduct exercises of this level, it means they are really afraid of something.

And even more so, they do not believe not only in victory but in any military successes of the rotten neo-Nazi regime in Kiev. Plus, of course, they are working out the anti-Russian agenda for domestic political purposes, consolidating their dissatisfied electorate.

Overall this is a very dangerous play with fire.

Significant forces have been assembled. And exercises of this scale have not been conducted since the last century. So they are a well-forgotten old thing.

We are not going to attack any country in this bloc. All reasonable people in the West understand this. But if they play too hard and encroach on the integrity of our country, they will instantly receive an adequate response.

This will mean only one thing – a big war, from which NATO will no longer turn away.

The same thing will happen if any NATO country begins to provide its airfields to Bandera’s supporters or quarters its troops with neo-Nazis. They will certainly become a legitimate target for our Armed Forces and will be mercilessly destroyed as enemies.

All those wearing helmets with NATO symbols, who today swaggeringly rattle their weapons not far from our borders should remember this”.

Humiliating defeat or Totalen Krieg

Heavy metal thunder Medvedev is complemented by a superb analysis by Rostislav Ishchenko, who I had the pleasure to meet in Moscow years ago.

These are two key takeaways:

1. “Today, the readiness of the armies of European NATO members for a real war is lower than that of the Russian army in the most difficult time ‘of the 90s’”.
2. Ishchenko neatly draws the West’s choice, “between recognition of a shameful defeat, with a defeat on the battlefield of NATO units proper, and the beginning with Russia of a full-fledged war, which the European armies cannot wage, and the Americans have no strength for, for they are going to engage in China.”

The inevitable conclusion: the whole U.S. architecture of “Russian containment” is “crumbling”.

Ishchenko correctly notes that “the West is not able to wage a proxy war against Russia beyond 2024” (Defense Minister Shoigu, on the record, already said last year that the SMO will end in 2025).

Ishchenko adds, “Even if they manage to hold out not only until the fall, but until December 2024 (which is very doubtful), the end of Ukraine is still near, and to replace them, the West was not able to prepare yet another one who wanted to die for the United States in a proxy war with Russia.”

Well, they are trying. Hard. For instance by regimenting a bunch of hyenas for the Three Seas scam. And by giving the CIA’s darling Budanov in Kiev free reign to stage serial terror attacks inside the Russian Federation.

Meanwhile, a confidential memo designed at the London School of Economics suggests close cooperation between the German government, USAID and the Friedrich Ebert Foundation to build a sort of “new Singapore in Kiev”: that is, a “reconstruction” profiting corporate Germany out of a low-wage hellhole.

Well, no one knows what sort of “Kiev” will survive, and in what form. So there won’t be any remixed “Singapore”.

There will be no compromise

German analyst Patrik Baab has offered a meticulous breakdown of the key facts underlying Medvedev’s outburst.

Of course he needs to quote NATO’s Stoltenberg, who has already elliptically confirmed, on the record, that this is not an “unprovoked” war of aggression – NATO in fact provoked it; moreover it’s a proxy war, essentially about NATO’s eastward expansion.

Baab also correctly acknowledges that after the peace negotiations in Istanbul in March/April 2022, imploded by U.S. and UK, there is zero trust in the Kremlin – and in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs – of collective West politicos.

Baab also refers to one of Sy Hersh’s Deep State sources:

“The war is over. Russia has won.”

Still, the key point – which does not escape Medvedev’s attention – is that “no concessions are to be expected in Washington. The military confrontation continues. The war has become a battle of attrition.” That ties in with Medvedev already making it explicit that Odessa, Dnipropetrovsk, Kharkov, Mykolaev and Kiev are “Russian cities.”

Hence, “a compromise is therefore de facto ruled out.”

Russia’s Security Council clearly understands how the strategic concept adopted by NATO at the 2022 summit in Madrid totally militarizes Europe. Baab: “It proposes multi domain warfighting against a nuclear-armed peer-competitor. In other words, nuclear war. It says: ‘NATO enlargement has been a historic success.’”

That’s the rhetoric parroted non-stop by Stoltenberg straight out of NATO’s think tank, the Atlantic Council.

Feeling the pulse in Moscow, in a series of in-depth exchanges, it becomes clear that the Kremlin is prepared for a nasty war of attrition that could last years – beyond the current Raging Twenties. As it stands, the song remains the same in Ukraine: a crossover of snail technique and the ineluctable meat grinder.

The endgame, as Baab clearly understands, is that “Putin is seeking a fundamental security agreement with the West.” Even as we all know it’s not gonna happen with Straussian neocons dictating policies in the Beltway, the facts on the – geoeconomic – ground are unmistakable: sanctioned-to-death Russia already surpassed Germany and the UK and is now the strongest economy in Europe.

It’s refreshing to see a German analyst quoting historian Emmanuel Todd (“WW III has already begun”) and crack Swiss military analyst Jacques Baud, who explained how there has been “a sophisticated philosophy of war in Russia since Soviet times”, including economic and political considerations.

Baab also refers to the inimitable Security Council’s Scientific Council stalwart Sergei Karaganov in an interview with Rossiyskaya Gazeta: “Russia has completed its European journey… The European and especially the German elites are in a state of historical failure. The foundation of their 500-year dominance – the military superiority on which the West’s economic, political, and cultural dominance was built – has been stripped away from them (…) The European Union is moving… slowly but surely towards disintegration. For this reason, European elites have shown a hostile attitude towards Russia for about 15 years. They need an external enemy.”

When in doubt, read Shelley

It’s now crystal clear how Washington is actively splitting the EU in favor of a rabidly Russophobic Vilnius-Warsaw-Kiev axis.

Meanwhile, the “no compromise” in Ukraine is deeply determined by geoeconomics: the EU desperately needs access to Ukraine’s lithium for the “decarbonization” scam; the vast mineral wealth; the rich black-earth soil (now mostly property of BackRock, Monsanto and co.); the sea routes (assuming Odessa does not revert to its status of “Russian city”); and most of all, the ultra-cheap workforce.

Whatever happens next, Baab’s diagnosis for the EU and Germany is gloomy: “The European Union has lost its central function”, and “historically, it has failed as a peace project.” After all now it’s the Washington-Vilnius-Warsaw-Kiev axis that “sets the tone.”

And it gets worse: “We are becoming not only the backyard of the United States, but also the backyard of Russia. The energy flows and container traffic, the economic centers are moving eastwards, forming along the Budapest-Moscow-Astana-Beijing axis.”

So as we crisscross Medvedev, Ishchenko and Baab, the inevitable conclusion is that the proxy war on country 404 will keep going on and on and on – in myriad levels. “Peace” negotiations are absolutely out of the question – certainly not before the November elections in the U.S..

Ishchenko understands how “this is a civilizational catastrophe” – perhaps not “the first since the fall of the Roman Empire”: after all, several civilizations collapsed across Eurasia since the 4^th century. What is blatantly clear is that the collective West as we know it is fast flirting with a one-way ticket to the dustbin of History.

And that brings us to the genius of Shelley encapsulated in one of the most devastating sonnets in the history of literature, Ozymandias, published in 1818:

I met a traveller from an antique land,
Who said—“Two vast and trunkless legs of stone
Stand in the desert. . . . Near them, on the sand,
Half sunk a shattered visage lies, whose frown,
And wrinkled lip, and sneer of cold command,
Tell that its sculptor well those passions read
Which yet survive, stamped on these lifeless things,
The hand that mocked them, and the heart that fed;
And on the pedestal, these words appear:
My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings;
Look on my Works, ye Mighty, and despair!
Nothing beside remains. Round the decay
Of that colossal Wreck, boundless and bare
The lone and level sands stretch far away.

As we keep searching for light in the darkness of insanity – complete with a genocide running 24/7 – we may visualize the pedestal standing in the middle of a vast desert, painted by Shelley with a couple of sublime alliterations, “boundless and bare” and “lone and level.”

This is all about a vast empty space mirroring a political black void: the only thing that matters is the blind obsession for Total Power, the “sneer of cold command” asserting the perpetuity of a hazy “rules-based international order”.

Oh yes, this a heavy metal thunder sonnet that outlasts Empires – including the “colossal wreck” vanishing in front of our eyes.