French president Emmanuel Macron has told The Economist that the alliance is experiencing its brain death, while warning European countries that they can no longer rely on America to defend its allies.

What we are currently experiencing is the brain death of NATO.

The US-led military bloc “only works if the guarantor of last resort functions as such,” the French leader noted:

“I’d argue that we should reassess the reality of what NATO is in the light of the commitment of the United States.” 

Macron said that Washington is “turning its back on us,” a move which was demonstrated by the pull-out of American troops from northeastern Syria and the abandonment of their Kurdish allies there.

The president was asked whether he believes in the effectiveness of the Article 5 of the NATO founding treaty, which says that if one member state gets attacked, others have to rush to its defense.“I don't know,” he said, “but what will Article Five mean tomorrow?”

 

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/472835-macron-nato-brain-dead/

 

Manu! The Empire isn't "France"... It's the USA and "France is a pawn in the US war plans"... Get out of NATO. The general understood the trick... This is why your little mate Sarcozy was a traitor to the cause of France... Your little problems with Libya are due to Sarko and Obama, and that woman... 

The memoir of former US national security advisor John Bolton has now seen the light of day despite attempts by the Trump administration to block its release arguing that it contains “classified information”. Readers throughout the world can now enjoy (or not really) Bolton’s recollections of his 18 months side-by-side with the US president.

US President Donald Trump’s “best personal relationship among world leaders” is with Prime Minister of Japan Shinzo Abe, his “golf buddy” and colleague, John Bolton claims in his bombshell memoir “The Room Where It Happened”.

“Trump loved mentioning that Abe’s father had been a World War II kamikaze pilot. Trump used it to show how tough the Japanese were generally, and how tough Abe was in particular”, Bolton writes.

​According to the former national security advisor, who resigned from his post in September 2019, the US president also has quite a good opinion of UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

Donald Trump also has a “great respect” for German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the book claims, despite the president’s irritation with his NATO ally for not meeting the 2 percent of GDP defence budget target.

“If countries were not rich, Trump acknowledged that he could understand it, but these are rich countries”, Bolton claimed, while extensively detailing Donald Trump’s skirmish over NATO funding in his book.

The president believed that it was then-president of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker who was responsible for setting the NATO budget, according to Bolton, and said Trump even referred to him as a “vicious man who hated the United States desperately”.

The US president is not a fan of either Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau or French president Emmanuel Macron, the book claims.

“Trump didn’t really like either Trudeau or Macron, but he tolerated them, mockingly crossing swords with them in meetings, kidding on the straight”, Bolton writes. According to him, Trump’s dislike for the two is probably clear to them.

“I assume they understood what he was doing, and they responded in kind, playing along because it suited their larger interests not to be in a permanent tiff with the US President”, he argued.

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/world/202006231079698442-boltons-new-book-reveal...

 

There is a small difference between the disdain for The Donald which is recent and the annoyance at the USA which started soon after WW2, in Europe, apart from the Poms who speak the same lingo. That's why they voted for clown BoJo... Read from top.

In an exclusive interview with DW, NATO chief Jens Stoltenberg touted the importance of German leadership in the alliance, following US President Donald Trump's controversial move to announce the withdrawal of 9,500 troops from Germany.

The move, which was criticized by German ministers including Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer and Foreign Minister Heiko Maas, would see the number of US troops in Germany reduced to 25,000.

Upon announcing the plan, Trump claimed that Germany had failed to meet NATO's defense spending target, and accused the country of being "delinquent."

In the interview, Stoltenberg expands upon why he believes cooperation between NATO members is essential to global peace and security, and Germany's relevance as Europe's largest economy.

DW: What are the biggest security threats to emerge in this pandemic?

Jens Stoltenberg: So what you've seen during the pandemic is that the security threats and challenges we had before the pandemic, they are still there, the terrorist threats, the consequences of the rise of China, a more assertive Russia with the aggressive actions against Ukraine or just the fact that we also see new cyber threats, all of these threats are still there.

Read more:  https://www.dw.com/en/stoltenberg-us-presence-in-europe-is-important-for-nato/a-53918183
---------------------

Please note "troops are not needed anymore on the ground to defend a country”… This is a bold statement from Gus that can be explained at length. Troops are cumbersome... Like the second World War was a different kettle of fish to the first one, the third one (or a major conflict) won’t be (would not be) fought by troops or their movements thereof.  

But the NATO chief has to justify his employment and his medal polishing. In a way the NATO thingy is quite Nazi in the background and fosters resentment from the populace... And we have to remember that NATO is ONLY DESIGNED TO SERVE THE USA… Macron is correct “NATO is brain dead”, meaning its existence is idiotic. NATO mismanaged Libya, unless it was the plan to destroy Libya (...it was the plan of THAT woman and Obama obliged).

And Turkey isn't enamoured with NATO either...

And see this fait divers:

Six ambulances, five first-responder cars and two emergency vehicles attended the incident, while three different fire departments were also involved.

The 50-year-old Schweinfurt resident who had posted them home from Nuremberg was likely not expecting the spiky fruit to cause such a fuss.

The package, with its notably unpleasant smell, eventually found its way to the intended recipient.

 

Read more:

https://thenewdaily.com.au/news/world/2020/06/24/durian-evacuation-germany/

US Republican Senator John Thune has proposed to purchase Russian S-400s from Turkey as evidenced by an amendment to the draft law on budgetary allocations for 2021. But the document did not indicate whether Ankara has either the desire or right to resell the weapons without Moscow's permission.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Jim Risch has proposed an amendment that would impose sanctions against Turkey under the Countering America's Adversaries Through Sanctions Act.

In an interview with Sputnik, retired Turkish Air Force Lieutenant-General Erdogan Karakus commented on Washington’s proposal, expressing his opinion on how feasible such an amendment is with regard to Russian air defence systems.

According to Karakus, the US rhetoric on Turkey's use of S-400 systems is related to Washington's desire to push Turkey and Russia against each other.

“The US goal is to disrupt Turkey and Russia’s relationship. It is trying to push the two countries against each other in Syria, Libya and several other directions. Washington's proposal for S-400 should not be accepted because otherwise, it would harm Turkish-Russian relations. This is what the US side is actually pursuing”, Karakus said.

He stressed that the US constantly undertakes such initiatives. Therefore, their recent proposal did not surprise him at all.

“This is an absolutely unacceptable proposal for Ankara. Russia put its trust in us and decided to supply us with these systems. This position of Moscow, as well as the air defence systems, is valuable for us. Therefore, Turkey should by no means lose Russia's trust because of the US. Only those states that are trusted in the international political arena are respected. And the US proposal violates the sovereignty of the country and calls into question its reliability as a partner”, Karakus said.

The retired general pointed out that the supply of S-400 to Turkey should not be perceived in terms of “who pays the money gets the system”:

“The S-400 purchase is miles away from that approach. Not everyone willing to pay money can buy these systems”.

Karakus recalled that this situation is similar to what happened with the F-35, when the Turkish side, after paying the money, faced a US refusal to supply the aircraft.

 

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/analysis/202007011079760399-offering-to-buy-anka...

 

 

Read from top.

During his visit to Tripoli July 4th Turkey’s defense minister Hulusi Akar signed an agreement on military cooperation with the representatives of the Government of National Accord (GNA). The signature was held behind the closed doors, but the few details that were leaked to the media are enough to conclude that the GNA has effectively traded its ostensible sovereignty for the Turkish support in the stand-off against the Libyan National Army and the Tobruk-based House of Representatives.

The agreement between Turkey and Tripoli authorities stipulates that the GNA is a guarantor of Turkish interests in Libya. The real meaning behind that is that the government led by Fayez al-Sarraj officially put the Turkish interests before the national concerns of Libya. The GNA also gave Turkey official permission to establish military bases on the Libyan territory.

These concessions are no doubt important, but perhaps the most brazing innovation introduced in the agreement is that all Turkish servicemen are given diplomatic immunity. This effectively means that the representatives of the Turkish metropole walking the Libyan soil are automatically granted a number of important privileges, granting them a legal advantage over the indigenous population.

Furthermore, the diplomatic immunity unlocks new possibilities for the transfer of foreign militants and supplies of arms, including internationally banned munitions, in violation of the arms embargo.

Since the beginning of the year Turkey has flown over 15,000 Syrian mercenaries into Libya, including child soldiers, who were recruited in the Syrian province of Idlib and received military training under the supervision of the Turkish advisers there. In addition to that, it has been recently discovered that the Turkish campaign to recruit fighters is not limited to Syria, but also includes Yemen.

The new agreement further facilitates the transfer of foreign fighters into Libya. The GNA has officially given up its right to at least formally check Turkish ships and planes and allowed Ankara to create military bases that are out of Libyan jurisdiction.

Under these conditions, the Turks will be able to send in as many mercenaries, including former members of terror groups, as they see fit without any restrictions or knowledge of the outside world.

In truth, Turkey’s behavior in Libya is already that of a colonial power in the new incarnation of the Tripolitanian Wilayet, a former colony of the Ottoman Empire. Human rights watchdogs report that the next day after the agreement was signed a number of Turkish planes with members of radical groups on board landed in Tripoli.

By signing the new agreement Fayez al-Sarraj and his government pledged allegiance to Turkey and cast away any pretence of being a leader of Libya. Turkey, in turn, is reluctant to declare Tripoli its colony, but this thin varnish will not hide the ugly reality behind.

 

Read more:

https://off-guardian.org/2020/07/08/has-turkey-colonized-libya/

 

 

Read from top.

Muhammad was 17 when the war started in his home country of Syria. He was getting ready to begin pursuing an engineering degree in the city of Homs. Adnan, meanwhile, was 30 years old at the time and was working in Homs as a carpenter. His third child had just been born.

Muhammad and Adnan fought on different sides in the civil war in Syria. Muhammad served in the military of dictator Bashar Assad and was eager for stability, while Adnan joined the rebels because of his faith in the revolution. Both dreamed of living in a peaceful, united country.

Now, nine years later, they are once again facing each other across the front lines - but not in Syria. The two are fighting some 2,000 kilometers away from home. In Libya.

In the North African country, Prime Minister Fayez Sarraj is battling the warlord Khalifa Haftar for power in the country. Sarraj is primarily supported by Turkey, while his opponent is backed by Russia. Adnan is making his money as a mercenary in Sarraj's militia network, while Muhammad has joined Haftar's Libyan National Army. And both are asking themselves the same question: How did it come to this?

The story of Muhammad and Adnan, two men from Homs who are now fighting against each other in the desert of North Africa, illustrates the tragic progression of the conflict in Syria. It is also a lesson in modern-day warfare.

Increasingly, governments that are involved in military conflicts are turning not to their own countrymen, but are instead relying on foreigners who they pay as mercenaries. Countries like Turkey, the United Arab Emirates, Russia and Iran are ignoring other countries' borders and sovereignty, sending hired guns into foreign countries because they don't like the regime in charge, because they want access to natural resources – or because mercenaries belonging to their enemies are there. It is yet another example of countries seeking to occupy the vacuum left behind by the accelerating withdrawal of the United States.

Hiring mercenaries is a way of fighting a war on the cheap. Regional actors can go into battle with little risk and at relatively low cost. Leaders can engage in conflict without having to answer for the body count. The fighters themselves, meanwhile, have few protections because of their dependence on their paymasters. Mercenaries are fighting in numerous conflicts around the world, including in Syria, Yemen and Libya. People like Muhammad and Adnan have become the playthings of global politics.

An Attractive Offer

Adnan was convinced that Assad could be toppled when he joined the Hamza Division, a part of the Free Syrian Army, after the outbreak of the war. He also found personal success on the battlefield, rising to become a commander in the division. But the FSA continued to lose ground, and with help from Russia and Iran, the Assad regime pushed the rebels into the northwestern province of Idlib, where they were only able to survive with Turkish support.

In recent years, Adnan has hardly fought Assad at all, instead helping the Turkish army of President Recep Tayyip Erdogan drive out Kurdish militias from the border region. "We are dependent on Erdogan," Adnan said over the phone. "We have to fight wherever he wants."

It was no surprise to Adnan when a Turkish middleman handed him a new assignment last December. He was tasked with assembling as many men as he could for the war in Libya.

At the time, Adnan couldn't even find Libya on a map. And when it came to the conflict there, he only knew what the Turks told him: that an internationally recognized government was struggling to defend itself from a warlord – from a "putchist" and a "terrorist."

Still, the offer they made him sounded attractive: For every month that he fought on Sarraj's behalf in Libya, Adnan was to receive $2,000, far more than he was making in Syria. In early January, the Turks flew Adnan and 30 comrades with a Turkish Airlines plane from the border town of Gaziantep to Libya. It was the first time in his life that he had flown.

In Tripoli, the Sarraj regime was eagerly awaiting the arrival of the support. In the preceding months, the prime minister had lost almost all the area under his control, with the exception of the capital city, to the warlord Haftar. Erdogan's mercenaries, it was hoped, would turn the tide.

Adnan and his men were put up in apartment blocks in Tripoli and received weapons and training from the Turkish secret service agency MIT, Adnan says. Then, they were sent to the front.

With the help of around 7,000 Syrian mercenaries along with drone support, Turkey has been able to turn the tide in the Libyan civil war, making Erdogan the proxy ruler of the African country that is home to the continent's largest oil reserves. General Haftar has not only had to concede the loss of Tripoli in recent weeks, he has also been forced out of strategically important coastal cities like Sabratha.

Nevertheless, Adnan regrets his decision to come to Libya. DER SPIEGEL has spoken with him by phone several times in recent months, and his desperation has steadily risen during that period. The frontline battles are often more intense than they were in Syria, he says. "Every day, we send 100 injured fighters home and fly 300 new ones in," he says. In contrast to Syria, he adds, he doesn't see the point of the Libya operation. "I fought against the Syrian regime because I believed in a future for my children. Look where I have ended up."

"Keep Fighting"

Friends in Syria accuse him of having sold out the revolution to earn money in Libya. But even if he wanted to, Adnan complains, he couldn't simply quit. The Turks, he says, only allow the injured to go home, which is why some of his comrades have shot themselves in the leg. Others, he says, have boarded refugee boats in the hopes of making it to Europe. Adnan says that he would also try to get to Europe if he didn't have children in Turkey. "I have no other choice than to keep fighting," he says.

Adnan's compatriot Muhammad is on the other side of the front in Libya. But he, too, has the feeling that he no longer controls his own destiny and that he is under the control of foreign powers. His primary motivation for speaking to DER SPIEGEL was to highlight the experience of Syrians in Libya. Like Adnan, he has declined to provide his last name out of fear of repercussions.

Muhammad's life has been dominated by war. He was still a young man when he joined the Desert Falcons, a militia organization that fought alongside the Assad regime against the rebels. A few years ago, the Desert Falcons were disbanded as a result of internal power struggles, with remnants of the militia joining an army unit that was armed and controlled by Russia, Assad's most important ally. Since then, Muhammad has answered to Moscow.

In January, his commander asked him if he was interested in fighting on Russia's behalf in Libya. He was told he would be paid $1,000 a month for his services and would receive a month of paid vacation every quarter.

Russia is not an official party to the Libyan conflict, but with the help of a military subcontractor, the so-called Wagner Group, it controls part of the battlefield. The Wagner Group is a private Russian security firm with close ties to the Kremlin and an important Haftar supporter, along with the UAE and Egypt. Russian President Vladimir Putin sees Haftar as his man in North Africa, and it is sure to have made him nervous watching the warlord lose ground to the Erdogan-Sarraj alliance in recent months.

Muhammad says that middlemen operating on Russia's behalf set up recruitment offices in Syrian cities – called al-Sajjad, or "the hunter" – for the Libya operation. For every Syrian that brokers send to North Africa, they receive a commission of 200 euros. After years of civil war, large swaths of Syria have been destroyed and it is almost impossible for young men to find normal jobs. It didn't take Muhammad long to make his decision. In one of the recruitment offices, he signed a contract in Arabic and Russian, committing himself to fighting on Haftar's behalf for at least three months.

Afterwards, he said, he and 50 other men, most of whom were younger than 30, were transferred to the Russian military base Hmeimim, not far from the Syrian coastal city of Latakia, where they received two weeks of military training.

Feeling Drained

The Russians gave the mercenaries IDs labelled "Friend of Russia," to enable them to pass through Libyan checkpoints. Then they flew with the private Syrian airline Cham Wings from Damascus to the Libyan city of Benghazi.

Once in Libya, Muhammad and his comrades were dressed in the uniform of Haftar's army and placed under the command of Russian Wagner officers. He says they fought in several different places, like southern Tripoli, on the coast and, for the last several weeks, in the country's east.

According to the United Nations, around 2,000 Syrians were fighting for Haftar and the Wagner Group in the month of May. Muhammad, though, estimates the number to be closer to 5,000. Immediately after the losses suffered during the battle for Tripoli, the Russians called in large numbers of reinforcements, he says. The Assad regime, he continues, even released detainees from Syrian prisons to send them into battle in Libya.

Muhammad sleeps during the day and fights at night, and has begun feeling drained. "I ask myself what I am doing here," he says. Muhammad has heard that Turkey pays its mercenaries far better than the Russians and is thinking of switching sides. "In Syria, I fought for victory," he says. "Here, it's only about money."

Read more:
https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/the-renewed-dependency-on-mer...


Thank you la Madam Clinton for having destroyed Libya... Thank you Sarkozy for having been on this hypocritical stint... Read from top.

As warring Libyan factions seek aid from Turkey and Egypt, AFRICOM is blaming Russia for landmines that were found near Tripoli in yet another alarmist ‘intelligence assessment’ aimed at getting US troops sent back to Africa.

On Wednesday, AFRICOM posted four photos of booby-trapped debris found between Tripoli and Sirte last month, as the Libyan National Army (LNA) retreated before the Turkish-backed Government of National Accord (GNA). The landmines used to rig the explosives were “assessed to have been introduced into Libya by the Wagner Group,” a mercenary outfit AFRICOM insists is acting on behalf of the Russian government.

"Wagner Group’s reckless use of landmines and booby-traps are harming innocent civilians,” insisted AFRICOM’s intelligence director, Rear Admiral Heidi Berg. She claimed that “imagery and intelligence assessments” show Russia “continues to interfere in Libyan affairs.” 

To bolster the claim of Russian meddling, AFRICOM referred to its May allegations – that Russia sent 14 MiG-29 fighters into Libya – as proven fact, rather than a triple-qualified assessment as stated at the time. Moscow has dismissed the claim as “not corresponding to reality.”

AFRICOM’s claim that the landmines shown in the photos had to have come from Wagner is curious. They are standard Soviet Union designs, which Libya had been buying for decades. Almost all of the equipment and weapons used by both the LNA and the GNA comes from the stockpiles of Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s government, which was overthrown in 2011 by NATO-backed militants. Gaddafi himself was brutally lynched after he was injured in a NATO airstrike near Sirte, the site of recent fighting.

Far from bringing peace and democracy, the rebellion plunged Libya into chaos as warlords and terrorists fought for land and control of oil fields. Yet General Bradford Gering, AFRICOM’s operations director, now laments the “total disregard for the safety and security of Libyans” supposedly shown by Wagner and Russia.

The Tripoli-based GNA was supposed to be the internationally recognized coalition that would end the conflict, but the Tobruk-based LNA soon split away, accusing the GNA of ties to Islamist militants. While the GNA was on the verge of losing Tripoli last year, its loyalists have managed to push the forces of General Khalifa Haftar back thanks in part to a massive sea-lift of troops and weapons from Turkey.

 

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/494863-libya-africom-russia-landmines/

 

 

Read from top.

 

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan has threatened reprisals if anyone attacks the ship surveying disputed waters in the Mediterranean for oil and gas, after two French jets flew nearby during an exercise with the Greek fleet.

“We said that if you attack our Oruc Reis you will pay a high price, and they got their first answer today,” Erdogan said on Thursday in a speech in Ankara, without offering any details as to what might have happened.

The vessel, named after a 16th-century Ottoman pirate, started survey work earlier this week near the island of Kastellorizo, which belongs to Greece but is located near the southern coast of Turkey’s Antalya province.

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/497951-erdogan-threat-ship-france/

 

Read from top...

 

And so started WW3 from within NATO...

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Six US B-52 bombers will fly over all 30 NATO member states in one day in a show of solidarity and as an interoperability practice on Friday, the United States European Command said in a statement.

"In a unique spin on regularly recurring Bomber Task Force (BTF) missions in Europe, six US Air Force B-52 Stratofortress strategic bombers will fly over all 30 NATO nations in Europe and North America on Aug. 28," the statement read.

The single-day mission is called Allied Sky and aims to "demonstrate NATO solidarity, enhance readiness and provide training opportunities aimed at enhancing interoperability for all participating aircrews."

Read more:

https://sputniknews.com/europe/202008281080300462-six-us-b-52-bombers-to...

 

As Greece and Turkey are at each other's throat and France is threatening Turkey, all in the NATO alliance, the US are showing their grand old grey doves, as to remind their partners that they're still boss... Let's hope the display will be without incident and the US take their toys back to Washington DC...

 

Read from top.

Six years after the appointment of Jens Stoltenberg as NATO Secretary General, Philippe Migault, Director of the European Center for Strategic Analysis, reviews the highlights of this senior official's tenure. The same applies to the Secretary General of NATO as well as to the President of the United States and, increasingly, unfortunately, of France's president. Whatever nationality or political color, these guys embody "change in continuity". Succeeding in 2014 to the very offensive Anders Fogh Rasmussen, Jens Stoltenberg has certainly differed by softer tones and more diplomatic.

But diplomacy is a clever mix of truth and lies. Stoltenberg's actions speak for themselves as his term comes to an end. He has been a staunch supporter of strong growth in military spending within NATO, which has steadily increased since his appointment. His leadership has been marked by the most important exercises conducted by the Atlantic Alliance since the demise of the Soviet Union — and maneuvers which have frequently taken place near the Russian borders. An obvious double-talk for a man who in 2016 said that NATO, a defensive alliance, did not see Russia as an imminent threat. But with a permanent double discourse, Stoltenberg has distinguished himself by his practice of double standards.

Criticizing the Russian option to seek "an area of ​​influence by military means" and worrying about the growing military presence of Russia in Eastern Mediterranea, he accepted that it was quite natural that the United States use their presence military in Europe to radiate beyond it, towards the Middle East, Asia and Africa.

“The American presence in Europe is not only intended to protect Europe, but also to radiate the power of the United States outside of it. We know that many American operations in Iraq, Afghanistan and Africa are launched from bases established in Europe. The US Military Command for Africa is not in Africa, but in Stuttgart, Germany," he said with great enthusiasm last June.

Moreover, while all somewhat serious observers of the Ukrainian dossier are perfectly aware that the entry of Ukraine or Belarus into NATO would constitute a red line for the Kremlin, Stoltenberg proposes to enlarge the Alliance to these two countries, insisting that he does not care what the Russians think. "The door to NATO remains open […] Sometimes, one has the impression that it is for Russia to decide whether or not Ukraine should be a member of NATO", he declared a year ago to Ukrainian students, but "Russia has no say! [It has] no legal or real basis to influence such a decision ”.

Never bothered by his own contradictions, he showed bad faith whenever necessary, brazenly lying in defiance of all the obvious. While the most politically correct Western media and Emmanuel Macron had not hesitated to denounce the complicity between Turkey and the Islamic State, Stoltenberg, referring to the Turkish offensive against the Kurds in northern Syria, called on Ankara to not play the game of "our common enemy, Daesh". Hop! Under the carpet the trucks of the Islamic State coming to deliver the oil of the Islamists to the Turkish border! Never seen before, the jihadists have been circulating in peace for years from one end of Turkey to the other to reach Syria, Libya or Nagorno-Karabakh! For Stoltenberg: "Turkey remains an important ally in the fight against terrorism".

Finally, Stoltenberg's mandate will remain that during which the United States withdrew from the Treaty on Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF), which in 1987 marked the end of the First Cold War. Washington, as we know, has referred to the testing of a new Russian missile, the 9M729, the scope of which would have violated the terms of the agreement between Reagan and Gorbachev, to withdraw from the treaty. The Americans have not provided any evidence of breach in this case, as they did, with photos to back it up, during the Soviet nuclear missile deployment in Cuba in 1962. Whatever. Stoltenberg backed them, brushing aside both Russian denials and canned the proposed moratorium on intermediate-range missiles in Europe.

NATO, Emmanuel Macron said, is "brain dead". No doubt he is right. But the inertia of this 70-year-old cruise ship is such that it continues on its way. Too big to fail. At the helm of such a ship, there is no need for a Nelson — a high-ranking public servant without genius, but with conviction and dedication, doing the day-to-day business on behalf of his American shareholders, will do the job. Stoltenberg was "the right man at the right place".

Philippe Migault

Learn more about RT France: https://francais.rt.com/opinions/79336-stoltenberg-bilan-tete-otan-aussi...


Translation by Jules Letambour.

Read from top.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization is soliciting bids from NGOs, universities, public and private think-tanks in all its member states.

The official purpose is to develop tools that increase the resilience of populations to "enemy" (read "Russian") disinformation. But the problem is that in order to fight against propaganda, it is necessary to target all propaganda, including NATO’s.

In practice, therefore, the tools will only serve to discredit reactions to NATO propaganda: for example in the context of flight MH17, the poisoning of Sergei Skripal or that of Alexey Navalny.

It is known since ancient times that propaganda is all the more convincing when it does not run up against contrary arguments. For a century, scholars have wondered how to bring about a situation where only one channel of information would be available. Some postulated that the message to be conveyed should be relentlessly repeated until all dissent is stifled; others argued in favour of selecting those who take part in the debates. In this age of social networks NATO is adopting a third approach: to build a consensus that relays the message and belittle the intellectual capacities of those who challenge it.

 

 

Read more:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article211348.html

 

Read from top.

- On 21 October 2020, the Greek Navy mobilized around 60 boats to protect the Aegean Islands in the event of a Turkish attack. 

- Konstantin Zatulin, deputy chairman of the Russian Federation State Duma, alluded to a possible Russian landing in Azerbaijan to hunt down the jihadists. The Russian Navy has been engaged in exercises off Baku since 16 October. 

- Turkish Vice-President Fuat Oktay, on his part, has publicly considered a possible military intervention by his country to safeguard the rights of Azerbaijan.

- Speaking at the end of an interview with the Armenian president on the sidelines of NATO defense ministers’ virtual meeting, NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg assured that his organization supports a strict ceasefire application and highlighted its good relations with both parties in the conflict. 

- Turkish Vice-President Fuat Oktay stressed that NATO would probably not intervene if Turkey were to enter the war in Azerbaijan. 

- Armenian President Armen Sarkissian stressed that Azerbaijan will continue to violate the ceasefire as long as he is confident of Turkey’s support.

- Germany has rejected a Greek request to stop arms exports to Turkey during this time of crisis.

- Members of the UN Security Council continued their contacts behind closed doors.

Read more:

https://www.voltairenet.org/article211358.html

 

 

MEANWHILE:

Karabagh: NATO supports Turkey while seeking to eliminate President Erdoğan

by Thierry Meyssan

In the Karabakh War, contemporary law is contradictory depending on whether it is interpreted in terms of ownership of the territory or the self-determination of the people. Taking advantage of this equivocation, the Turkish people (i.e., both Turkey and Azerbaijan) have just attacked this territory, self-proclaimed independent (Artsakh) although de facto linked to Armenia. Russia has already made it known that, according to the treaties, it will defend Armenia if it is attacked, but that its national security is not concerned by what is happening in Karabagh. Therefore, the only question is to establish whether Turkey has acted on the orders of the West, or whether it has taken an initiative that its own allies are likely to turn against it.

The war has been going on in Nagorno-Karabakh since September 27, 2020. The superiority of the Azerbaijani forces is obvious, both in number and in the quality of their weaponry. The first line of defense of the Artsakhae forces has been pulverized, but the other two still hold. The destruction is very significant, including on the Azerbaijani side. It is difficult to establish a human toll, but the deaths are already very numerous.

President Ilham Aliyev has announced his intention to continue his offensive until victory, that is to say the "recovery" of his territory. He is supported by his Turkish counterpart, Recep Tayyip Erdoğan. Pakistan also sided with him, while denying having sent soldiers to the scene. All the Turkish-speaking countries of the Turkish Council gave their unfailing support to the ’Two-State People’ (Azerbaijan and Turkey).

On the Armenian side, the equally unfailing support of the diaspora disseminated in the West has created a consensus condemning the Azeri attack (even though Baku claims not to have attacked Karabagh). In addition to the problem of Artsakh, there is the problem of Armenia. It is clear and claimed that soldiers from this country are fighting in Artsakh, but it does not seem that the fighting has spread to the territory of Armenia.

From a diplomatic point of view, the OSCE Minsk Group, chaired by the United States, France and Russia, is multiplying calls for a ceasefire, without any effect. It had done nothing since its creation and continues publicly to blindfold itself. In reality, it is active in the shadows and has just organized a mediation in Geneva, without Armenia.

A word on the French position: although co-president of the Minsk Group, Paris does not cease to confront Ankara on all sorts of subjects: from the delimitation of exclusive zones in the Mediterranean to the situation in Libya, not to mention secularism. However, President Emmanuel Macron avoids as much as possible discussing the Turkish occupation of Cyprus, Iraq and Syria, which are much more important issues. France has asked Turkey for explanations on the transfer of jihadists from the Free Syrian Army, which it once helped create, supported and managed against Syria.

The middle powers avoid taking a stand, since almost all of them hesitate to take sides with a powerful oil state for the sake of the Armenians’ beautiful eyes. However, given the genocidal past of the Turkish people, which they persist in denying, it will be morally impossible not to take a stand for a very long time. Before Qatar (which is home to a Turkish military base) took a stand, the Secretary General of the Arab League condemned Turkey. He was immediately followed by Syria. President Bashar al-Assad took the opportunity to recapitulate Ankara’s crimes against its people.

In conclusion, while the probable defeat of Artsakh and the probable massacre of its inhabitants is approaching, the United States and Russia still claim neutrality, the Westerners and Arabs support Armenia, while only the Turkish-speaking states openly support Azerbaijan and Turkey.

The hypothesis of the trap

The hypothesis of the trap set up by Washington in order to push President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan to misstep in order to blame him and to bring him down, like his Iraqi counterpart Saddam Hussein, still holds. In 1990-91, the invasion of Kuwait, encouraged by US Ambassador April Gaspie, was followed five months later by a unanimous condemnation by the Security Council and by Operation Desert Storm. We are only two weeks away from the start of operations in Arstakh.

It was difficult to transform the image of President Saddam Hussein in a few months. He was a CIA agent, recruited during his youth, during his studies. He had helped an attempted coup by the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria, at the request of the West. He had led a long war against Iran, always at the request of Westerners. He then imagined himself indispensable to his sponsors. Washington thus published documents attesting that he had assassinated or had had assassinated several people in his entourage, but it was still necessary to transform this Eastern despot into a new mass criminal. In this process, the false testimony of a false Kuwaiti nurse before the US Congress was crucial: on the orders of the tyrant, the Iraqi army stole incubators, causing the death of premature babies.

In the case of Azerbaijan, things will be easier. It will suffice to exhume the evidence of the Armenian genocide that the Turks persist in denying to justify a serious risk of a new massacre. All the more so since the cathedral of Artsakh has already been targeted by two precision missiles. Already, Azerbaijan denies having fired these missiles, which is possible but supposes that a third power is pulling the strings of the conflict. If Baku’s involvement were proven in this violation of international humanitarian law, the genocidal intent would be impossible to ignore, given that the Armenian genocide (1894-95 and 1915-20) targeted this population on the basis of its religion.

The trap is closing

Anxious to prevent things from getting out of hand, Russian President Vladimir Putin organized negotiations between the Azerbaijani and Armenian foreign ministers in Moscow on October 9, after he had sent his Prime Minister to Yerevan. After six hours of consultations, they resulted in the signing of a ceasefire by noon on 10 October. In addition to the return of prisoners and the bodies of victims, the agreement provided for the resumption of peace negotiations under the aegis of the OSCE Minsk Group.

The cessation of fighting was preceded by intense shelling of the small town of Hadrout, whose ’resumption’ Baku had a little too quickly proclaimed, and a vast drone attack aimed at aggravating the balance of power in extremis.

The truce lasted only 5 minutes: at 12.05 am, Arbaïdjan resumed fighting in Hadrout.

According to the Armenian side, Azerbaijan then bombed the Republic of Armenia in the border town of Kaplan. If this information were verified, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) would have to provide military assistance to Armenia. It would then be necessary for Russia to demonstrate Turkey’s involvement -which no one doubts- to place the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in a dilemma: either support Turkey and declare World War III, or enjoin it to leave the Alliance.

Since almost all members of the Alliance can no longer support President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, he should then become the world’s enemy number one.

However, things are perhaps even more complicated: the international communications of the Azerbaijani side are ensured by a lobby, the Nizami Ganjavi International Center, clearly controlled by NATO. Moreover, Washington has already attempted several times to overthrow, even assassinate, President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan.

Thierry Meyssan

Translation 

Roger Lagassé

 

 

Read more:

 

https://www.voltairenet.org/article211204.html

 

 

Read from top.

Russian President Vladimir Putin has said that almost 5,000 people have been killed in fighting between Azerbaijan and Armenian forces over the disputed Nagorno-Karabakh region.

This is far higher than the death toll given by the two sides.

Mr Putin said that he speaks to the two sides several times a day, and would not be taking sides in the conflict.

He said that Moscow disagrees with Turkey - which supports Azerbaijan - over the conflict.

The Russian president also called on the United States to assist in seeking peace in the region. 

Armenia and Azerbaijan have accused each other of violating humanitarian ceasefires in Nagorno-Karabakh.

• What are Armenia and Azerbaijan fighting over?
• Karabakh war leaves civilians shell-shocked and bitter
• Nagorno-Karabakh conflict in pictures

Fighting flared last month over the territory, which is internationally recognised as part of Azerbaijan but run by ethnic Armenians.

This is the worst violence in the region since a six-year war over the territory ended with a ceasefire in 1994.

 

 

Read more:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-54652704

 

Read for top.

French President Emmanuel Macron has argued for a radical revision of global social and economic systems, claiming that changing demographics and other issues will require new ways to distribute finite resources.

In a wide-ranging interview with the Groupe d’Études Géopolitiques, the French leader said the “Washington Consensus,” which he defined as a “monolithic rationale based on the accumulation of profits” was outdated and that nations must embrace new economic, political, and social models in order to overcome current crises, including the coronavirus pandemic and terrorism. 

He also warned that “Malthusian theories” about overpopulation would become more prevalent unless there is a “re-conception of the world” that addresses “the scarcity of resources” as well as demographic changes.

If you take the Europe-Africa region, for every European country demographically disappearing, in the same period, one African country appears. We are witnessing a kind of acceleration in the twists of history

Warning that the world is at a “breakpoint,” he said that “contemporary capitalism” must undergo a transformation. 

It is capitalism that has become financialized, that has become over-concentrated and that is no longer capable of handling the inequalities in our societies and internationally. We can only respond to it by re-forging it.

He proposed replacing the “Washington Consensus” with a “Paris Consensus” that would recognize that “something other than profit needs to be involved” in economic and social decisions. He insisted that such a new system would be better suited to tackle the threat posed by climate change, as well as inequality. 

The French president expressed hope that his vision would be embraced by the rest of the world, arguing that “the struggle against this mechanism of capitalism is ineffective in a single country.”

Although he stressed that he still believed in the idea of “Westphalian sovereignty,” Macron urged for greater European unity, stating that the continent must closely cooperate in order to “prevent the Chinese-American duopoly.”

 

Read more:

https://www.rt.com/news/506820-macron-reforge-capitalism-inequality-france/

 

President Emmanuel Macron and the government of Jean Castex drafted a bill to combat the political instrumentation of the Muslim faith. This text is currently being discussed in Parliament.

It revolves around four strong ideas, including the prohibition of the financing of religious associations by foreign States. Everyone is well aware that this is the head of Islamism, but no one dares to name these states: Turkey and Qatar, remote controlled by the United Kingdom and the United States. Indeed, fighting against Islamism in France has many brutal consequences in foreign policy. No party dares to tackle this problem, rendering all the efforts made in this struggle ineffective.

France has already experienced this hesitation in the face of Islamism in the mid-1990s. At the time, the United Kingdom and the United States supported the jihadists in Algeria against French influence. London also offered political asylum to these "democrats" who were fighting against a military regime. The Minister of the Interior, Charles Pasqua, launched a showdown that led him to have the members of a commando of the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) who had hijacked an Air France plane shot dead and to expel the CIA chief of post in Paris (who was also compromised in a case of economic espionage). The issue was thus settled for 20 years.

The Directorate General of Internal Security (DGSI) inspired a press dossier, in the Journal du Dimancheof February 7, 2021, on how "Erdoğan is infiltrating France". Note: the newspaper did not question Turkey, but the only President Erdoğan. Similarly, at least initially, it did not mention Qatar, the United Kingdom or the United States. Above all, it quoted the Millî Görüş which it accuses, without noting that it was the militia of Prime minister Necmettin Erbakan and that President Erdoğan was one of its leaders. Finally, it omitted to mention the alleged role of the Turkish secret services in the attacks of November 13, 2015 (the Bataclan).

It is this theme that we are going to develop by rectifying many prejudices.

Islam: faith and politics

Mohammed was a prophet, warlord and prince at the same time. The Islam he founded was at the same time a particular rite of Christianity [1], his policy towards the tribes of the Arabian Peninsula and the law he promulgated. No one was able at his death to distinguish his spiritual heritage from his political and military action. On the contrary, his political successors (in Arabic: "Caliphs") inherited his authority in religious matters, although they had no theological knowledge and sometimes even did not believe in God.

Today, Muslims living in Europe aspire to sort out this Islam, to keep only the spiritual part of it and to abandon dated aspects, especially the Sharia. On the contrary, President Erdoğan, who officially wishes to be declared Caliph of Muslims on October 29, 2023 (the centenary of the Turkish Republic), is doing everything possible to oppose this.

It is therefore a struggle between two civilisations. Not between European culture and that of Turkey, but contemporary civilisation against another, which disappeared a century ago.

Erdoğan: an Islamist thug who became president

President Erdoğan is not a politician like the others. He started his career as a thug who was punching in the streets of the capital. He entered politics in the 1970s by joining an Islamist militia, the Akıncılar, until he joined the militia created during the fall of Prime Minister Necmettin Erbakan in 1997, the Millî Görüş. This organisation of nervis was financed by the Iraq of President Saddam Hussein and placed under the control of the Grand Master of the Sufi Order of the Naqchbandis, General Ezzat Ibrahim Al-Douri, future Iraqi Vice-President.

The Anglo-Tunisian Rachid Ghanoucchi, one of the great figures of the Muslim Brotherhood, said: "In the Arab world of my generation, when people talked about the Islamic movement, they talked about Erbakan. When they talked about Erbakan, it was the way they talked about Hassan al-Banna and Sayyed Qutb". So, although the Islamist movement is organisationally divided between the Muslim Brotherhood on the one hand and the Naqchbandis on the other, they undoubtedly form a single ideology.

It is in the name of the Millî Görüş that Recep Tayyip Erdoğan played an effective role in the wars in Afghanistan alongside Gulbuddin Hekmatyar and in the wars in Chechnya alongside Shamil Basayev. Once he became president, he imposed himself as the leader of this movement during the NATO war in Syria. Today he is the leader of both the Muslim Brotherhood (established in the wider Middle East and Europe) and the Naqchbandis (established mainly in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Russian Dagestan, South Asia and Chinese Xinjiang).

Islamist networks

The transformation of the Order of Naqchbandis and the creation of the Muslim Brotherhood on the model of the United Grand Lodge of England was led by the United Kingdom in the context of the "Great Game" between the United Kingdom and the Russian Empire and the colonial conquest of Sudan. Even today, MI6 still exercises direct control over these two organisations. The donors change (first Saudi Arabia, then Qatar and Turkey), but never the principal.

Before the First World War, the British used Al-Azhar University in Cairo to unify the Muslim world behind a single version of the Koran (there were about forty at the time). The aim was to exclude from the text the passages used by the cruel Sudanese Mahdi sect against the British Empire. The Grand Imam of Al-Ahzar was sent to convert the Sudanese Muslims to the ’true’ Islam that had just been born.

The first form of the Muslim Brotherhood was founded by the Egyptian Hassan el-Banna. It was conceived as an extension of the British investment in Islam. The second form of the Brotherhood was organised after the Second World War and the execution of Hassan el-Banna, directly by MI6. The United States soon introduced an atheist Masonic intellectual, Sayyed Qutb. Qutb converted to Islam, which he conceived as a weapon for seizing power. He created a binary ideology (we and they forbid and allow it) and preached jihad. Gradually, under British control and with funding from Saudi Arabia (Islamic World League), the Brotherhood spread to the whole of what we today call the Broader Middle East. They seized power in Pakistan making possible the CIA war against the Soviets in Afghanistan. Then they transformed themselves into a real army and fought in Bosnia and Herzegovina alongside the Pentagon. Today they are involved in several conflicts, notably in the Sahel, Libya, Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Afghanistan [2].

Rohollah Khomeini’s Iran is also based on a conception of political Islam. The Ayatollah had met Hassan el-Banna in Cairo, not to rally to him, but to share the Muslim world with him. The current Guide to the Revolution, Ali Khamenei, has translated two books by Sayyed Qutb which he says he admires. He systematically invites the Brothers to the congresses he organises on Islam, but the two groups never miss an opportunity to slander each other in private. A kind of armed peace was established between them.

Europeans in general and the French in particular are just beginning to take an interest in political Islam, which they are unable to distinguish from Muslim spirituality despite the work of Louis Massignon.

Turkey and NATO

Let us return to Turkey. The United States included it in NATO because it bordered the Soviet Union. They were able to appreciate the value of its soldiers during the Korean War, without whom they would have suffered a shameful defeat. They themselves organised a labour migration of Turkish citizens to West Germany in order to stabilise its population in the Atlantic camp. Moreover, as the Kurdish Turks had created the PKK with the help of the Soviets, the US occupation authorities in Germany were able to monitor them directly.

Later, when the Soviet Union dissolved, the US relaxed its pressure. Turkish workers began to spill over from West Germany to other border countries, including France.

During the Cold War, the United States had set up the European headquarters of the Muslim Brotherhood in Munich, then in Geneva around Said Ramadan (husband of the daughter of Hassan el-Banna and father of Tariq and Hanni Ramadan). After each failed coup d’état in the Middle East, NATO had Germany or France grant political asylum. As a result, these two countries have historically raised their enemies in their midst. Charles Pasqua was the first to oppose this alliance of dupes. The files then accumulated by the French intelligence services were recently compiled by Jean-Loup Izambert [3].

With the Islamist turn imposed on Turkey by Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, the agency of religious property (Diyanet) considerably developed its hold on the diaspora. It has multiplied the number of imams made available and has relied on the Millî Görüş, and more recently on the Grey Wolves (another Turkish militia, also linked to NATO, but henceforth forbidden in France [4]).

Erdoğan and the attacks of 2015 and 2016 in Paris and Brussels

The investigations into the attacks in Paris-Saint Denis and Brussels-Zaventem in 2015 and 2016 were not carried out as the actions of isolated combatants. According to the French and Belgian investigators, they were military-style operations. The question is therefore which army organised them?

The investigators showed that the two groups were very closely linked. So it was the same principal.

Four days before the attacks in Brussels-Zaventem, President Erdoğan explicitly threatened the European Union in general and Belgium in particular with an attack [5]. The day after this bloodbath, the press in favour of the president made no secret of its joy [6].

There can therefore be little doubt that he had the same desire for the Paris-Saint Denis attacks, since France had betrayed its commitments to Turkey in Syria [7].

As always, the only jihadist identified as having belonged to both the Paris and Brussels commandoes (Mohammed Abrini, the "man in the hat") has been identified as an informer for the British secret services [8].

Did you say "financing jihadists operating on French soil"?

Thierry MeyssanTranslation 
Roger Lagassé

 

Read more:

 

https://www.voltairenet.org/article212155.html

 

 

Read from top.

 

and remember when: