Ive here. Nothing describes the latest developments in Russia and the United States on Ukraine better than an unpleasant historical reference. After all, the U.S. Armed Forces do like to pursue ideas that the British deem unreasonable, rather than kick the tire stage, for example, man staring at goat.

Note that the EU, which will suffer the most collateral damage, still doesn’t seem to have a seat at the table, despite the Europeans’ parallel negotiations with Russia and Ukraine. January 26 from France 24:

Advisers to the heads of state of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany reiterated their commitment to maintaining a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine after talks in Paris on Wednesday. Negotiations to defuse the crisis come as the United States and NATO are responding in writing to Moscow’s raft of security demands in the region.

In a joint communiqué issued after eight hours of talks in Paris, representatives of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany supported “unconditional adherence to the ceasefire … regardless of differences on other issues related to the implementation of the Minsk agreement”.

The Minsk agreement, signed in September 2014, was unsuccessful in stopping fighting in eastern Ukraine. However, the four countries that make up the so-called Normandy format agree that the agreement forms the basis for any future resolution of the conflict.

Interestingly, The Times of Israel has a brand new story based on an interview with former CIA analyst and current TV writer and producer Joseph Weisberg. Weisberg is a former Russia hawk, so his current thinking is instructive. He believes that the United States has deceived Russia by promising NATO not to expand further eastward, while the United States has shown no sympathy for Russia, which is understandably sensitive to placing missiles on its doorstep. He believes negotiating and reducing economic sanctions will be more effective than brinkmanship. Weisberg also has very harsh words for so-called intelligence and espionage.

go through John HelmerHe is the longest-serving foreign correspondent in Russia and the only Western correspondent to directly command his own bureau, independent of a single country or commercial relationship. Helmer has also served as a professor of political science and an advisor to heads of government in Greece, the United States, and Asia. He was the first and only member of the U.S. presidential administration (Jimmy Carter) to gain a foothold in Russia.Originally Posted in dance with bears

During the U.S. invasion of Morocco and Algeria in 1943, en route Before the invasion of Italy, the Office of Strategic Services (OSS), then known as the CIA, came up with the donkey dung bomb to destroy the enemy. Since 2014, the CIA has come up with a modern equivalent – it’s called the Ukrainian bomb. The first was designed to kill the Germans. The second was designed to kill Russians. Neither of them, the donkey dung and the Ukrainian, were up to the mark.

Donkey Dung is the name and brainchild of Harvard professor Carlton Kuhn. In designing the U.S. version of the IED, Kuhn said that because donkey dung is more common on Morocco’s ground than rocks, bombs could be more effectively disguised as donkey dung.

The US did not fight any Germans in Morocco or Algeria. The U.S. invasion promised the Arabs their national sovereignty and independence—President Franklin D. Roosevelt made it clear—but it was an elaborate deception. These territories were returned to the French. After the U.S. invasion of Italy, then France, the natives were once again promised national sovereignty and independence, but it was also a U.S. deception. The territories were returned to those who accepted the terms of American occupation. To this day, they continue to surrender, but the terms have been modified in accordance with the American principles of collective security directed and administered by the United States. The North Atlantic Treaty Alliance (NATO) is the main organization implementing this program.

Between 1946 and 1990, half of the defeated Germans began to retreat to their original territory, the western half of Germany. Soviet troops defeated the Germans who invaded the Soviet Union and the east. Europe and drive them back to the Berlin checkpoint. Before Mikhail Gorbachev revised Soviet terms to accept Soviet withdrawal from East Germany, this was how collective security in Europe worked – two opposing coalition forces against each other, but prevented incoming attack by either party.

Gorbachev backed down on U.S. promises that NATO would not move forward. It was a promise that Gorbachev would be a fool to believe. He just has to ask Moroccans or Algerians if Americans keep their promises, and he’ll be told they don’t. He didn’t want to believe it. Before NATO invaded and bombed Serbia, his successor, Boris Yeltsin, was equally willing to believe in American deception. Both Gorbachev and Yeltsin believed they depended on the Americans to maintain power in Moscow.

Vladimir Putin tried to believe those promises until 2014, when the war for the US occupation of Russia’s borders officially began. At that border, the Russians could only retreat into Russian territory, as they did during the German invasion in 1941.Putin Announce There was no retreat from his speech to the Russian military corps last month. It marked the end of his compromise with advancing NATO forces and U.S. nuclear warheads.

In this development, the Russian Foreign Ministry suggested Two European treaties on the principle of indivisible security.This principle means that a country cannot and promises not to increase its military capabilities in a way that threatens the security of its neighbors in the same geopolitics spaceThe treaty also states that there will be no more donkey dung bombs – no more Ukrainian, Romanian, Polish and other nuclear-armed missiles within close range of the Russian capital, military command and control centers and land-based nuclear missile bases.

indivisible security principle, aka Russian self-defense now faces the principle of collective security, aka NATO’s forward defense, along a red line, runs south from the Baltic Sea, along the eastern border of Ukraine to the Black Sea, to Romania and other littoral countries including Turkey.On Thursday, the U.S. rejected indivisible security, so two drafts treatyIn a 90 Minutes radio interview in Moscow on Friday, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov explained why a clash of two security principles would not lead to a Russian retreat. *

The battle, now the last of the American Empire in Europe, began with the donkey dung bomb 79 years ago.

Lavrov’s speech shows that from the history of that period, from the destruction of Arab sovereignty, to the destruction of European sovereignty, and the near destruction of Russian sovereignty by Gorbachev and Yeltsin, the Russians have absorbed what they cannot now. Lessons. forget and they cannot retreat. There is no retreat – that is the lesson.

Lavrov’s text provides a comprehensive guide to what happens next.reading text full. In the air, it ran for less than an hour and a half??.

Source: https://mid.ru/

Lavrov ignored the timing. “I want to stress that we are currently working on the answers we have received,” he said. “We have outlined our initial estimates!” “We will be ready to respond. Recommendations on the response will be reported to the Russian President, who will make a decision. At this stage, we are still working out our course, including what I just mentioned. to the steps.”

“I expect to speak with Foreign Minister Lavrov in the coming days, after Moscow has had the opportunity to read the document and prepare to discuss next steps,” Blinken announced.

The Olympics in China begin on February 4 and end on February 20; President Putin’s re-election or succession campaign has begun and will end in January 2024, the next March polling day. In the two-year interval, the escalating campaign of U.S. pressure in Moscow is expected to continue; Russia’s sudden response must retain the initiative for twenty-four months. In the Kremlin, these measures are also political and personal survival measures.

“If the West doesn’t listen to reason, what should we do? The Russian president has said something,” Lavrov said on Friday. “If we try to reach agreement on mutually acceptable principles to ensure European security and fail to produce the desired results, we will respond with measures. When asked directly what those measures might be, he [Putin] Say: They can come in all shapes and sizes. He will make decisions based on recommendations made by our military. Of course, other departments will also be involved in drafting these proposals. “

Lavrov offers a Russian guide on what has been exhausted and cannot happen next:

1. NATO has fired its boltComparing Washington’s response to Brussels’ response, Lavrov said: “Compared to the NATO document, the US response is nothing but a model of diplomatic etiquette. NATO has sent us such an ideologically motivated The answer, it permeates its special role and special mission so much that I even feel a little embarrassed for the person who wrote these texts.” NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg will take over in September. Before that, all he had said was promoting the work of the arms industry, selling weapons to target Moscow; two weeks ago, Lavrov said Stoltenberg was “shaking the air.” The British candidate to succeed him, Baron Mark Sedwell, was the author of the first Novichok operation in March 2018 – he failed to neutralize Sergei Skripal, but managed to Blame it on Putin and cover up evidence of what happened.He and three female candidates for the position are reported to be professional russian haters.
2. The European Union (EU) has shined“I have no intention of discussing our partners on a personal level,” Lavrov noted, “although there is a lot to say.” Regarding EU foreign minister Josep Borrell, Lavrov said Friday that he has been “Instigating hysteria on the topic of escalation in Ukraine”. Two weeks ago, he said Borrell was “emotional and impolite.” Lavrov’s spokeswoman, Maria Zakharova, added: “There are two J. Borrells: one who speaks and the other who writes. Or a J. Borrell who speaks, but the others write for him. Neither in style, in language, in expressions used, these texts do not belong to one person. Obviously.”
3. The only negotiating partner is the United States, which has no capacity. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken, whom Lavrov has previously accused of “foaming at the mouth” and displaying “arrogance of the highest degree”; for Blinken’s psychoanalysis, read This. In current Russia negotiations, Defense Secretary General Lloyd Austin is represented by Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark Milley; Austin’s absence is unprecedented; Washington media does not explain. President Joseph Biden’s absence is of a different nature. Russian officials are careful to avoid commenting on evidence of the president’s condition. Biden’s political standing is getting weaker; now, Biden’s disapproval rate is almost as large as President Donald Trump’s:

Source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com

Source: https://www.realclearpolitics.com/

Russia’s calculation is that the United States will become increasingly tense and vulnerable internally in the next two years. War in Europe is not a vote winner for incumbent Democrats. Also, after five years of campaigning, the war on Russia has failed to prove its authenticity or value to Democrats’ vote against Trump.

Knowing what actions to take on collective security and indivisible security over the next 24 months range from impossible to impossible to arrive at this peace of mind. There is no point in reading mainstream media in the West, and alternative media in the UK or the US. Their reporting, analysis and commentary on Russia and the United States is either speculation or propaganda – “shaking the air” or “foaming at the mouth.”

When there is no retreat, words no longer matter. Only use force.

*Lavrov cited two agreements on indivisible security in the common European space which have been signed by all member states of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), including the Ukraine, the central Asian states, Russia, and US. Here they are -- the Istanbul Declaration of 1999;  and the Astana Declaration of 2010.  Paragraph 1 of the Astana declaration declares: “We, the Heads of State or Government of the 56 participating States of the OSCE, have assembled in Astana, eleven years after the last OSCE Summit in Istanbul, to recommit ourselves to the vision of a free, democratic, common and indivisible Euro-Atlantic and Eurasian security community stretching from Vancouver to Vladivostok.” Paragraph 10 says: “We are determined to work  together to fully realize the vision of a comprehensive, co-operative and indivisible security community throughout our shared OSCE area. This security community should be aimed at meeting the challenges of the 21st century and based on our full adherence to common OSCE norms, principles and commitments across all three dimensions.”