March 2, 2016 – Fort Russ News –
|The justification in ’63 was the USSR. Now we have to make do with the Russian Federation.|
The western press never states the obvious, so our retired Latin prof Tom Winter took a stab at it…
All over the world, from the lobbyists for Lockheed-Martin to the farmer in France, everybody needs Russia. In Europe, The businessmen and the farmers alike know they need Russia. The sanctions have boomeranged. As Die Welt headlined it,
“Russia crisis is costing Europe up to 100 billion euros.”
[“Russland-Krise kostet Europa bis zu 100 Milliarden Euro”]
And they add this graph:
|Potential fall-off of trade. Estonia (Estland) is hardest hit.|
The cost doesn’t matter. It just doesn’t matter. Key issue is the bomb from Georgiy Arbatov in 1991. “We are depriving you of an enemy.”
But if the Soviet Union is no longer the international Communist hobgoblin, how to maintain the occupation of Europe?
The excuse for US military bases there is protection. Europe needs our protection. Europe, for its part, needs the river of money that comes from the US. Ramstein, the main base for NATO and the US Air Force for Europe — and now Africa! — was bringing 1.3 billion dollars a year to the Kaiserslautern economy. And that is from 12 years ago, 2004. And the region has so many yanks that it is called “Little America.” $1,29Bn
Will they ever in Germany, out of national pride and self-respect, like Charles DeGaulle, throw out the American bases, and throw out NATO? Even the Philippines had the self respect and pride to throw out the American Subic Bay naval base. But no, Uncle Sam is a lover who pays and protects, and Frau Germany is a kept woman.
The mask of this relationship is the protection. We’re here to protect you. From what? Aha. Of course! From Russia. The only credible counterpoise to American power. Here, from the a guide for incoming US service personnel, is the description of our German military colony:
Now the US and NATO are in the Baltic States. The neocons are preaching that the baltic states are in Russia’s crosshairs. Here’s the Atlantic Council: “Although Russia’s economy is reeling and its military forces are increasingly engaged in Syria and Ukraine, NATO commanders, governments, and analysts are concerned that Russian President Vladimir Putin’s adventurism has not run its course. Most anxieties focus on the Baltic states as Russia’s next potential military target.”@@@
Thinktanks are at work coming up with
Russia-Attacks-the-Baltic-States-scenarios. [For instance] On the Baltic side, the motivation of course, is the hope to get something like the money stream that enriches Germany. And they, too, in aspiring to be another kept woman, need the blanket cover story of the threat from Russia. And must, like Merkel, play along.
The threat is Russian Aggression. What could be more cynical? The president himself knows that Crimea was a consequence of the actions of the US in Kiev. For Obama’s thinking, in sum, Crimea wasn’t a piece of a Putin grand strategic plan, but his response to us, when “We brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine.” Brokering a deal to transition power is a euphemism for a coup d’etat. Is a coup d’etat not aggression? And knowing the truth, as President Obama has revealed that he knows, and then insisting on “Russian Aggression” is shameless. And on national television! “Mr. Putin made this decision around Crimea and Ukraine not because of some grand strategy but because he was caught off-balance by the protests in the Maidan and Yanukovich then fleeing after we had brokered a deal to transition power in Ukraine.” Hear him say it: ||0
The openness of it is another proof of Marshall McLuhan’s dictum “Only the small secrets need to be protected. The big ones are kept secret by public incredulity”
Necessary: Sometimes it helps to restate the obvious, so I’ll go right ahead and do it. Crimea is viscerally Russian, and has been since Catherine the Great. It is home to Russia’s warm water fleet. After Krushchev’s unconstitutional turnover of Crimea to the jurisdiction of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, the Russian naval base there was, after 1991, contractual. If Ukraine becomes a Western country, would the west have Crimea and Sevastopol? Letting the people of Crimea do what they have always wanted to do was necessary after the Kiev coup stage-managed by our US neocons.
The Crimean plebiscite, returning Crimea to Russia — unlike Krushchev’s one vote turning it over to Ukraine — was not only a strategic necessity, as Obama knows, but a triumph of self-determination.
But, of course, now the US points to Crimea as a land-grab, and tells the world through our state department’s main mouthpiece “You just don’t in the 21st century behave in 19th century fashion by invading another country on completely trumped up pre-text.” The gift of our horse-faced Secretary of State is the ability to keep a straight face. He had to know (didn’t he?) how laughable that line was in the wake of Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya…
Then, of course, after the land grab of Crimea we present the picture to the countries of Eastern Europe, in effect, “you could be next.”
Rewarding the Baltic states for their faith in the doctrine of Russian Aggression, we have plans to quadruple our military outlay there: “Spending on military deployments designed to reassure Eastern European countries who fear Russian meddling or attack will jump from £547m ($789m) to £2.4bn ($3.4bn) according to a 2017 budget proposal.” Jens Stoltenberg welcomes the increased spending:
“Jens Stoltenberg, Nato Secretary General, welcomed the extra US spending.“^^^
They have to fear Russian meddling or they don’t get it. We establish Russian Aggression so the money goes right through Congress.
2002 US military spending: $343 Bn.
2014 US military spending: $610 Bn