It’s all but impossible for Americans to acquire information about the war in Ukraine that does not consist of propaganda and/or disinformation. Almost everything we encounter is derived from Western governments or the mainstream media, which act uniformly to promote the globalist party line. Nothing is allowed through that does not support the Narrative on Ukraine.

To find anything different, we have to examine sources that derive their information from pro-Russian propaganda and/or disinformation. Those are our only two choices. For all intents and purposes, truly independent and objective reporting on the ground in Ukraine simply doesn’t exist.

Since most of the material available to us is drawn from pro-Zelensky propaganda, I like to post reports drawn from the propaganda for the other side, in an effort to achieve a sort of balance.

Hellequin GB has translated three articles from Anti-Spiegel, a German-language site that presents the Russian viewpoint, and uses translations from Russian media. Call it the “Anti-Narrative”.

Concerning the first article, the translator says:

Since none of us really knows what is going on over there, I leave it to everyone to make up their own mind about this article from Thomas Röper. But still, it should give people some food for thought about why the “Azov Battalion” and the Ukrainian state, which were not so long ago branded by the mainstream media and Western governments as “neo-Nazi” and the most corrupt place on Earth, became almost overnight the West’s darling.

The translated article:

Mariupol

Azov demands: “15 civilians for a ton of food and medicine”

The Azov Battalion’s latest “proposal” for the “evacuation” of civilians is that they are willing to exchange 15 civilians for a ton of food and medicine.

Since the Azov battalion let the first (and so far only) group of about a hundred civilians out of the Azovstal steelworks in Mariupol on Sunday, further offers from the Russian side to let civilians out of the steelworks via humanitarian corridors have gone unheeded. Civilians who escaped from the steel mill on Sunday have confirmed to the international press that they were being held there against their will by Azov militants. Der Spiegel, for example (Beim Lügen erwischt: Welt und Spiegel verändern (heimlich) ihre Artikel — Anti-Spiegel), brazenly lied about it and, against its better knowledge, completely misrepresented the statements by the witnesses.

Since the civilians who escaped also said that there were several hundred other civilians in the catacombs under the steelworks who were not being let out, it is clear that the Russians were right in their accusations against the Azov fighters: they were holding the civilians hostage and as human shields. That became more than clear afterwards, because since the first civilians came out a few days ago, the Russian army has opened humanitarian corridors every day, but no one has come out.

Now the Azov fighters have finally dropped their masks and made a new “proposal” to the Russian army: they are ready to let the civilians go, but only in exchange for food and medicine. They even named a “price” for the people: 15 civilians in exchange for a ton of food and medicine.

This is not Russian propaganda, by the way, because no denial came from Kyiv or from Azov after the Russian army reported it. Why deny? In Kyiv, one can rely on the Western media not to mention this.

Russia has not yet rejected the “proposal” and has not agreed to it either. The comments in Russia speak instead of “methods used by terrorists” and of “hostage-taking” and “human trafficking”.

Unlike Western media, Russian TV reported this news on the evening news in a report I translated on the current situation in Mariupol.

Start of translation:

The Russian military reopened a humanitarian corridor in Mariupol today. It will remain open both tomorrow and Saturday to allow civilians to leave the Azovstal plant and nationalists to lay down their arms and surrender. But the militants responded with a new, this time particularly cynical, offer: the exchange of civilians for food. They even made a price offer: 15 people for a ton of food and medicine. The Kremlin has already pointed out that such demands are usually made by terrorists. A report from Mariupol.

The captain on the bridge stares out to sea through the glass pane shattered by Ukrainian shrapnel. His Tsarevna, as the dry cargo ship is called, has not been able to leave the berth for three months. The port of Mariupol does not let the sailors go.

“On February 21 they came into the port and on February 24 at 10 a.m. the port was closed. The other ships were evacuated because one burned down and the other, the Lady Augusta, has technical problems. We are waiting for the blue corridor to open and we can set sail,” says Pavel Pavlov, captain of the ship Tsarevna.

But now it is simply impossible to sail — the Ukrainian nationalists, who have made what was once the largest port on the Sea of Azov their fortress, have hidden behind the crews as if behind human shields. (Russian translator’s note: During one of my trips to the conflict zone, I met crew members of one of the ships, since after their liberation they stayed in the same hotel as us journalists, during which time I spoke with them at length.)

When the nationalists withdrew from their positions in the port of Mariupol, they blocked the fairway with a sunken ship. Leaving the port is now impossible. In addition, the militants of the Kiev regime laid nine sea mines in the port, which are now chaotically moving somewhere in the area waters.

Specialists from the DNR [Donetsk People’s Republic] Ministry of Emergency Situations are working on clearing the port and have already been able to defuse several anti-ship mines. The reconstruction of the port infrastructure has also begun. According to the authorities of the republic, the first cargo ship is expected to leave Mariupol at the end of May.

Today the artillery cannonade over the city’s industrial area has subsided. After the coalition forces of Russia and the Donetsk People’s Republic unilaterally ceased fire, they again opened a humanitarian corridor for the civilians staying at the Azovstal complex. It will remain open from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. until May 7 inclusive. The Azov nationalists, who continue to hold civilians there without giving them any information about the possibility of leaving the plant, are now safely blocked in the remains of the steel mill.

“We were intimidated: ‘You’re not going out here. Then you will be shot.’ They put it this way: Nobody is holding you, but there is no guarantee that you will get out,” people said.

Thanks to the efforts of the Russian military, more than a hundred people were able to leave Azovstal on April 30 and May 1. However, immediately after this, the Azov fighters again went into firing position and tried to break through in small groups. This was followed by massive artillery attacks on the positions of the nationalists.

And now the Russian side is again declaring a ceasefire. Today, however, the humanitarian corridors are empty. At the same time, the Azov militants have stated that they do not intend to release more civilians and have set conditions: Hostages in exchange for food and medicine. They even set their own exchange rate: 15 people for a ton of food and medicine. This is how terrorists usually negotiate, like they did for example in Syria. However, the similarity between the methods of the Middle Eastern radicals and the neo-Nazis in Ukraine does not end there. The fighters of the Kiev regime also prefer to fight the civilian population than the Russian armed forces and continue to shell civilian targets in the cities of Donbass on a daily basis.

“The kids don’t go out because they’re scared. You don’t know what could come from above at any moment. They sleep in the basement or under the bed,” says this woman.

Since the end of February, attacks by Ukrainian armed forces and nationalists have already killed a hundred civilians in the DNR and wounded five times as many.

end of translation

The second article talks about the deceitful games being played concerning the flow of Russian natural gas to Central Europe:

The EU and Russian gas: “No more fun”

EU countries will have to decide in the coming days whether they want to continue receiving gas from Russia next month or not. Russian television shed light on the situation.

After Poland and Bulgaria reportedly refused to pay for Russian gas in rubles and Gazprom turned off their taps, it is clear that we are facing a showdown. Either EU member states agree to the Russian regulation, or the gas tap is turned off. Russian gas is always paid for the past month, which means that gas bills are due in the next few days, then we’ll see what the EU countries actually decided.

Russian TV ran a detailed report on the situation in its weekly news review, which I have translated. The report is also very much worth reading because it comes from the German correspondent and it is always interesting to see how Germany is regarded from abroad.

Start of translation:

Not funny anymore: The EU at its own crossroads

Gazprom has announced a complete halt to Russian gas supplies to Poland and Bulgaria. The reason for this was the principled refusal of these countries to pay for Russian gas in rubles. Poland and Bulgaria now receive the same Russian gas from Germany by way of reverse. If Germany also refuses to pay in rubles, then Bulgaria and Poland’s will also dry up. (Russian translator’s note: Reverse means that the gas is pumped in the opposite direction. Previously, gas came from Russia to Germany via Belarus and Poland; now Germany is pumping gas to Poland.)

The Czech Republic was the first to announce that it would refuse to pay for Russian gas in rubles. The European Union speaks unanimously of blackmail and of using gas for political purposes. On the other hand, there are several thousand completely unlawful sanctions against Russia, Russian companies, officials and individuals: what do you call it? Is freezing our $300 billion reserves blackmail? Yes, they say it bluntly: the purpose of the sanctions is to weaken and even destroy the Russian economy. Why are you surprised? The party is over. And there are those who have recognized this in good time.

Bloomberg reports that ten European buyers have already opened special accounts with Gazprombank to pay for their imports in rubles. And Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said that most of the key partners have agreed to the gas payment scheme proposed by Russia.

How is the situation in Europe? A report from our German correspondent.

The topic of the week in Europe is gas for rubles. Payday is approaching. Europe is desperately trying to find a universal solution that would allow it to get gas without violating its own sanctions.

“Our response will be united, supportive and unanimous because we believe what happens to one member state happens to all at the same time,” said EU chief diplomat Josep Borrell.

Not really, but formally — if the answer is “united” — Poland and Bulgaria seem to have decided everything for everyone. On April 27, the Polish government announced its refusal to pay in rubles, leading to a halt in Gazprom’s supplies. But Morawiecki and Co. went even further: they imposed sanctions on Russia’s largest private gas supplier Novatek. Incidentally, Green Energie, Novatek’s Polish subsidiary, owns part of the Polish gas distribution network. As a result, several dozen county capitals were cut off from supplies.

“Residents who heat with gas have no heating and no way to cook their evening meal. There are hundreds of children in our facilities, such as kindergartens and schools. The problem also affects the administrative staff; there is no hot water in the offices,” said Przemyslaw Renne, Mayor of the Municipality of Mescisco.

Just don’t let them think they weren’t warned. Someone had to suffer so that humanitarian considerations could cover up the simple robbery: all assets of the Novatek subsidiary, everything in which billions of euros were invested, must now be placed under external administration, that is, confiscated. A similar thing happened a month earlier with Gazprom-Germania, Gazprom’s German subsidiary, which is now managed by the Federal Network Agency. They were taken by surprise when Gazprom this week refused to accept payments from its former export division, and the agency doesn’t understand how this is possible. If they do, they impose sanctions, but if Russia does, it’s blackmail.

Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki sees it this way: “We will not bow to this blackmail, and I would like to assure my compatriots that this action by Putin and the Kremlin will not affect either the budget or the position of Poland.”

Now it doesn’t affect them, but that’s because Gazprom is still fulfilling its contractual obligations to Germany, which go beyond the needs of the Germans themselves and allow them to resell the gas at a small premium. Poland’s showing off is not expensive.

“This week Poland refused to pay for gas supplies from Russia in rubles under the new rules. It was solemnly announced that Russian gas was no longer needed and Poland would no longer buy it. In reality this is not so. After stopping direct gas supplies from Russia, Poland buys Russian gas in Germany, from where it flows to Poland via the Yamal-Europe pipeline. The reverse is 30 million cubic meters per day, which is almost exactly the same as Poland’s orders under the gas export agreement in recent days,” Gazprom spokesman Sergei Kupriyanov said.

Bulgaria, which also refused to pay in rubles, is in a situation that is both easier and more difficult at the same time. Easier because the climate is mild and more difficult because there is no Germany on the doorstep. Greece is ready to help fraternally, but it will have to wait because the pipeline is still under construction, which threatens to build up a sufficient reserve for the winter. But despite the risks, Prime Minister Kirill Petkov is clearly working according to the method: no sense, but the code word.

“The suspension of gas supplies from Gazprom is a gross breach of contract and blackmail with payments in rubles by third parties who guarantee neither gas supplies nor Bulgarian money. We will not engage in such a rip-off,” Petkov said.

It is unclear why the supply is not guaranteed, why the money is not guaranteed. Bulgaria has fashioned all of its energy “luck” from the moment it thwarted the excellent Blue Stream project under pressure from none other than US Senator McCain, to the moment it refused to be paid in rubles. Turkish Stream now runs through Bulgaria; it is a transit country, so Budapest salutes and warns of inconvenience if someone in Sofia decides to steal Hungarian gas paid for in rubles. (Russian translator’s note: Blue Stream was a proposed pipeline that would bring gas from Russia through the Black Sea to the EU via Bulgaria. Bulgaria would have made billions from the transit, but Bulgaria stopped the project after the Maidan under pressure from the European Commission and the USA.)

“The news that Gazprom has stopped supplying Bulgaria may be a cause for concern. However, the exact information is that Gazprom does not supply gas destined for Bulgaria. According to Gazprom, transit, i.e. deliveries via Bulgaria to Serbia or Hungary, does not depend on this,” said Hungarian Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó.

The Czech Republic is likely to join Poland and Bulgaria. Prime Minister Fiala has announced that they will refuse to pay for gas in rubles. The Russian budget, at least, will not suffer as the gas price has risen to $1,350 per thousand cubic meters as a result of this news, and that is certainly not the end of the road. The EU has arrived at its own “crossroads”: either sanctions, or gas at a more or less reasonable price. And it is clear that at the moment they are choosing gas. Thanks to Russia, European politicians been given ample room for their verbal manipulations.

“We, that is, the OMV Group, have accepted the terms of payment, as has Germany. The conditions were deemed to be in line with the sanctions. That was important to us. And that is why President Putin told me at our meeting that the gas will continue to be supplied in full and that we can pay in euros,” said Austrian Chancellor Karl Nehammer.

That’s the way it is. Gazprom’s European business partners, for example the German company Uniper, transfer euros to Gazprombank. However, they are immediately and 100% exchanged for rubles through the Moscow Exchange. That is, from the moment of the transaction, European financial institutions lose the ability to control these funds. For example to freeze them. And at the same time, the ruble is hedged against devaluation. All important sanctions have come to nothing. This is point one. Secondly, what if Russia decides to drive a wedge — supply gas to Serbia and Hungary and turn off the gas supply to everyone else? For politico-military reasons.

“Together we have provided more than $5 billion for Ukraine’s self-defense equipment. That includes about $3.7 billion that President Biden has pledged for Ukraine since the Russian invasion began. My trip to Kyiv has increased my admiration of how the Ukrainian armed forces implement these capabilities. Ukraine clearly believes they can win, and everyone here thinks so too,” said US Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin.

On Tuesday, the Pentagon chief gathered his allies at the US base in Ramstein. The USA invited — the base is on German soil, but the Germans are only there as guests. Four dozen defense ministers met, including the Ukrainian one, representatives of all countries that use the US with varying degrees of intensity and cynicism in its proxy war with Russia. Still, there is a difference between, for example, Italy or France supplying arms to the Ukrainian army and Poland and Romania already massing their armies on the borders of Russia, Belarus, Ukraine and Moldova. It was agreed to set up a coordination group to deal with Kiev’s military needs on a monthly basis.

“We decided to support Ukraine and send Gepard anti-aircraft systems there. This is exactly what Ukraine needs now to protect its airspace. Germany is ready to act,” said Federal Defense Minister Christina Lambrecht.

It looks like this is the win! Germany is finally starting to ship something heavy and chain-driven to the Eastern Front. On German television, the Social Democrats are being asked about the sudden change in their leader Olaf Scholz, who refused to do so last week. So what has changed — is Scholz no longer afraid of World War III? It’s quite simple: the chancellor wants to remain chancellor.

On Wednesday the opposition threatened to push a resolution through the Bundestag that would allow Scholz’s position on the issue of heavy arms shipments to be ignored, which would inevitably have triggered a government crisis. So the coalition made a counter-proposal, which was accepted: NATO’s eastern European allies will be compensated for the equipment they send to Kyiv. Well, and as a bonus, the government “polished” the whole affair with direct deliveries of anti-aircraft systems. The “image” broadcasts live from a museum where such a device can be seen. The moderators are enthusiastic: “Gepard” is not “Leopard” but at least a tank.

The journalist climbs onto the tank and an expert explains to him that this is a very good weapon that will allow Ukrainian anti-aircraft gunners to fight low-flying targets. And then a detail emerges that significantly reduces the pathos of the message. The studio tried not to notice, but the reporter stubbornly repeated it twice: “Ukraine receives anti-aircraft guns from Germany, but Germany has no ammunition. It needs 500 liters of fuel for 100 kilometers. Spare parts for this type of anti-aircraft systems are very expensive. The Gepard is equipped with a radar that scans the airspace; this will allow Ukraine to protect its airspace. The big problem, however, remains the ammunition.

“The Gepard fires 1,100 rounds per minute. If you know how to use it, it is an air ‘saw’, but in Germany there is only ammunition for 20 minutes. If you spread them across dozens of vehicles, it’s a salvo for each. Jordan and Qatar have ammunition but they won’t sell it. Brazil has 300,000 shots and is willing to deliver them for cash. There are no other options — the ammunition is manufactured in Switzerland, and Switzerland, as part of its military neutrality, has banned the supply of ammunition to Ukraine. So either Germany buys up the Brazilian ammunition, a significant part of which is used for training, or the ‘Gepard’ topic is closed. Maybe the latter is the goal.

“Any disruption in gas supplies from Russia will have an impact on the economy. That is clear, and the government is also very aware of this. So this is not one of the cases where we have directly imposed sanctions, by the way, in close cooperation with our partners who are themselves energy exporters, so they are in a different starting position, for example the USA,” said Scholz.

The latest statistics for the year: Between March 2021 and March 2022, the price of imported coal in Germany increased by 307 percent, gas by 304 percent and petroleum products by 110 percent. Germany has a supply of petrol for four weeks. The sanctions are directed against those who impose them. A sixth package is on the way. But Russia is still to blame. Now it’s going to be “blackmail” again, but we have to go through it; it’s worth it.

Commenting on the situation around Poland and Bulgaria, the head of the European Commission said: “Gazprom’s statement that it unilaterally cut off gas supplies to some EU member states is another provocation by the Kremlin. But it is not surprising that the Kremlin uses fossil fuels to blackmail us.”

Before the Poles and Bulgarians quite voluntarily announced their refusal to pay in rubles, Gazprom pumped fuel into Europe in line with, if not beyond, the treaty obligations. The reservoirs are already a third full. And even if von der Leyen completely ignores this, she still manages to blame the Russians for what has been the core of EU energy policy in recent months: she explicitly says “we”, meaning Poland and Bulgaria. “We have already reduced the flow of gas from Russia and thanks to the plans we will be able to become independent of Russian fossil fuels much faster. And that’s good. And forever.”

“For good and forever” she said in English — that sounds nice, but if something is “forever”, it can also be a punishment: the death penalty or life imprisonment. The British daily The Times sees the future something like this: “Is anyone telling Europe that the era of cheap living is over? Inflation rates in the Eurozone are grim, to say the least; a 44 percent rise in energy prices is driving up food prices. Previously, the low cost of living was achieved at the expense of the environment and they depended on fuel imports from Russia. Nonetheless, no one now has the courage to tell their constituents that past living standards and prices cannot be sustained.”

It will have to be paid many times more, which means that the next generations of Europeans will not have the same prospects when they are young, nor the security of adulthood, nor the comfort of old age. A happy turn of events is not in sight today, although it is her decision alone.

It may be quick or it may take decades, but the gold plating will fade and fall from that billion. The pace depends on whether Russia is forced to facilitate this process. And if that is the case, the term Cold War will lose its metaphorical meaning for Europeans as early as this winter.

end of translation

Afterword from the translator:

That happens when you have a political class that has been living with champagne, rare whiskeys, Cuban cigars and caviar for so long and at the expense of the taxpayer that they have lost even the least comprehension of the realities of everyday Life. The Americans, the French and the Russians each fought a revolution over these same grounds, only to have them replaced by the same thing all over again. Why do WE need governments at all for OUR survival? It’s only government that needs us, the people, to survive. But that’s the rule for any kind of parasite, isn’t it?

The final article explains how NATO’s actions in Central and Eastern Europe have violated the NATO-Russia Founding Act of 1997:

Escalation

West Breach of Treaty: “The NATO-Russia Founding Act is Dead”

NATO declares that it will no longer comply with the NATO-Russia Founding Act, the document on which NATO-Russia relations should be built.

In 1997 the NATO-Russia Founding Act was concluded, in which NATO and Russia agreed on close cooperation. In addition, NATO has committed itself not to station any troops permanently in the new members in Eastern Europe.

Once again, history is key. When you look at political and media claims in the West, you rub your eyes at how quickly they change and people don’t even notice these 180° turns. One can once again one has to admire the power of propaganda. But first things first.

When Russian propaganda turns out to be true

At German reunification, the US, Germany and other states promised Gorbachev that NATO would not expand further east. US Secretary of State Baker made his famous statement that NATO would not expand “an inch” eastward.

After that, when Russia complained about NATO’s eastward expansion, Western media called it Russian propaganda and lies. In January, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg was allowed to say in an interview with Der Spiegel:

“That’s just not true, no such promise was ever made, there was never such a backroom deal. That is simply wrong.”

At that time, less than four months ago, the political and media line was still that NATO had of course not promised Russia anything, because otherwise one would have had to admit that the USA and NATO — with an ice-cold smile — lied and cheated on Russia. You couldn’t say that, because it would have created public understanding about Russia’s anger and its concerns for its own security. So the Western media and politicians straight-out lied to the public.

Now, a few months of hard-hitting war propaganda has changed that. By the end of April there was no longer any talk of the West having promised Russia not to expand NATO eastwards. For example, on April 29, Der Spiegel published an article with the headline “New documents on NATO’s eastward expansion — why Germany has been considerate of Russia for years”, which suddenly showed in detail how Russia was cheated in the 1990s, which is the cornerstone of today’s conflict. But the Der Spiegel article was not about the West having lied to and cheated on Russia; instead, the original tone of the article was that the allegedly flawed and too-Russia-friendly policies of the past should be addressed.

An article like this would have been unthinkable in January, but after a few months of intensified war propaganda, people accept this 180° turnaround. And no one realizes that this was just the first of many broken promises made by the West to Russia, the sum of which has led to a complete loss of confidence, and that Russia feels massively threatened by NATO, and saw no other way out than to use force to stop the admission of Ukraine to NATO and to prevent NATO troops from being stationed in Ukraine.

That’s how easily propaganda can turn the truth on its head and twist cause and effect, because without the many promises and treaties broken by the West there would be no war in Ukraine today.

The NATO-Russia Founding Act

Since Russia was weak in the 1990s and was basically ruled by advisors from Washington while President Yeltsin indulged in tasting the many varieties of Russian vodka, NATO was able to expand eastward from the late 1990s. While Russia protested softly, it was reassured with the conclusion of the NATO-Russia Founding Act.

Of course, Russia was assured, NATO will not permanently station troops east of Germany, and NATO will also ensure that the Russophobia rampant in some Eastern European countries is contained and kept under control. Russia shouldn’t worry; that’s what the NATO-Russia Founding Act was signed for. And in contrast to the empty and only verbally-given promise not to expand NATO, the NATO-Russia Founding Act is ultimately a legally binding treaty.

The breach of contract

In 2014, the West orchestrated the Maidan coup in Ukraine, and when Crimea subsequently declared independence from Ukraine and reunited with Russia, NATO broke the treaty and began moving troops to the Baltics, Poland and south-eastern Europe. Of course, NATO has never said it broke the treaty, it has always claimed to be loyal to the NATO-Russia Founding Act and not to permanently station the troops in Eastern Europe; after all they would rotate regularly.

That was nonsense, of course, especially since the US missile defense system was already being set up in Romania and Poland at the time, and these are definitely US troops stationed there permanently, i.e. NATO soldiers. This breach of treaty was just one of many in a long line of broken promises and treaties by the West towards Russia that collectively shattered trust and brought us to where we are today.

“The NATO-Russia Founding Act is dead”

Western politicians are no longer embarrassed to openly break this treaty. British Foreign Secretary Liz Truss, for example, said at a NATO defense ministers’ dinner on April 6 that the NATO-Russia Founding Act was “dead”, adding:

“The era of cooperation with Russia is over. We need a new approach to security in Europe, based on resilience, defense and deterrence. It is no time for false restraint.”

These were by no means empty words from the woman known for her rampages on foreign and security policy, because Rob Bauer, the Dutch admiral and chairman of the NATO Military Committee, has now declared:

“The NATO-Russia file is still there. But their content will not prevent us from implementing our plans. At the moment, the general consensus at the political level is that we will not kill [the agreement], but that will not prevent us from taking the necessary action on our part.”

This is a clear announcement about simply ignoring and breaking the contract that still exists. NATO has been doing this for eight years, but now it’s not even embarrassed to admit it openly.

And what’s next?

The West always says that it only wants peace and that Russia is the aggressor. It was the West that broke promises it had made to Russia. And it was the West that even openly broke treaties. In addition, the USA has broken or unilaterally terminated practically all disarmament treaties with Russia.

Who can blame Russia for feeling threatened when such a weapon-ridden military bloc, which has broken virtually every promise and treaty it has made, is spreading more and more across Russia’s borders? So it came about that Russia now had no choice but to react militarily, because in January the West even rejected talks about mutual security guarantees. They didn’t even want to talk to Russia anymore, but at the same time Ukraine was armed and thousands of NATO soldiers were stationed there, even though they were officially designated as advisers and trainers.

But how is the conflict to be defused if the West keeps intensifying the pace? The West is obviously not interested in a de-escalation, on the contrary: the USA is certainly delighted that they have forced Russia into an expensive proxy war, which can also be excellently exploited for propaganda purposes.

And the people of Ukraine? Ask the people of Iraq, Afghanistan or Libya how much the US cares about the fate of ordinary people in other countries while promoting its geopolitical interests…

Afterword from the translator:

When one looks throughout our history, one should have learned by now NEVER, EVER to trust a career politician or a politically-inclined high-ranking career soldier. Have there any treaties been kept when those treaties stand in the way of “acquiring” land or resources? I really don’t think so. Just ask the Native Americans, the Zulu, the Matabele, the Boers…or the people of any country that stands in the way of corporate mercantile interests and globalism.