by Andrew Korybko
PART II: Nuland’s Plan For The Balkans (And How It Can Dramatically Backfire)
(Please read Part I before this article)
Having laid out Nuland’s vision for the Balkans, it’s now time to reverse her processes and show how some of them can be wittily co-opted to liberate the region from unipolar control. The article will address each of the three themes that Nuland spoke upon and highlight the opportunities that they present to the multipolar world, if properly utilized. The last part of the piece concludes with a groundbreaking proposal for a regional grassroots movement based in Macedonia and/or Serbia that would publicly advocate for de-facto Yugoslav reintegration (in all spheres except for the political one) and support the Balkans’ full pivot towards BRICS and the developing multipolar world order.
Chinks In The Armor
Nuland’s analyzed statements in Part I reveal clues as to what Republika Srpska, Serbia, and Macedonia must do to resist Euro-Atlanticism. Here’s how they can reverse the US’ plans for them:
Republika Srpska:
This federative entity must continue exercising its constitutional right to partial sovereignty and indefinitely delay the Euro-Atlantic occupation of all of Bosnia. So long as it flexes its authority in line with Bosnia’s constitution (which it has consistently been doing for over 20 years already), then there are no legitimate grounds for accusing it of a political provocation that could usher in a domino scenario of US-planned destabilization in Bosnia. More than anything, the republic’s authorities must resist the temptation to overwhelmingly respond to any forthcoming ethnic provocations that will surely be launched against it, with the most recent being the Vucic stoning attempt. It’s expected that similar ethno-religious hate incidents will crop up all around the area, but the key will be in moderating the government’s reaction so that it walks the fine balance between forceful but fair (admittedly a very hard act to do under such growing external pressure). Additionally, the republic must be prepared for dealing with terrorist incidents similar to that which transpired in Zvornik in late April, and should recognize that when confronting irrefutable terrorism, no holds should be barred (unlike when responding to relatively ‘softer’, but nonetheless still serious, provocations such as agitating unrest by the Bosnian Muslim minority living in its territory or those bussed in to protest).
Serbia:
The Serbian government must unambiguously state its full opposition to changing the constitution in order to facilitate the recognition of Kosovar ‘independence’. Vucic has been awkwardly attempting to please his EU partners by toying with such an idea, and it’s responsible for energizing grassroots opposition to his government. If he moved forward with the referendum, it would likely fail in any case, but the danger is that the event itself could serve as a ‘trigger’ of opportunity to activate the militant pro-Western cells inside the country and recreate a Kievan scenario in Belgrade. After all, such a vote wouldn’t be simply about Kosovo and Serbian national identity (which are huge topics full of emotional significance in and of themselves), but about whether or not Serbia wants to continue moving towards the EU. Framed in such a way, which it undoubtedly would be by the Western mainstream media, it carries strong undertones of the decisive moment when Yanukovich decided to delay the signing of the EU Association Agreement, and unwittingly pushed forward the Color Revolution that was being planned against him for the next election cycle.
Instead of continuing to entertain the notion of recognizing Kosovo as an ‘independent country’, the Serbian government should move itself closer to Russia and have trust and confidence in its population that such a decision will be supported by the majority. The Kosovo issue is of such importance to Serbs that any attempt to officially change the government’s policy on the topic will be vehemently opposed by a cross-domain sector of the population, even many of those formally in favor of EU integration. This is because it touches upon the patriotic essence of Serbian identity that transcends all political affiliations except for those most opposed to the expression of Serbian sovereignty (the pro-EU radicals, which are presently thought to be in a minority). If Vucic wants to capitalize off of the positive relations that he’s fostered with Russia thus far, he needs to move as far away from the revisionist Kosovo agenda as possible and clearly state his opposition to reversing the government’s policy in this regard.
Finally, the last thing that Serbia must do is restrain itself from formally intervening in Republika Srpska if the situation rapidly spirals out of control there. Here it can learn a lesson or two from Russia, which demonstrated the highest level of restraint in refusing to formally intervene in Eastern Ukraine despite the unacceptable casualties that kept mounting against the affiliated population there. Moscow recognized that the US was trying to draw it into a geostrategic trap (the ‘ Reverse Brzezinski ’), and although it failed to ensnare Russia, it doesn’t mean the US won’t try to deploy it in Republika Srpska to entrap Serbia. It’s not to say that Belgrade must refrain from any show of support for Banja Luka – not in the least! – but that it must make sure that no formal military intervention takes place that would bleed its resources and expose its southern front to a devastating terrorist war in the Presevo Valley and Sandzak regions. It’s a herculean task to balance such simultaneous destabilizations, but if it receives Russian strategic guidance and acquires a proper understanding of the imminent threats facing it, Serbia should be able to successfully manage its resistance.
Macedonia:
Gruevski and his government need to stand strong against the Color Revolution plots that have been hatched against them, meaning that it may not have been the wisest move to have capitulated by forming a pre-election transitional government (just as Nuland wanted ). His actions may now lead to a serious loss of control over the country’s institutional apparatuses should a trusted confidant not take his place in the interim, which could make a forthcoming election loss a fait accompli due to the rigging tactics that may be used against the incumbent/resigning (?) Prime Minister. Macedonia’s democratically elected and legitimate government has proven the groundswell of grassroots support it enjoys by successfully calling upon nearly one hundred thousand citizens to demonstrate on its behalf at the height of the Color Revolution attempt against the country in mid-May. Thus, it’s evident that it has the popular backing needed to win any upcoming election, to say nothing of its ability to stay in office until the vote is held, which makes Gruevski’s decision all the more confusing to fathom.
The patriotism that pervades Macedonia needs to be recognized as constituting perhaps the most important political force in the country. Some of those who demonstrated in support of the government last May possibly may not have supported the Prime Minister himself, but they wanted to show their resistance to the foreign regime change attempt being activated against their country. Macedonians are exceptionally proud of their identity, and they understand how threatened it is by neighboring states, especially Greece and Bulgaria . As a result, they’re well aware of how quickly it can be lost (and undemocratically at that) if a foreign-installed government comes to power and unilaterally changes the country’s name, which would instill fear among the population that a more comprehensive rollback of their identity is imminent (such as changing how their ethnic and linguistic identity is described). This means that Macedonians will not surrender their hard-fought-for identity in silence, and will do whatever they can to protect what they and their families have struggled for years to finally attain.
Should Gruevski win the upcoming early election and initiate a referendum on the name issue, he would likely be doing so in order to show the West how strongly the population opposes any modification in this regard (just as they opposed the attempt to depose him), however, he must be careful that such a vote isn’t manipulated by the Western mainstream media as a vote for or against the EU (as they plan on doing with any prospective Serbian constitutional referendum, as was described above). If the situation develops according to this scenario, then it’s likely that yet another round of Color Revolution mayhem will break out in the country, with the distinct possibility that the US would escalate it into an all-out Hybrid War to achieve its regime change ends (or at the very least, kill the prospects for Balkan Stream’s transit through the country). As a final verdict on the country, one must realize that although the situation appears to have calmed since the mid-May Color Revolution climax, such reassurances are false and misleading, and Macedonia has never been removed from the US’ destabilization crosshairs, nor is it likely to be freed from such plots within the near future.
Reviving Yugoslavia
Nuland’s proposal to essentially resurrect Yugoslavia was of the right idea, but fails miserably in its form as a subservient German proxy. However, that doesn’t mean that such restorative efforts should be discarded in another more respectable form, which is what is being advocated in this section. Nuland and the US government that she represents clearly recognize the appeal that regional integration has to the masses, as certain elements of them (even those not of mature age at the time) have developed a sort of historical nostalgia for the old Yugoslavia. While that entity is irrevocably destroyed as a result of the US-initiated wars in the region, it is definitely possible to revive it in a softer, more abstract form via infrastructure integration (which is also what Nuland proposes). What needs to change as regards Nuland’s vision, however, is both the integrationist core (Serbia, not Croatia) and the geopolitical affinity of the new de-facto entity (multipolar, not unipolar).
To offer a more constructive and sovereign template for reintegrating the lands of the former Yugoslavia (which had its prior integration networks ripped to shreds by the US-promoted wars on its territory), one needs to begin by addressing the points of ‘appeal’ that Nuland attempted to make during her speech. First thing first, she spoke of the need to lay down ethnic rivalry and move past previous divisions. What she had described is the Russian and multipolar method of handling international relations , not the trans-Atlantic cabal’s tactics of strategic state fragmentation and Brzezinski-esque breakdowns (which the region unfortunately experienced in the 1990s). Coming to the realization that her appealing rhetoric most closely resembles the Russian reality of international relations, the population can then become receptive to the benefits that a multipolar alignment would bring.
Continuing along this path of thought, if Serbia and Macedonia can hold out just a little bit longer against Euro-Atlantic occupation, then they could potentially be eligible for BRICS New Development Bank (NDB) financing. The President of Brazil’s Development Bank, one of the constituent members of the NDB, announced in an interview in response to whether or not those two countries could receive development assistance in the future, that:
“Those are the periphery of the European Union. They deserve attention, they are not fully developed economies, and I think the New Development Bank could take action in the future.”
This monumental proclamation means that the Balkans no longer have to choose between the false choice of Euro-Atlantic domination and poverty, which the West has been misleadingly presenting for over two decades, since a third alternative, multipolar support from the BRICS nations, could offer a much better deal. All that has to happen for them to remain eligible is to indefinitely remain outside the EU by adhering to the abovementioned policy recommendations. Once the BRICS countries get the hang of operating the NDB and establish projects in their constituent countries (with the first to be approved by April 2016 ), then they could begin expanding their activity to underdeveloped peripheral countries, which in Russia’s case could extend all the way to Serbia and Macedonia. If these two Central Balkan states enter into fruitful cooperation with BRICS, then they could become a magnet for more multipolar investment in the region that could possibly extend into EU-member Croatia as well (outside the framework of the NBD). The most realistic scenario for this would be via pipeline cooperation and the creation of a branch extension of Balkan Stream from Serbia/Republika Srpska to Croatia and Slovenia.
Remember – the US wants to use pipeline infrastructure to begin the reintegration of the Balkans (per Nuland’s suggestion that Croatia serve as an LNG hub for the region) – so it’s not farfetched at all that the reverse scenario, a pipeline from Serbia to the Western Balkans, could fulfill the same purpose. In fact, if there’s anything that Russia and the US implicitly agree on, it’s that pipelines (be they Balkan Stream or the LNG-sourced Croatian pipeline) form the spine of further Balkan integrational projects, and that they’re a key component of New Cold War strategy being utilized by either side. Arriving at such an understanding allows one to more fully comprehend the determination that Russia and the US are exhibiting towards the realization of their respective pipeline plans, and by appreciating their placement in each’s foreign policy toolkit ( especially Russia’s ), to not fall victim to shortsighted and premature announcements heralding the speculated end of their ambitions. In one way or another, Russia and the US are both on the same strategic page of the need to reintegrate the former Yugoslavia (in infrastructural/social [?] form, not in political fact), it’s just a question of which particular vision will eventually prevail.
Rooting Out The Radicals
The Balkans’ multipolar reorientation is being held back by radical pro-EU elements that promote their patrons’ policies inside their home countries. It’s not their support of the EU that makes them radical, but rather the extent that they are willing to go in order to bring their countries under its control. This takes the form of supporting Color Revolutions, behaving as a political fifth column (when it comes to elected and appointed bureaucrats in each state), and engaging in terrorism (Greater Albania and religious extremists). What needs to be done is for Republika Srpska, Serbia, and Macedonia to ironically follow Nuland’s earlier advice but do so in a way that promotes their sovereign and multipolar interests. As a reminder, here’s what Nuland said:
“As we redouble our efforts to bring growth to the entire region, we must also be vigilant defenders of our democratic values. We stand for free trade, free markets, and free peoples. We gain strength when our governments are clean and serve their people. We aspire to set the global gold standard for religious and ethnic tolerance and pluralism. In everything we do, we must support the sovereign right of nations to chart their own democratic futures; we must root out the cancer of corruption that eats away at livelihoods, democracies, and security; and we must work together to halt the spread of violent extremism and foreign fighters.
Corruption remains a major impediment to progress in this region. It is the cancer that saps strength from our democracies and drives up unemployment and civil unrest. More than that, it opens vulnerabilities that autocrats, petro states, and violent extremists exploit. All those who seek to stir up trouble here find an easy gateway when dirty money can buy corrupt politicians and undercut democratic governance and the rule of law.”
If viewed from the multipolar perspective, then her recommendations are actually quite useful. Defending democratic values is as simple as engaging in the type of democratic security that Macedonia partook in at the height of the Color Revolution attempt against it, when patriotic citizens flooded the capital to show their support for the country’s independence and the rule of law. Supporting free trade, markets, and peoples is another way of saying that the Balkans must be given the choice to interact with the BRICS countries and move forward with the Balkan Silk Road that China is planning for the region. Being the global gold standard for religious and ethnic tolerance and pluralism just means following the lead of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, the most diverse major powers on earth. When it comes to rooting out the cancer of corruption, as Nuland puts it, multipolar supporters could take this to mean the beginning of a campaign against the radical Eurocrat elites in their country.
This needs to be extrapolated upon a bit more in order to bring it into full synchronization with Nuland’s subsequent rhetoric. She speaks about how corruption apparently attracts autocrats, petro states, and violent extremism, and seen from the multipolar perspective, this is also unquestionable. Flipping the table on what Nuland meant (which was described in Part I), one can hold the following interpretation:
Corruption is the key trait that makes the Balkan elite susceptible to EU influence, which opens the door for EU autocracy, the conniving petro state plans of Qatar and its Croatia-destined LNG, and the violent extremism of NGOs. Corruption is also the reason that foreign American fighters are based in Serbia’s occupied province of Kosovo and why Color Revolution infrastructure has proliferated throughout the region. Root out the corrupt politicians and pro-EU radicals, and the Balkans can have an entirely different future than the one Nuland wants.
The way to do this is to ironically follow exactly what Nuland said to do. In her own words, “It is not just governments that need to act. Civil society, independent media, and private citizens all need to make their voices heard and shape necessary reforms. They need to keep asserting their rights to freedom of expression, representation and peaceful assembly.” The next section will explain what’s meant by all of this.
Welcoming Multipolarity
Russia, China, BRICS, and all other multipolar actors are ready to enter the Balkans and assist with development and integration, as seen by Moscow’s Balkan Stream pipeline plans, China’s Balkan Silk Road, and the possibility of BRICS infrastructure financing. They’ve run across a major obstacle, however, ever since John Kerry officially decreed in February that the Balkans were in the “ line of fire ” between the US and Russia. He specifically mentioned Serbia and Macedonia in his threatening address, and it’s no coincidence that both are now in the crosshairs of American-initiated destabilization, be it the failed assassination attempt against Serbia’s Prime Minister or the temporarily halted Hybrid War that was to be unleashed on Macedonia in May (and is still awaiting the signal for large-scale activation). Complicating matters even further are the radical pro-EU elements that have infested both countries, such as the Color Revolution experts Otpor, and Zoran Zaev and his Open Society associates, respectively (although far from a comprehensive list). In order to create a more welcoming environment for the arrival of multipolarity and counter the hostile tension against it that’s been fostered by outside forces, Balkan citizens, specifically those in Serbia and Macedonia, might take the initiative to form grassroots movements to oppose the radical pro-EU corruption in their countries and complement their government’s multipolar initiatives.
Suffice to say, this proposed movement (or movements, depending on how it evolves and interacts between Serbia and Macedonia) would logically originate in the last two holdout Balkan states, since they are the only two that still have a chance of unadulterated ( as in, not controlled by the EU) multipolar engagement with Russia, China, and BRICS. Following Nuland’s ideas, it would promote the strengthening of pro-multipolar civil society and connect with independent (non-EU-dominated) media. Private citizens, not foreign powers, form the heart of this movement, and it is up to them to organize proponents in their respective towns and regions. By peacefully and non-provocatively applying certain tactics from the Color Revolution playbooks of “ From Dictatorship To Democracy ” and “ 198 Methods of Non-Violent Action ”, they can enact a sizeable impact on the national discussion by exposing corrupt pro-EU elites, resisting undemocratic attempts by certain figures to rush their countries into the EU, and countering actual Color Revolutions. The most important role that they would fulfill, however, is in raising nationwide awareness about the objective benefits of multipolar cooperation and the multitude of sovereign threats stemming from Euro-Atlantic occupation. Many citizens may not be fully aware of the advantages of reorienting their countries towards BRICS (while still retaining pragmatic relations with the EU) due to the deluge of pro-Western information that they’re flooded with daily, so it’s pivotal to force their attention via highly publicized manifestations inspired by Gene Sharp’s writings.
In no way is any of this meant to oppose the sitting governments – quite the contrary, civil society can take certain initiatives that the authorities cannot. Due to the tense geopolitical situation in the Balkans and Kerry’s “line of fire” threat, Belgrade and Skopje are reluctant to side too closely with Russia, especially given that they’re already catching a lot of flak for not following the EU’s sanctions policy against it. Civil society, however, is a whole other sphere, one which does not have to diplomatically abide by geopolitical conventions of balancing between Great Powers, and is allowed to be as partisan as it likes, provided that it embodies the legitimate will of the citizenry. Since it’s estimated that most of the citizens in Serbia and Macedonia favor pragmatic business relations with BRICS (which would be neutered, if not outright precluded, by their EU ‘integration’), it’s expected that such a civil movement could experience dramatic success if it’s managed properly. In accordance with the belief that each government (that of Vucic and Gruevski) is ultimately accountable to the people and wants to preserve its governing power for as long as democratically possible, they could very well be influenced by these large-scale multipolar manifestations to the degree that they feel confident enough of their citizens’ support to defiantly stand up to the US and EU’s unipolar commands and chart a brave course towards full-scale cooperation with BRICS.
Concluding Thoughts
Nuland’s visit to the Balkans should be read as the US digging its heels into the region, demonstrating that it has a long-term interest in reshaping it according to the vision that would be most geostrategically advantageous for it. At the same time, coming on the tail end of Greece’s financial capitulation to the EU and the premature and shortsighted fears that Balkan Stream is cancelled, it shows that the US obviously feels that multipolar (i.e. Russian) influence transcends this momentary obstacle and is irrefutably a serious threat to unipolar control of the Balkans. This is why her speech wasn’t a triumphant and condescending one that would characterize a geopolitical ‘victory lap’ if Balkan Stream was indeed done for, but rather one full of fear mongering, threats, and warnings, showing that the US government does not in any manner feel that the New Cold War is concluded in this theater. Quite the contrary, the US intends to accelerate its offensive in the Balkans and remains resolute in its determination to formally subordinate its last three holdouts (which just so happen to be the strongest levers of regional influence that Russia currently has).
The Balkans are definitely in for a tumultuous future, since it’s extremely unlikely that either Russia or the US will walk away without defending their grand strategic interests to the utmost of their capability (no matter how covertly it must be applied). That said, the Balkans are not a neo-colonial object to be bickered over between two Great Powers, as real people inhabit the region and have their own preference for which direction it should develop. Objectively speaking, the US currently holds an advantage through its relative domination of the information networks and civil society organizations in the region, but their radical pro-Western views don’t represent the sentiment of the majority. Therefore, it’s high time that the citizens of each of these two Central Balkan states band together to have their voices heard and peacefully organize to advocate for the geopolitical course that they believe their countries should take. If the US-dominated information and NGO networks aren’t sufficiently echoing the views of the majority, then the majority must rise up to oppose them and replace such entities with structures that embody the will of the people. Taking a few tips from Gene Sharp’s writings, they can assemble in innovative ways that efficiently draw the most attention to their efforts, thereby beginning the process of changing the national conversation at the highest levels and edging their governments closer to a public pivot towards BRICS.
The problem for Serbia is obviously it´s US imposed quisling regime. A cult of former otporistas and Captain America´s running the country since Serbia was “baptised to democracy” 1999 by US bombs and 1.800, no less, western organized and supported NGO´s heavily entrenched in the Serbian society, top to bottom, not to mention the Soros owned media.
The only thing that would help Serbia is another archduke Ferdinand moment it seems
And what exactly makes you think that Serbia is US controlled? I haven’t heard that they are supporting the sanctions on Russia, neither has the government ever attempted to join NATO or recognize Kosovo as an independent state.
They are not even willing to parrot the “genocide” line on Srebrenica but are instead calling in a massacre, which is the factually correct position, because even though most killed were soldiers, there were summary executions of prisoners and some civilians.
As a Serb I really get angry when I read foolish comments that Serbia needs an “Archduke Ferdinand” moment. You know what last time happened? Almost 60% of its overall male population (including children) died.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Campaign_of_World_War_I#Casualties
Russia received communism and gulags! Do you think that was great for Russia or Serbia?
Better leave radical policies to ISIS and its supporters, we don’t need this nonsense.
So saker finally got its first Otpor-troll! What took you guys so long Ivan? Have you been busy with Srdja Popovic and his gang lately?
If Putin would have gone into total opposition to the West back in 1999 Russia would most likely not exist anymore today. Just food for thought for you.
Not even today he feels that he can afford a hard line, even though he pushes them back successfully in certain spheres.
I’ll tell you what they would do to us if we opposed them the way you would prefer it. They would have declared us a rogue regime like North Korea and would make sure that every border around Serbia would be closed. They wouldn’t need to invade us, they’d just starve us to death because we are not fortunate like North Korea to share a border with Russia or China.
What Vucic does is much smarter. He gets a some support from the West, lots from Russia and China and balances them so he doesn’t have to give up anything essential like Kosovo.
If we stay on this course we will be sovereign again in partnership with our neighbors OUTSIDE of the EU.
By the way, fear not, Serbia will never join the EU. Not just because there would be domestic opposition, but also because the EU will never allow Serbia to join, just like Turkey, with whom they are negotiating EU accession for almost 40 years.
The EU is just trying to slow our development (with other, more honest partners) down by waving the EU carrot in front of us.
There is a great deal of desperation and despair in Otpor-Ivan´s post that probably stems not only from the trend that there are so few of them left and those remaining pass every lamp post with utmost nervousness but also that most of them didn´t get their 30 pieces of silver, only part time jobs at NED & Soros´s NGO´s and their media such as B92 at best. The majority like my friend in Belgrade, got a one time offer: Free booze and party all night long during the rallies against President Milosevic. That hangover lasted 20 years….
Looks like the US don´t look after their own after all but we all knew that didtn´t we?
Er, I think you misunderstood. Mikhas meant an obvious enemy openly trying to subvert Serbia, not radical politics.
Also, I think the only reason Vucic hasn’t done all that yet is because Serbians will never allow such things… No amount of brain-washing and propaganda can make the majority support the independency of Kosovo…
Balkans part II: Who would have thought the disclaimed spirit of Lenin might lurk in your writing? By the way who is Gene Sharp and why should any grass roots type person in the Balkans give a flying fig about what he says or how he formulates it? Anyway go Lenin: ” let the “majority rise up?” oh please, look what happened to a man of the people in the Ukraine–Mozgovoi who was doing a bit of radical grassroots organizing in a very challenging manner to the existing power structure at the wrong time in history unfortunately for him. Let us just hope this Gruevski character does not waste the support of 100,000 by pulling a Tsirpas. Leadership as well as ideological platform is key to any “grass roots ” movement. Check the writings of the man who lead the most successful one in history.
So they will have to watch their backs as well as keep an eye on the most obvious enemy in front as well as wait for the break in historical time. Putin probably is the only man on the planet who understands this last concept.
As for regional destabilization; Agree with you there that it will undoubtedly continue. The template that the Hegemon is using for the break up of the mid East especially Iraq is the promotion of Israelistan otherwise known as Kurdistan as the dominator state. There always has to be a dominator in their scenarios. So which will it be in the Balkans? Croatia perhaps or a greater Albaniestan? As in the Ukraine, one of their alternate scenarios in theIr plan is to have that master statelet ( greater Kiev?) as a means for bullying and constant source of infection. Transcarpathia ? oh let the drug gangs have it! And the Poles can take care of those pesky Lvovites. The East is already serving its purpose. … Now Odessa? oh no must have a port on the Black Sea and a link tthrough Roumania up to guts of Eastern Europe. Will fight for Odessa. Poor Odessa.
I think this analysis lacks one very important factor, and that is the dominant ideology of nowdays Wester countries, which fastly penetrates Balkan peoples, and that is the gender ideology or LGBT ideology. That is a very powerful ideology, mainly propagated through media, and stays in direct oposition to somewhat orthodox uprising of Russia. Unipolarity or multipolarity is a question of this: will you have only one ruling ideology or will you have tolerance and plurality. I think the West and those who are attached to them dont want tolerance and plurality, and they are now like nazis or communists in 30s of XX. century. So unification of Balkan needs primarly an ideology. First, you had “yugoslavism”, then “communism” and now “genderism/liberalism/LGBTism”.
I’m trying to figure out what the political or economic or military or control ramifications are supposed to be of treating women and LGBT equally as opposed to not doing so.
So far, coming up blank. Free trade has control implications. Dollar hegemony has control implications. NATO membership has control implications. Non-gay-bashing, um, has, ummm, dunno. What’s it supposed to do, exactly?
I think it doesn’t have as much to do with homosexuals as with the ideology that is pushed in the West with it to create more tolerance towards homosexuality. Namely promiscuity, having sex with anyone you like without any obligations (it’s understandable that this helps legitimizing this kind of intercourse if they can say it doesn’t matter and doesn’t hurt anyone but it can also lead to more abortions) and the resulting destruction of the classical family structure which possibly has negative consequences regarding birth rate. (this is what particularly hurts the states ability to project power)
I’m sure that few people in Russia would disagree with protecting homosexuals from being attacked and beaten on the streets and anything like that. In fact Russia and even its predecessor the USSR protected their rights decades before the West started doing it.
If it weren’t for this ideology then this probably wouldn’t be an issue. But you’d have to ask homosexuals how life for them was before all of this demonization in Russia to know for sure. There surely have been painful experiences for many, but you can’t ban pain by introducing laws. It’s a question of what is acceptable and what isn’t.
I’d also like to add that it is at least questionable to impose any kind of ideology in such overt ways with the goal to change the minds of your population in such grand scale. (starting in schools)
As long as the LGBT community is not threatened and they can live a normal life like anyone else, people do have the right to like or dislike them if they choose so, even if it is unfair sometimes. (but what isn’t in life?)
And Russia has the right to reject imposing this ideology if their people don’t want this. At least that’s my position even though I’m personally neutral towards homosexuals. I just want to preserve the traditional family structure, that’s what I’m concerned about.
The same people working on imposing their ideology on Russia would by the way fight tooth and nails if for example Iran tried to impose their ideology on them. I’m not against Iran, but this is their culture and it is obviously foreign to great many parts of Russia, as is the Western ideology to Iran or the Russian to the West. Which one is the universally right one? I think it’s nonsensical to even attempt fighting against each other over this.
All countries teach some ideology or other in schools. They teach nationalism, they teach either inclusion or segregation, they teach that church and state should or should not be separate, they teach capitalism, socialism, feudalism, whatever. If you teach history and racism is there, you will be saying something about it; if you don’t say that it’s wrong and different races are equal then you will tacitly be saying otherwise.
“As long as the LGBT community is not threatened and they can live a normal life like anyone else”–Yeah, that’s kind of the point. They are and they can’t. There are things that “anyone else” can do, that society says they can’t or shouldn’t. And as long as it’s fine and dandy for people to “dislike them” not because they’re personally jerks but because they’re (black, gay, Orthodox, female, asthmatic, whatever) they are in danger. Not in theory, but in annals and statistics of beatings, rape and murder.
As to the “traditional family”, if it is incompatible with the idea of people who love one another forming a family it needs some reform. Back in the day of course it was mixed-race marriages that were the threat to the traditional family. Maybe you should consider backing the “loving family” instead.
As a side note, not that it should matter, but I’m straight. I just happen to believe in justice, which implies equal rights for all. Not more rights for whites, or straights, or billionaires, and less for everyone else. My marriage is not threatened by my daughter’s gay friends getting married too. If people are in love and want to they should get married, if they aren’t they shouldn’t, and I see no reason why there should be anything else to consider.
If that’s the solution you want for your own country, fine. But you have no right to have your country impose it on other countries, or try and use it an excuse for ‘regime change’.
Don’t you see what they’re doing? Not five minutes after rolling out their gay marriage ruling–in fact only 12 years after repealing the last of the old sodomy laws–they’re now using LGBT groups in other countries (such as Russia) as a kind of 5th column to make their countries look bad in the western press. It may accomplish that–but even if it does, it will make all LGBTs look like traitors to their countries, bringing on more abuse.
Ahhh! But that’s beauty of the plan. Then Washington has a ‘persecuted minority’ they can grandstand on in Europe. The LGBTs themselves are completely expendable. It is they and they alone who will suffer increased public hostility in their own countries, just so Washington can crow about ‘humans rights’.
It’s all sleazy and shameful exploitation. But that doesn’t guarantee Washington won’t try it.
Any changes to family structures, birthrates, and sexual mores for that matter, are in the end largely a result of the availability of cheap, affordable contraception. Rights and education for women do seem to play a part as well. And there is some indication that with neoliberal economies structured the way they are, having kids has become a much greater economic burden so people try not to do it as much. None of it has much to do with gays.
On the other hand, the culture of extreme promiscuity, porn, sex as spectacle and so on is related to two things that I can see. One is capitalism, which wants everything to be a market and can allow no exceptions, certainly not one as important as sex. The other is puritanism, which requires libertinism as its flip side (much as imperialism requires the “terrorist” or similar threat as its flip side), the thrilling forbidden which must lure so that it can be denounced. Libertine, decadent sexuality flourishes under conditions of repression, especially combined with market exploitation.
Look at the North American gay culture: While repressed, it was a jungle of casual sex, queens, and weird subcultures centred around bars and massage parlors, all expressing a resistance to the repressive establishment holding them down. As it becomes accepted, instead most of the gay guys are getting married, settling down, mowing their suburban lawns. Must be terribly inconvenient for all the Baptist pastors trying to frighten the daylights out of their flocks.
In any case, if there’s one thing the world does not need right now it’s a rapidly expanding population. Rather, the world would be far better off with distinctly fewer people. And if we don’t start heading in that direction soon, the overburdened ecology will do it for us the hard way as various things we depend on erode. The Chinese understand that better than anybody, and are perhaps the only country in the world to engage with the issue decisively. Not that I think their policy is perfect, but at least they have one. If your problem with egalitarianism were that it slowed population growth, even tipped things over into population shrinkage–well aside from being wrong, if it were right it would be a good thing, not a bad one.
“In any case, if there’s one thing the world does not need right now it’s a rapidly expanding population. Rather, the world would be far better off with distinctly fewer people.” (purple guy…)
This is the core of gender/LGBT/eugenic/etc… ideology, which is the heart and mind of todays Western countries. It is an agressive ideology, aimed against other countries, peoples…
That is the single biggest problem of world today: depopulation. Demographic catastrophe.
Guess what: that is the main problem of every Balkan state and nation.
And one more thing: Those who think (like Bill Gates and socalled philantropist) that there are
too many people on earth should start from themselves and leave the place to some poor kid from Africa. From my point of view: that poor kid deserves to live more than any nazi of the world.
Ya know, when you have bacteria growing on a plate in a lab, they will keep on growing exponentially until they cover the thing. Then they’ll poison each other with their waste or outgrow the food supply or both, and the population will implode. Similar things happen when you’re brewing beer or wine; the little yeasts grow like crazy eating all the sugars in the grape juice or what have you, and then they die when the alcohol level gets too high because yeasts shit alcohol.
Google “world population”. The human population has been growing exponentially. In the middle ages we’re talking 350 million or so. In 1800, maybe a billion. By 1900, not yet 2 billion. Now there’s 7 billion and still growing. Reports come in constantly pointing out that, all global warming aside, every year we are using up more of the world’s ecosystem than can regenerate, leaving less for the following year. Fairly soon we’re going to hit that bacteria ceiling. And you’re trying to tell me the world’s problem is depopulation?
Now consider the notion that population reduction is something the Western imperialists are doing to other countries. So presumably, that should mean they’re hoarding the population growth for themselves while inflicting population reduction on everyone else, yes? Obviously, no. Generally, the better off a place is, the more stable or declining its population, led off by Japan. Many of the prosperous Western countries actually would have slightly declining populations if it weren’t for immigration, immigration that those same countries keep complaining about. Meanwhile, the countries exploited by the West see high population growth combined with instability and poverty.
Outliers: Russia, which actually did see population reduction while it was being most victimized, practically the only country this has happened to, and China, which has made a strong conscious effort to reduce its population ahead of prosperity gains. The China example makes it pretty clear that population growth seen as a problem is not a Western thing.
Purple Library Guy,
Here’s a video of the ramifications you seem unaware of:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZX55HUPFSU&feature=youtube_gdata_player
And it doesn’t even begin to touch the subject of soaring rates of womb-prostitution in the developing countries after gay marriage was legalized among gay men:they are the only population in toto who need IVF, surrogacy/egg extraction.
So huge has this trade become, India and Thailand have had to introduce bans in an attempt to control the upsurge of trafficking women, even girls as young as thirteen to meet the Western demand:Russia also introduced a ban on foreign couples after the notorious gay dads case that used a boy bought from his ‘surrogate’ mother for a child pornography ring. Jennifer Lahl has done some sterling work exposing the industry in baby manufacture and womb-prostitution in her documentary ‘Breeders.’
I suspect the main issue for the Eastern Europeans/Russians however, is the indoctrination of young children on the subject. Check out what incorporating gay marriage into the school curriculum in Ontario, Canada has resulted in and you might see just why they are so opposed to state-imposed homosexuality as distinct from spontaneous occurrence within the population.
Everyone is entitled to protection from assault by law, but not to political, social and cultural affirmations of their desires, gay, straight or the full polyamorphous perverse. Refusing to legalize gay marriage is no more discriminatory than banning polygamy, marriage between relatives or to animals.
(Though it won’t be long before lobbies emerge claiming the same ‘rights’ from these quarters too.)
@ 12345,
Q; ..dominant ideology of nowdays Wester countries…
R; You mean unca Sammy’s dominant, rubber stamped version?
OT
http://www.presstv.ir/Detail/2015/07/21/421232/Iran-Russia-ISIS-Ilya-Rogachev-Zarif-Lavrov Excerpts: (no mention of military yet)
Russia has voiced interest to team up with Iran to fight the Takfiri ISIL terrorists operating in the Middle East region.
“We can develop anti-terror cooperation with Iran, first of all, in the Middle East region,” Ilya Rogachev, the director of Department of New Challenges and Threats Issues of the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, said on Monday.
“The notorious international terrorist organization as Islamic State (ISIL) can be and has to be the object of our cooperation with Iran,” the Russian official said.
On July 14, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the conclusion of Iran’s nuclear talks with world powers has paved the way for a “broad” coalition to battle the ISIL Takfiri terrorist group.
“It removes the barriers – largely artificial – on the way to a broad coalition to fight” ISIL and other terrorist groups, said Lavrov.
And here’s another article on the same topic of possible Russian “discouragement” of ISIS, which I guess is actually relevant to protecting the Caucasus and even the Balkans from ISIS.
One excerpt from the Voltaire article:
“This is why Russia asked for the presence of a Syrian delegation in Moscow. To the great surprise of the Syrian Minister of Foreign Affairs, Walid Moallem, the delegation did not talk to the Russian counterpart, Sergeï Lavrov, but was received by President Putin, on the 29th June. Putin warmly welcomed him in public, in the presence of the Press, and delivered a long speech explaining the Russian project – Syria must join with Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey to eliminate Daesh. M. Mouallem was then invited to answer questions from the Press, side by side with President Putin, but without ever being able to answer him directly.
Clearly, Russia had already secretly discussed this plan, not only with Saudi Arabia, [7], Jordan and Turkey [8], but also with Iran, and intended to show the rest of the world that she was in a position to dictate Syria’s policy. Although startled by the Russian initiative, Syria can only benefit from this plan, since it would mean the end of the war.”
http://www.voltairenet.org/article188124.html
Andrew brings our attention to another huge problem set. The Balkans again. Chaos and hatred stirred into a plasma.
It is disheartening to see the Hegemon pulling scabs off deep wounds, “corrupting” nationals and demonizing any patriots who want to build their own future in their own land.
Yet, paths to a better future exist. We can hope Putin and Russia, with the BRICS and China can outweigh the undertow effect of the West’s greed and dominance.
One thing, Andrew. Could you deliver maps for your articles like these? It would be great to have them along with your writings. The places, the region, the position in relation to the bigger nations really would be served well by some good maps.
Thanks for your thoughtful dive into the topic.
Why don’t you learn to properly adress countries or entities? There is no internationally recognized country named “Bosnia”. There is such a country called Bosnia and Herzegovina. It is a Western colony. Is this country you are talking about?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnia_and_Herzegovina
Where the hell did you find a country called Bosnia there? Bosnia is just a land of Bosnian people which, together with Serbian people and its belonging land Republika Srpska and Croat people and its belonging land Herzegovina, makes that country just like for example bavaria and Baden-Wurttemberg are states which are forming Germany or Florida and California which are states forming United States. It isn’t rocket science. What you are doing here is repeating Western narrative of some phantom country named Bosnia which does not exist, but more importanly your narrative is doing damage to us. The West has the reason for doing what they do, whereas you are just plain ignorant doing Western bidding with your own energy… slitting your own throat in other words. Bosnains are their people, only they want that Western colony, which is why there is that Western narrative about Bosnia on the area of an entire Western colony (including RS and Herzegovina). Bosnia is just a state within Western colony Bosnia and Herzegovina, just like Republika Srpska and Herzegovina are exactly the same. And there are no people called “Bosnian Muslims.” Educate yourself. They were called Muslims by Yugoslav constuitution of 1974., but from 1993. they call themselves Bosnians. That is why they wanted out of Yugoslavia — to create their own nation called Bosnains (with the big helf from the West) which would asimilate Serbs and Croats into their Bosnian people. Most of them are not religious, they atheists, so your term “Bosnians Muslims” is not only politically and historically incorrect and false, but fake even on religious ground. But even crazier that that, you are basically pushing interests of Bosnians (and thus Western interests) by your own narrative! It is not the first time I am educating you here, but you just don’t seem to get it.
Republika Srpska is going to become part of Russia. We are just waiting favourable time to have referenda on uniting with Russia. There should have been Russian army and bases in Republiak by now, but Russia hasn’t acted on our call yet. But it is all going to sort out when we become part of Russia, nuclear missiles bases are also coming up. Serbia and Montenegro are coming with us, we are going to pull them in too. We must be united. Serbs always stand united. Now maybe the West has managed to divide and partition us, but we are patient. Out ime will come, and the best way for it to materialize as soon as possible is to Russia to start building military bases in Republika!
Dear Andrew.
How is Greece threatening FYR Macedonia?
Best regards
Athanasios
I think he is talking about the fact that Macedonia is almost surrounded by countries which want to deny it its identity or sovereignty. If it gives in to Greece then Bulgaria will push even more for unification with Macedonia and argue that the a unique Macedonian people or language never existed. What identity can the Macedonians have when they can’t call themselves Macedonian anymore? Bulgarian? Citizens of FYROM (Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia)?
Hard to answer, Macedonia might on the long run seize to exist after that.
On the other side are the Albanians where some radical elements want to capture roughly 25% of Macedonian territory, which could also lead to a civil war.
Either way, the West can pressure Macedonia heavily via its proxies around it. That’s why I suspect the Macedonian PM had to go to Brussels and sign an agreement.
Doesn’t matter if he would have been right to reject any deal with the West, there is a reality where the West could bring about massive pain upon Macedonia.
Serbia had to face the same reality during the NATO Kosovo campaign which by then didn’t cause any significant military losses to Serbia, I’ll quote the article:
“Ahtisaari opened the meeting by declaring, “We are not here to discuss or negotiate,” after which Chernomyrdin read aloud the text of the plan. Ahtisaari says that Milosevic asked about the possibility of modifying the plan, to which he replied, “No. This is the best that Viktor and I have managed to do. You have to agree to it in every part.” Ristic reports that as Milosevic listened to the reading of the text, he realized that the “Russians and the Europeans had put us in the hands of the British and the Americans.” Milosevic took the papers and asked, “What will happen if I do not sign?” In answer, “Ahtisaari made a gesture on the table,” and then moved aside the flower centerpiece. Then Ahtisaari said, “Belgrade will be like this table. We will immediately begin carpet-bombing Belgrade.” Repeating the gesture of sweeping the table, Ahtisaari threatened, “This is what we will do to Belgrade.” A moment of silence passed, and then he added, “There will be half a million dead within a week.”
There is no proof that this is exactly how it happened, but maybe you remember the demonization of Serbia back then. German Media were openly repeating slogans from the first World War back then like: “Serbien muss sterbien” (Serbia must die)
If they could kill a million Iraqis 4 years later, they definitely could have done this to Serbia back then with full support of the Western media and its people.
The point here is that most of the time it doesn’t matter at all if you are right or not. Sometimes you have to negotiate the unacceptable to survive.
Now the best way your energy cam put to productive use, Andrew and Saker too, is for you to start writing about our wanted and inevitable unification with mother Russia, and in your writings to explain and clarify the need for Russia to respond on our call to build military bases in order for region to have security. Norh Atlantic Terrorist Organization is running amok in the region, and people in the region needs safety, which Russian army is going to provide, to those who want it of course.
Forgot to add, 2 days before Western agent Vucic went to Srebrenica to bow and mourn those Bosnians killers who had massively killed Serbian, not only men but, women and children too, he had signed all those things the West wanted from Serbia for its mentioned terrorist organization in Rambouillet (look Rambouillet Agreement). It is no reason to excessive worry as such things are easilly amended, but before we start doing anything the means of blocking possible repeat of aggression of that Western terrorist organization. They divided us into 3 pieces, so it is even harder for us to stand against Western oppression by ourselves. But all that is going to change when we unite with Russia. Also not to forget, there are plenty of things people could do when they put their minds to it, and you can do plenty of good by doing what you do best: educate people about requested, necessary and wanted Russian military bases in Republika. It going to be much easier to make things happen from there.
The first and foremost “petro state” is the Outlaw Empire and has done everything Nuland charges such states with many times over. And of course, it continues to be a Petro State.
Clearly as shown by the comments by disinformationists, this sort of article must be translated into the languages of the Balkan states; such brilliant work is useless when it’s only read by those outside of the region.
It should be recalled that the Outlaw Empire cares nothing about Universal Human Rights, proven many times over besides never ratifying the Treaty created through the supreme efforts of Eleanor Roosevelt.
Dear saker & Andrew,
Thanks for the articles. What do you think of russia’s allies expect from Russia if Russia is not trustworthy as the case with Iran of s300 and I found the below link from Belarus. http://m.belarusdigest.com/story/belarus-eurasian-economic-union-enough-enough-22928
Ah, yes, the belarusdigest.com. http://belarusdigest.com/about
“Yarik Kryvoi is the founder and the Editor-in-Chief of Belarus Digest. He is also Secretary of the Anglo-Belarusian Society. A Harvard Law School grad, Yarik has been working for international law firms and taught law in the United Kingdom, Russia, Belarus and the United States for over ten years. He is originally from Minsk, Belarus and is currently an Associate Professor at the University of West London. His web site is kryvoi.net and he tweets at…”
http://kryvoi.net
“Experience as a Consultant
Economic Court of the Commonwealth of Independent States (Minsk, Belarus)
Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty (Prague, Czech Republic)
International Labour Organization (Geneva, Switzerland)
The World Bank (Washington, DC, USA)
World Trade Organisation (Geneva, Switzerland)”
Thanks.. u got it covered
This comment was originally posted under “Anonymous”, but is by the same “bd” whom it was a reply to.
Andrew,
Thank you for your analysis of the possibilities in the Balkans. Now we’ll know what to watch for.
I found Nuland’s statement of being for “free trade, free markets and free people” especially ironic: When less-developed countries open their markets to more developed ones the result is always the same. They become impoverished and dependent. Less-developed industries and farming cannot compete with the more developed, so their industry and farms fail.
The only method to become competitive in an area is to invest in the machinery or other input needed. But in the current IMF/Fed system they are forbidden to create their own currency and credit instruments apart from the dollar or euro. And so starts the debt trap. All of the Southern EU countries have experienced this, while Germany grew richer.
“Corruption is the key trait that makes the Balkan elite susceptible to EU influence, which opens the door for EU autocracy, the conniving petro state plans of Qatar and its Croatia-destined LNG, and the violent extremism of NGOs.” You sure got that right.
Free trade is what the British Empire desired, but the nascent Outlaw Empire was wise and erected tariffs and other impediments to trade so its “Infant Industries” could have an opportunity to develop. The motive behind “free trade” is to suborn such industries and replace them with your own. And even better if you can get a government to take out a loan–review what was called Dollar Diplomacy, and you will see where the idea of IMF’s “Structural Adjustment Loans” originated. Famously, it was John Adams who first raised the warning about taking out loans with stronger foreign competitors.
I have a question for the author: since you believe that Yugoslavia is a good idea and would like to revive it, what is your suggestion for ensuring that it will not be anti-Serbian Yugoslavia, as the first two of them were (I would like to remind you that the first Yugoslavia ended with killing 1 million Serbs in the Second World War, while the second one ended with expulsion of more than 1 million Serbs from their ancestral lands (Kraina, Dalmatia, Slavonia, Baranja, Bosnia, Herzegovina, Kosovo, Metohija etc.), most of these people live now abroad, because at that time Republic of Serbia, under sanctions and eventually bombed, could not take care of all this people). Are you aware of the size of the Serbian nation? Are you aware that imposing supra-national (Yugoslav) identity on Serbs (while Germany, Vatican, UK and USA will do everything to strengthen national identity of the others, ingeneer nations, based on hater of Serbia) will further destroy Serbian ability to defend themselves.
If you really believe, as you say, that real people live on the ground then listen: We want unification of Serbian lands and the strongest possible connection with Russia. We have tried everything else, all the stupid multicultural concepts (that may work for the Russian Empire but not for us, we are not an empire, but a small nation) and we know that Russian military bases on Serbian soil are the only thing that could guarantee further existence of the Serbian nation and state. Needless to say, this state should include all the Serbian lands, Republika Srpska as a bare minimum. Why this is not an option for an analyst like you? Would really appreciate if you could sincerely answer the question.
Thank you,
Regards, Rosa
“In everything we do, we must support the sovereign right of nations to chart their own democratic futures; we must root out the cancer of corruption that eats away at livelihoods, democracies, and security; and we must work together to halt the spread of violent extremism and foreign fighters.
Corruption remains a major impediment to progress in this region. It is the cancer that saps strength from our democracies and drives up unemployment and civil unrest. More than that, it opens vulnerabilities that autocrats, petro states, and violent extremists exploit. All those who seek to stir up trouble here find an easy gateway when dirty money can buy corrupt politicians and undercut democratic governance and the rule of law.”
Yeah Nuland-same for Crimea?
and
http://fortruss.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/poroshenkos-speech-to-rada-today.html
Poroshenko’s Speech to Rada Today: Eliminate Corruption by Legalizing Criminality [video]
http://fortruss.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/75-billion-uah-fraud-of-yatsenyuk.html
as it says
http://fortruss.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/ukrainian-national-guard-earns-tens-of.html
Donbass blockade gives opportunities to earn via corruption
http://fortruss.blogspot.co.uk/2015/03/the-list-of-most-high-profile-fraud.html
in the Kiev Junta,
http://en.interfax.com.ua/news/general/271807.html
Chief of the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) Valentyn Nalyvaichenko has said that on Friday all the leaders of the main directorate for battling corruption and organized crime of SBU Central Office were fired.
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150716/1024722140.html
“Now if the US Customs delegation is supposed to teach Ukrainians how to fight corruption, Nasirov has certainly chosen the wrong kind of guys to help him out. The CBP is known as America’s most corrupt police force. The CBP has the highest per-capita record of officers being arrested for corruption. Moreover the agency has a culture that includes the use of deadly and unnecessary force against unarmed people, the LA times said.
The problem has become so widespread that the US government decided to hire more than 300 new investigators to make sure that the 44,000-men strong agency is free of corruption, the Government Executive reported.
So, turns out that the CBP and the Ukrainian Customs Services are cut from the same cloth — both are corrupt to the bone.”
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150716/1024722140.html#ixzz3gbaNfIXX
———————————————————
http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150528/1022642258.html
“Self-enrichment remains the primary goal of Ukraine’s leadership and Rada members, whose corruption is reinforced by the integration of criminal groups into the power structures, facilitated by the armed conflict in the southeast, according to the OCO report.
“The alliance between the oligarchs and the state has become entrenched at the highest levels of government, while at the local level, judges, police, local government officials and politicians have organized themselves into a corrupt network of mutual enrichment at the public expense.As a result, the country continues to struggle with corruption, which threatens to contaminate EU states, especially if Ukraine is granted EU membership.
OCO says it observed similar developments in Bulgaria and Romania, which are now EU members, as well as Serbia, a country in the process of getting EU membership.”
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150528/1022642258.html#ixzz3gbbAnWH3
“The EU is concerned with the referendum, that may take place in the Republic of Serbia, as Federica Mogherini, representative of the EU Foreign Affairs and Security Policy claimed.
She said it “would challenge the cohesion, sovereignty and integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina”. And as the date has not been determined yet, it gives space for the idea to be reconsidered, according to her.
The Serbian parliament decided to hold a referendum this September in order to abolish the Prosecutor’s Office and Court of Bosnia-Herzegovina. That may be the first step towards further proclaiming independence.
The US embassy denounced the initiative as the work of “corrupt forces” and said that Washington would devise an “appropriate response.” ”
– See more at: http://english.pravda.ru/news/world/21-07-2015/131415-serbia-0/#sthash.nGaI2cQW.dpuf
———————————————–
“American neocons have turned wars into a profitable business, a US investigative journalist exposes, nailing Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland and her husband, arch-neocon Robert Kagan, for their dubious foreign strategy.”
today in
Read more: http://sputniknews.com/politics/20150721/1024894225.html#ixzz3gbbgCMX1
only few days ago a report how RADA is still currently corrupt
russia-insider.com/en/ukraine-corruption/ri8804…….
“Ex-Ukraine Secret Police Chief Reveals the Depth of Gov’t Corruption
Having been fired last month the post-Maidan SBU chief is now spilling the beans on his boss Poroshenko”
http://www2.gwu.edu/~ieresgwu/assets/docs/demokratizatsiya%20archive/06-04_shelley.pdf
extensive report how corruption works in Ukraine
re sakaashvilli
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/saakashvili-busy-selling-odessa-his-american-friends/ri8497
and the other day he falsely denounced a profitable company as having huge dents in Odessa so the company is suing him for deformation and devaluation….is this how acts as a model so he can bankrupt companies to buy them up cheap or make them available for others?
http://ukrainiancrisis.net/news/12326
Why Nudelman, Kagan, Pyatt, Albright and their tribe? Is it a tribal/family affair or just pure coincidence? Would a gang of prominent Palestinians in their position have made any difference?
What is it that makes them hate Christian orthodoxy, Russians and Serbs so blindly that they are prepared to throw the world into WW3?
Dear Andrew,
Thank you once again for your thoughts and interesting two part article.
The Balkans and the Caucasus are vip to watch and follow at the moment….I dearly hope the people of the Balkans do survive the A/Z onslaught. Russia’s veto in the UN Security Council was vip to try and stop the rise of these hatreds again – stoked by the US and their vassel states in Europe.
Rgds,
Veritas
brilliant recommendations
I do not know how many in these Balkan nations are fluent in American English, which this is written in, but I suggest a much much simpler, shorter version of this speechified advice..The uni-polar threat scatological Nuland poses is far more than dire, it means the erasure of all Balkan ethnic identities forever.. Another form of US/German genocide. A third attempt in less than 100 years to erase Europe. Nothing less.