(LifeSiteNews) — There has been a lot of war news recently, combined with confusing messaging. With no overall aim in sight it is difficult to make sense of the policy of the United States and its Western allies. Here is a brief overview of the chaos which has replaced the careful plans of our masters.
Robert Kagan is one of the leading neoconservatives in the United States. His wife, Victoria Nuland, led the 2014 putsch in Ukraine which installed a neoliberal, Western-oriented government. He openly admits that Russia was provoked into invading Ukraine. Why would he say this?
The reason he said this was because it is true, and because it was part of the neoconservative plan.
First, the U.S. decided to remove Yanukovich because he declined a neoliberal economic package from the West, and moved to accept an interest free loan from Russia instead. The U.S. then toppled his government and replaced it with one which immediately implemented punishing neoliberal “reforms.”
Second, the U.S. and NATO then set about rebuilding the defeated Ukrainian army, training and funding it to become the biggest and best in Europe by 2022. In addition, a heavily reinforced defensive line was built down the eastern flank of Ukraine. This is known by some today as the Zelensky Line.
Third, the U.S. and its allies entered into negotiations with Russia over the Donbass whose conditions were never intended to be implemented. It is now admitted by Angela Merkel, former Ukrainian President Poroshenko and Volodymyr Zelensky himself that these agreements were undertaken to buy time for the rearmament of Ukraine.
Fourth, the plan as set out in this 2019 RAND Corporation paper was to engage Russia in a military conflict designed to result in stalemate. The US intended to entrap Russia in the kind of quagmire which had stymied its own adventures abroad. The goal here was not only the military humiliation of Russia, but was moreover an attempt to “bleed” Russia on the battlefield in an unwinnable campaign of Western-backed attrition.
Fifth, as RAND indicated, the use of economic sanctions to isolate and degrade the Russian economy was supposed to guarantee a domestic crisis in Russia, which would combine with the planned Russian military disaster to produce serious unrest.
Sixth, the goal was ultimately to create the conditions for regime change in Russia. By “overextending and unbalancing” Russia in the military, economic and diplomatic spheres the U.S. could realistically hope to replace the Russian state with one of its own choosing, as it had done with Ukraine.
This would allow for the more efficient integration of Russia into the international managerialist world order, with its plentiful resources now available to fund and supply the restoration of both Europe and Ukraine. A defeated Russia could be broken up, into more readily manageable client states, providing easier access to the remaining neoconservative targets of China and Iran.
None of this has happened. Russia is destroying the Ukrainian army. It posted a record trade surplus and has forged closer links, including lucrative oil and gas contracts, with a range of partners outside the limited reach of the Western sanctions system.
It is Europe, and also NATO, which appears to have been “overextended and unbalanced.” with NATO Secretary General conceding that the West lacks the industrial capacity to match Russian armament supplies, and with Europe facing the worst economic crisis since the Second World War. The United States appears to have been willing to sacrifice the European standard of living, going as far as committing an act of war against Germany in bombing its main gas pipelines. This act, together with the effects of the sanctions, have accelerated the deindustrialization of the leading economy of Europe. The U.S. has degraded not Russia, but its own allies and alliance.
It is for these reasons that it is seeking a swift exit from Ukraine which pacifies the Russians. The United States has orchestrated a defeat for itself of an order of magnitude which eclipses the debacle of Afghanistan, having weakened its allies, exposed its military vulnerability, attacked a fellow NATO member and taken measures which have seriously degraded the European economy. It appears to have no plan other than to cut and run from the mess it will leave its friends in Europe, who will have to find their own way to deal with a renascent and victorious Russia.
The chaos we see in the messaging in our media is of a piece with the panic in the eyes of Jens Stoltenberg, Secretary General of NATO. The fear and confusion is not a result of failure alone, but the product of a planning process so impervious to reality as to refuse to provide for any outcome other than success.
It is remarkable as a case of hubris alone that following an unbroken series of foreign disasters the neoconservative forever war faction could have had such invincible confidence in their latest scheme. This fact underlines the danger these people represent to the world.
The Russians are not innocent, and to wish for a swift end to the war is not to exculpate them. They have withstood an avowed attempt to dissolve their sovereignty into a global managerial model directed by people with no regard for the human cost of their actions. It is not an act of sedition to denounce the capture of the West by an elite whose idea of freedom is the demolition of nations and the abolition of liberty, privacy and bodily autonomy in the service of managerial efficiency. It is no exaggeration to state that the active promotion of various forms of insanity is routine in the mass media of the West.
Our present leaders have as much conscience as the machines they fetishize, and through whose technological advancement they wish to better control us. To them, everything which degrades life for ordinary people is an advantage. For the time being at least, the global rollout is coming to a grinding halt. The mess you see in the media is what happens when there are no balloons to shoot down. Stand by. Normal service will be resumed.