March 12 marks the 25th anniversary of the beginning of NATO’s fateful expansion into Eastern Europe in 1999. Veteran Serbian-American historian Srdja Trifkovic told Sputnik how the ‘fateful error’ made a quarter century ago set the stage for the present crisis between Russia and the West.

The three-week period between March 12 and April 4 marks three important milestones for NATO:

1.

On March 12, 1999, the alliance began its incorporation of Eastern European countries into the bloc, swallowing up the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland.

2.

On March 24, 1999, NATO kicked off a brutal 78-day bombing campaign against Yugoslavia.

3.

On April 4, 1949, the bloc was founded.

The bloc’s enlargement has “been a good investment,” former president Bill Clinton, whose administration set a course for NATO expansion almost immediately after entering office, said to attendees of a NATO conference in Prague on Tuesday.

 

 

“It was a good, sensible risk and it has immensely strengthened NATO. And the motto of this conference is as true today as it was then, perhaps more true: you can’t ever take your security for granted. We know that we need more networks of cooperation,” Clinton said.

 

 

25 Years of Poking the Bear

“History will see the accession of the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland as a key step towards a Europe cooperation and integration, towards a Europe without dividing lines,” former NATO secretary general Javier Solana said in 1999.

Twenty-five years on, Solana’s words sound like mockery, with Europe finding itself in the midst of its worst security and economic crisis since the Second World War, and the NATO-fueled proxy war against Russia in Ukraine threatening to turn the region, and perhaps the world, into a pile of smoldering ash.

The first Eastern European round of NATO expansion marked a “strategic shift” in US policy, with the Clinton administration sending “a clear signal…that they intended to use NATO as a means of projecting US power in Eastern Europe and extending it, even though the USSR,” the alliance’s raison d’etre, “had ceased to exist,” says Dr. Srdja Trifkovic.

“In other words, it was a decision that reflected the intention of the US government to treat NATO as a permanent feature, as a permanent factor of the international scene, and no longer as a ‘defensive’ alliance, which was created in 1949, theoretically at least, to defend Western Europe against possible Soviet aggression,” Trifkovic told Sputnik.

 

In strategic terms, the 1999 enlargement “represented a major shift” in the US’s grand strategy, and sent a “clear signal to Russia…which at the time was undergoing a period of extreme weakness under Boris Yeltsin, that the game is not over,” the observer added. “What seemed like the end of the Cold War was not the end of the Western alliance.” 

“For the Russians, I think it also was a sobering moment when they realized that the promise made by James Baker, then US secretary of State, that there would be no enlargement, was no longer valid,” Trifkovic said, referring to Baker’s February 1990 remark to Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev that NATO would not move “one inch eastward” of Germany pending Soviet approval to have East Germany annexed by the Federal Republic.

 

Aggressive New Course

In a twist of fate symbolizing the revamped NATO’s aggressive geopolitical course, the alliance kicked off a massive bombing campaign of Yugoslavia on March 24, 1999, less than two weeks after the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland’s accession to the bloc.

 

 

“No troops from those countries were used against Yugoslavia – only Hungarian territory for overflights by NATO aircraft. The main base of attack was Aviano in Italy,” Trifkovic recalled. “Nevertheless, the fact that NATO was beginning to encircle Serbia from all sides had a profound psychological effect.” Furthermore, “Vladimir Putin is on record saying that NATO action against Yugoslavia actually helped the Russians have a more clear, more sober assessment of Western intentions.”

 

The encirclement has continued ever since, with 13 additional members entering NATO in the 25 years since 1999, six of them neighbors of Serbia.

 

Ultimately, the Clinton administration’s decision to expand NATO was a strategic “fateful error,” ruining a fledgling relationship between Washington and Moscow, setting the stage for the Ukrainian crisis, and serving to bring Russia and China closer together than they’ve been since the 1950s.George Kennan, “one of the architects of the US strategy in the Cold War…said when this wave of expansion occurred that it was the biggest mistake of US foreign policy in the post-Cold War period,” Trifkovic recalled. Kennan, “as a strategist of the highest order, was extremely skeptical about the wisdom of expanding NATO. Now, all these years later, we see that indeed, he was right,” the observer summed up. READ MORE: https://sputnikglobe.com/20240312/natos-1999-enlargement-sent-clear-signal-to-russia-that-cold-war-never-ended-1117289580.html WE HAVE KNOWN FOR A LONG TIME WHY CLINTON WENT FOR IT: DESTROY RUSSIA.... 

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

 

The West fears a peaceful Russia, not its nuclear weapons

 

A text which once again challenges Western propaganda and what it is capable of inventing to hide the fact that they are there in Ukraine "like cockroaches" accumulating weapons, yes Russia has weapons and they have known it for a long time so why provoke her? But what they should fear even more is that “their economic bomb” does not work and that Russia lives normally without rationing and it will soon control 30% of the grain market, it is no longer a “gas station” country. »… This is why it wants peace to continue to develop and that is what is new in the world, what the West controls even less than war, the new forms of cooperation.

Danielle Bleitrach

*

by Igor Karaulov

Lately, the West likes to talk about the Russian nuclear threat. During the Russian President's recent speech to the Federal Assembly, the Western press and politicians emphasized precisely this point. The part concerning Sarmat, Kinjal and Avangard has been examined from every angle. Among other things, this information is easily viewable: it is very convenient to scare the average citizen with apocalyptic images and clips. A topic suddenly thrown up by the Americans has not disappeared: they say that the Russians are about to send something nuclear, mysterious and incomprehensible into space. This probably works on viewers in NATO countries.

Another question is to what extent any of this can be seen as a genuine concern, rather than a carefully staged "Mom, I'm scared." In fact, Vladimir Putin has not said anything revolutionary in this regard. He was content to report the work announced five or six years ago. I remember that at the time, some people said: here are the new Russian missiles, invented by Kremlin propagandists and drawn in Photoshop. It's just cartoons, there's no need to worry. But today, the Kinjal and Zircon systems are already operational and doing work that is not virtual. And God forbid our enemies from seeing how Sarmat will work.

We must remind our former partners from time to time that our strategic shield has not disappeared and is even strengthening. Our president once said that we don't need a world without Russia, and it seems he never recanted. Let's make sure they remember it.

But, after all, the world has been living in conditions of nuclear parity for more than half a century, under the sword of Damocles of mutual destruction. And yet, for two years, the Americans, the French and the British have persisted in crawling like cockroaches in Ukraine against Russia. They supply weapons, provide intelligence and send their military specialists, without the slightest restraint. Today the Germans are discussing how they could destroy the Crimean Bridge. They are therefore certain that the Russians do not want the end of the world.

The West should be afraid of something else – and I'm sure serious people on the other side are really afraid, even if they don't show it. What they should be afraid of is not our nuclear shield, but the peacebuilding plan, which Putin talks about in much more detail than he does about military issues.

We can say that until 2022, the country was in roughly the same economic situation that we were in militarily and strategically until 1949. Before 1949, the United States had the atomic bomb, which was not the case for the USSR. This gave rise, in some American minds, to curious plans for unilateral nuclear destruction on the part of our recent ally. Until 2022, it was believed that the United States and its satellites had such a devastating economic “bomb” on their hands. It was said that if they detonated it over Russia, life in the country would come to a halt, the accumulated resources would quickly run out, and the government would fall under pressure from disgruntled citizens.

After so many sanctions packages, we can say: well, they blew it. And where is the result? There is no result. The country does not look like a besieged fortress, there are no ration cards, there is no shortage of goods, trains run, planes fly, high-speed roads are built.

Generally speaking, the country lives and envisages its future in a peaceful manner. To do this, he wants to quickly end hostilities and move on to more interesting things. In general, if someone had told me two years ago that in early 2024 I would listen to our president and marvel at where the country gets so much money, I never would have. believed. And this is where Western strategists should be really afraid.

First of all, it turns out that the economic bomb does not exist. It doesn't work, it's not even worth trying. If this news is sad for some, it is good for others, for countries that would also like to free themselves from Western diktat.

Secondly, it turned out that the plan for a “war of attrition” with Russia is useless. Russia is getting stronger, not exhausted. The stories that the Russians have “missiles for two or three days” can be forgotten. As for the deployment of military production, it's not that we haven't "started" yet, but we started relatively recently and we won't be finished for some time.

Third, you abandon the markets temporarily, then suddenly discover that you have abandoned them for good. What falls from the wagon disappears. It is not without reason that our peacebuilding plan includes the creation of new logistics corridors to redirect our exports, strengthening ties with new, more reliable partners and establishing our own production of goods that we purchases previously from those who like to impose sanctions, whether it be medicines or civil aircraft.

Finally, fourth, and most importantly. The hope that Russia can be defeated, disintegrated, destroyed from within is fading. And that's exactly what they were hoping for. Poor Borrell, a purely civilian man, could have dreamed of Russia being defeated on the battlefield. But serious military experts from NATO countries said from the very beginning and continue to say today that in the event of a head-on collision, the Russian bear cannot be broken. Finally, there comes a time when it is pointless to carry out subversive work, pointless to spread propaganda, pointless to fuel the opposition. People who are ready to create their own future won't buy all of this. And that's what really scares them.

This new fear of Russia is already being felt. Since the West has already moved from the thesis “Ukraine will definitely win” to “if Ukraine loses”, and soon to “when Ukraine will lose”, it has already begun to calculate future losses. Thus, the French Minister of Foreign Affairs (and at the same time the husband of the current Prime Minister Attal, as their relations are excellent), Stéphane Sejourné, predicts losses of several billion dollars and warns that after victory, Russia will control 30% of the world grain market, which is simply terrible.

This clearly illustrates the evolution of Russia's position in the world. In Soviet times, a single state encompassed the growing areas of Russia, Ukraine, and Kazakhstan, but this did not make it a monopolistic exporter; on the contrary, the country bought grain. Today, it follows that Russia poses an economic threat to its Western adversaries for one reason: grain, but there are others. This is very flattering for a country that a misguided person once called a "gas station."

In reality, peaceful cooperation and competition is what we have always wanted. If the populations of European countries finally realize that Russia's primary goal is to create a peaceful future, it will likely be more difficult for their current governments, which insist on beating the drums of war, to retain their seats. This is why the propaganda balloon with the image of the Russian bear, which shows its nuclear fangs in a predatory manner, will continue to inflate in the West. Until it bursts.

source: VZGLYAD via History and Society

https://en.reseauinternational.net/loccident-craint-une-russie-pacifique-et-non-pas-ses-armes-nucleaires/

 

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT.

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

Comments by Pope Francis about launching peace talks to end the Ukraine conflict are out of line and untimely, the EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has said.

Borrell’s remark comes after the head of the Catholic Church stated in an interview with Swiss broadcaster RSI last weekend that it would be a display of courage from Kiev if it raised a “white flag” and entered into peace negotiations with Russia. 

“The Holy Pope entered a garden where no one invited him… But calling on Ukraine to surrender is more than a wish for peace,” the diplomat said during an interview on Thursday with Spanish public radio RNE.

Borrell went on to state that he believes “that now is not the moment when it is necessary to offer Ukraine to surrender. On the contrary, this is the moment when we need to continue to help.” 

The EU’s top diplomat is the latest official to weigh in on the Pope’s words, which sparked outrage in Kiev and beyond. Numerous European officials have said they took remarks as a call for Ukraine to surrender to Russia.

In a statement on Sunday, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, without specifically mentioning Pope Francis, stated that the religious figures who are trying to help Ukraine are “together with the people, not two and a half thousand kilometers away somewhere, virtually mediating between someone who wants to live and someone who wants to destroy you.” 

Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, meanwhile, responded to the pontiff’s claims about the need to be able to accept defeat and “show courage and negotiate” by insisting that a strong person always “stands on the side of good” and stressing that Ukraine’s flag is the only one by which the country “lives, dies and will prevail.” 

We shall never raise any other flags,” Kuleba declared.

Several of Kiev’s foreign backers have also rejected the Pope’s statement.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin said that it shared the pontiff’s desire for peace negotiations between Moscow and Kiev and that Moscow has made repeated calls for talks.

Even after negotiations between Moscow and Kiev broke down in the spring of 2022, Russia has repeatedly stressed that it remains open to meaningful peace talks and has blamed the lack of diplomatic breakthroughs on the Ukrainian authorities.

Kiev and its Western backers, however, have insisted that an agreement can only be reached on Ukraine’s terms and have been promoting the so-called peace formula proposed by Zelensky, which calls for the non-negotiable return of all former Ukrainian territories, as well as the withdrawal of all Russian troops without preconditions, and an international tribunal for Russian leaders.

https://www.rt.com/news/594287-borrell-blasts-pope-ukraine/

 

DESPITE WHATEVER ZELENSKUBIASHITHEAD, BORING BORRELL AND THE WEST SAYS, THE ONLY SOLUTION IS:

 

MAKE A DEAL PRONTO BEFORE THE SHIT HITS THE FAN:

 

NO NATO IN "UKRAINE" (WHAT'S LEFT OF IT)

THE DONBASS REPUBLICS ARE NOW BACK IN THE RUSSIAN FOLD — AS THEY USED TO BE PRIOR 1922. THE RUSSIANS WON'T ABANDON THESE AGAIN.

THESE WILL ALSO INCLUDE ODESSA, KHERSON AND KHARKIV.....

CRIMEA IS RUSSIAN — AS IT USED TO BE PRIOR 1954

A MEMORANDUM OF NON-AGGRESSION BETWEEN RUSSIA AND THE USA.

 

EASY.

 

THE WEST KNOWS IT. THE WEST KNOWS IT. THE WEST KNOWS IT.!!!!!!

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....

 

YUCKRAINE IS STILL USING THE RED AND BLACK FLAG TO CELEBRATE ITS NAZI/FASCIST HEROES....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2nv8W2KW7tM

Putin just scored a KNOCKOUT Blow to NATO and Ukraine is Terrified w/ Andrei Martyanov

 

 

NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg has warned members of the bloc against committing a “historic mistake” by allowing Russia and its president, Vladimir Putin, to secure victory in the Ukraine conflict. 

Speaking at a conference in Brussels on Thursday, Stoltenberg insisted that Ukraine has proven that it is capable of defeating Russia on the battlefield and has survived thus far thanks to the “unprecedented” support of NATO countries. 

Now, however, Kiev is “running out of ammunition,” the NATO chief warned, and called on bloc members to mobilize their reserves and “show the political will” to provide Ukraine with everything that it needs to continue the fight. 

“All allies need to dig deep and deliver quickly,” Stoltenberg insisted, adding that every day of delay has “real consequences” on the battlefield for Ukraine. 

“This is a critical moment. And it would be a grave, historic mistake to allow Putin to prevail,” he said, adding that such an outcome would be “dangerous for us all.” 

Stoltenberg went on to note that despite Russia’s attempts to “slam NATO’s door shut,” the bloc has instead continued to grow, adding Finland and Sweden to its ranks while “Ukraine is closer to NATO than ever before.” 

https://www.rt.com/news/594282-nato-putin-historic-mistake

 

 

FROM Andrei Martyanov

 

 ... ouch. It is also a very strong indicator of the economic strength, or rather lack thereof.  

 

The U.S. Navy is pushing back the start of construction on its next-generation attack submarine by nearly a decade, citing tight budgets and a need to fund current and near-term operations. A Navy spokesperson told Defense News construction on the lead ship of the SSN(X) program, which will follow the Virginia-class attack submarine, is now planned to start in the “early 2040s.” The Navy last year planned to begin the ship class in 2035, and it was previously set for a 2031 start. In its fiscal 2025 budget, the Navy is seeking to delay spending on several modernization programs, including SSN(X), the DDG(X) next-generation destroyer, and the F/A-XX next-generation fighter.

 

When I say the United States lost the arms race — I mean it. This is not some hyperbole or figure of speech. Virginias are excellent subs but their Block I would be around 40 years old early 2040s. Virginia is a fourth generation sub, but while she still could be improved as a platform, her weapons' suite is not that impressive, however still dangerous. TLAMs are becoming obsolete, and UGM-84 Harpoon is not getting younger too. This suite loses outright to 3M54, P-800 and 3M22 Zircon carried by Yasen-class. But Russia already has a fifth generation sub with fifth generation capabilities — it is Belgorod, the carrier of Poseidon and hell knows what other advanced underwater drones. The work on the fifth generation modular sub has started in Russia long time ago and already in 2017 there was a very interesting news about newest Project 545 Laika (Husky-class) sub:

 

Судостроительные предприятия готовы заняться новой лодкой сразу же после достройки серии "Ясеней". По словам заместителя главкома ВМФ вице-адмирала Виктора Бурсука, первую "Хаски" заложат в 2023-2024 годах. Достроить и сдать ее флоту планируется на рубеже 2030-го. Даже по тем обрывочным данным, которые появляются в открытом доступе, очевидно, что засекреченный проект с научно-технической точки зрения будет революционным. ... Строить АПЛ пятого поколения начнут после сдачи серии из семи многоцелевых подлодок проекта 885 "Ясень", которые планируется ввести в боевой состав ВМФ до 2023 года.

 

Translation: Shipbuilding enterprises are ready to start working on a new boat immediately after the completion of the Yasen series. According to Deputy Commander-in-Chief of the Navy, Vice Admiral Viktor Bursuk, the first Husky will be laid down in 2023-2024. It is planned to complete construction and deliver it to the fleet at the turn of 2030.Even from the fragmentary data that appears in the public domain, it is obvious that the classified project will be revolutionary from a scientific and technical point of view. ... Construction of the fifth-generation nuclear submarines will begin after the delivery of a series of seven Project 885 Yasen multi-purpose submarines, which are planned to be commissioned into the Navy by 2023.

 

See highlighted? Russian Navy currently has 5 project 885 Yasen-class SSGNs afloat. Arkhangelsk is outfitting at the pier and getting ready for tests. Perm and Ulyanovsk are being built, to be commissioned into the fleet in 2025.This is seven. 

Here are some renderings of Laika compared to Yasen-class, many of whose features Laika inherits. 

https://smoothiex12.blogspot.com/

 

 

READ FROM TOP

 

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW....