Why we fight today (Part
AGAINST WASHINGTON, NATO
AND BRUSSELS FALSE ATLANTIST "EUROPE" :
WITH MOSCOW FOR ANOTHER EUROPE,
GREAT AND FREE, FROM VLADIVOSTOK TO REYKJAVIK!
Why we fight today (Part I)
the implosion of the USSR, “a great geopolitical
play” is played on all the territory of the ex Soviet republics and at the
borders of Russia. The
goal is the control of the energy richnesses (oil, gas, strategic ores)
and their ways of routing. But more especially domination in Eurasia, whose
theorists of American imperialism, like Brezinski and his “Big chessboard”,
make – rightly – the key of the world domination.
AND NATO POLICY BASICALLY ANTI-RUSSIAN
Goal: to drive back Russia, to dismember the Russian Federation (like Yugoslavia,
first stage of this vast imperialist project),
to dissociate its historical core.
Baltic States already members of NATO, the Ukraine and Georgia which knock on
the door of NATO, Azerbaïdjan will do
the same in the near future: in
short, they are tightening around
Russia a “medical cord” following the example that which was established by
the world community in the first quarter of
last century around the bolshevic State which had just made its appearance”, denounces the NEZAVISSIMAÏA GAZETA of Moscow.
precisely published in the end of the Nineties in the prestigious American
review NATIONAL REVIEW a plan of dismemberment of Russia in three small
states (Moscovia, the Ural, Siberia). An air of deja vu since it was already
the project of the Nazi theorist Alfred Rosenberg, racist herald
of the Germanic expansion in the East !
– paralysed during one decade by its pro-Western leaders, the clique of
Eltsine, of the liberal politicians and of the oligarchs who plundered
the country –, has a long time
undergoes this new “Drang nach Osten”, going from retreat to retreat,
brought back to its borders of the sixteenth century, losing historical
territories (like the Baltic States) and allies.
IS BACK !
today, and it is a geopolitical revolution, Russia is back. World energetic
power, equipped with an extremely restored State, proud of its past whether
Soviet or Russian, refusing the Western way. “After the disappearance of the Soviet Union, Russia
did not cease only one moment to aspire to its
restoration and, at the present time, it is carrying out this plan to
commented on the daily newspaper of Azerbaidjan AZADLIQ (November 29 2006).
And the projects of Moscow reveal the regained
power of the European giant “the
experts foresee in the policy of the Kremlin attempts to create a new alliance
on the chess-board of the CIS. Contrary to the projects of the Western political
technicians, Russia not only preserved, but reinforced its role of economic,
political and cultural leader in the countries Moscow calls nicely “the close
foreigner” ... And
if the Kremlin wanted secretly to lead the processes of integration in space of
the CIS to their fine logical, until the creation of a new State, one alliance
to the manner of the European Union
questioned the daily newspaper GOLOS ARMENII (September 7 2006).
“SECOND EUROPE”, A EURASIAN “OTHER EUROPE” DRAWS UP
Russia and its allies, but also China, so anxious of the claims of Washington in
Eurasia –a geopolitical, economic and military pole of power is formed
again, which again draws up on the ex-Soviet Space a great power, able to
compete with Washington and its colonial armed arm NATO.
the transnational organizations which constitute themselves around Moscow –
eurasiatic economic Community (EAEC:
Bielorussia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Uzbekistan, Russia and Tadjikistan), the
the Treaty of collective security (OTCS of the Community of
the independent States, military alliance of the type of the Organization of the
Treaty of Warsaw), Organization
of co-operation of Shanghai (OCS:
Russia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, China, Tadjikistan and Uzbekistan. Pakistan,
Iran, India and Mongolia have the statute of observer there, China and Russia
play there key roles), common economic Space (EEU,
Russia, Bielorussia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia and Tadjikistan) –, a SECOND
EUROPE, another EUROPE, Eurasian draws up facing the Atlantic Small-Europe of
Brussels prostitute to the USA.
any more disputes today this geopolitical thesis, stated for the first time
by Jean THIRIART, the father of our “European Communitarianism”
since 1964 according to which Europe goes from the Atlantic to Vladivostok.
is well a second Europe which emerges. As clearly Russian President Putin
affirms it today. The
recent article of Vladimir Putin “on
the partnership Russia-European Union”
published initially in the FINANCIAL TIMES caused vast echoes in the world press.
From the words of Vladimir Putin, one can understand that an agreement with the
EU is his great wish. For example, it is instructive to read that, in the
opinion of Putin, Russia
belongs to the European family.
second Europe is, it, independent of the USA to
the difference with Brussels and Strasbourg
puppet Europe – economic giant and
political dwarf due to NATO .
SUPER POWER RISES IN THE EAST !
is significant that the NATO media never speak about the new block and its
transnational organizations which draw up in
the EAST. Who in the Western-European public heard of the OCS, the EAEC or the
is a question of making believe to the lobotomized Western masses that the
European Union only embodies the European project (sic) and that NATO is the
only very powerful military block of the new century (resic).
is falser ! “Beyond objective criticisms, the EAEC is today one
of the most effective regional alliances on the postsoviet chess-board... The
rallying of Uzbekistan to the EAEC last January and the resumption of
negotiations on the adhesion of the Ukraine make it possible to
suppose that the EAEC will succeed the CIS. And if the EAEC is linked
with the Organization of the Treaty of collective security (CSTO:
Armenia, Bielorussia, Kazakhstan, Kirghizia, Russia and Tadjikistan), which is
extremely probable, one will finally attend the final formation of a new
militaro-politico-economic international organization… Russia thus starts to
actively carry out its own project of integration in the postsoviet space,
equipped with a strong military component and reinforced with real economic
the daily newspaper of the Caucasus LRAGIR (August 23, 2006) commented on
for the OCS, it is a block which frightens Washington
and NATO “At
the total scale, it is a powerful association. The members of the organization
occupy the three fifths of the territory
of Eurasia, count a quarter of the population of the planet and
have a total GDP of 2500 billion dollars, commented
on the VOENNO-PROMYCHLENNY KOURIER (October 11, 2006). Taking
into account the possible adhesion of new members, the OCS will have immense
human resources (3 billion people), half of the gas and world's oil reserves and
approximately half of the defensive potential accumulated on the terrestrial
sphere. In addition to economic integration
(the organization projects free movement goods, capital, technologies and
services within twenty years), not less significant military integration (...).
Meeting at the end of September in Peking, the Council of the regional
antiterrorist Structure of the OCS confirmed that the six countries had
instituted their organization not only for the development and of the
economic co-operation but also to ensure their security and to achieve
Military integration and the energetic geopolitics
of the six States of the OCS already “frightened” the United States so much
so that the American
under-secretary of State for Central Asia and South Asia, Richard Boucher,
exhorted the OCS, in the name of the Bush administration, to give up the
geopolitical declarations to concentrate on the economy. The
OCS and the United States and also, in a certain direction, NATO are, already in
fact, the geopolitical rivals”.
us add that the SCO and the CSTO lead a policy of integration at the military
level. The next
summer, these two organizations will proceed to their first joint tactical
CSTO and the OCS gathers almost half of the population of the world. By their
influence within the UNO and other international organizations, they can compete
with the United States and the NATO countries,
which many political leaders for the countries in question hardly appreciate, analyze
RIA NOVOSTI. Result:
Brussels still refuses to accept the proposal of the CSTO inviting it to
cooperate in the fight against the surge of Afghan drug, even if many OTCS
Member States share a common border with Afghanistan, and that the joint efforts
of NATO and the CSTO would be more useful than the disparate actions. The fact
remains that NATO does not regard the CSTO as an equal partner. However, Moscow
is concerned little with it”.
PIEDMONT OF THE LIBERATION OF THE GREATER-EUROPE
the beginning of the Eighties, with Jean THIRIART, I launched the “Euro-Soviet
advocated the unification – against the USA and NATO – of Greater-Europe
from East to West, the USSR becoming the Piedmont of a “Euro-Soviet Empire” a
thesis which made since much way in
support to Moscow, Piedmont of the Other Europe, is the adaptation of this
fundamental thesis to the geopolitical conditions of the new Century. Today
Russia, like formerly the USSR, is the only European power really independent of
Washington, the only one to follow an independent policy, really Eurasian and
Western Europe, another power, France, still has sporadic inclinations of
independence, when it remembers the great anti-Atlantic policy – and
already pro-Russian – of General De Gaulle. But post-gaullist France is a
schizophrenic state, paralysed by powerful foreign lobbies, where cohabit
gaullist impulses and the states of submission to Atlanticism (as in Lebanon and
in Syria, where France, playing against its own interest, carries the
neocoloniaslist bags of Washingtton and Tel-Aviv). The French leaders –
Chirac, Villepin, Sarkozy (small French Bush) – have since a long time betrays
Gaullism. To claim the opposite is a political swindle.
Paris-Moscow Axis – that we advocate – will exist really only if
France remembers De Gaulle and breaks up with Atlanticism. We are extremely far
from it. Thus remain Moscow and the
block which is organized around it.
TO THE COLD WAR
these two blocks, which are geopolitical rivals de facto, an increasingly open
confrontation is outlined. The analysts speak openly, and rightly, of “return
to the Cold war”.
“The conflicts which burst for various reasons
with the closest neighbors (Baltic States and those of the CIS), and on many
problems with the United States, the countries and the structures of the
European Union became lately a constant of the Russian foreign politics. These
conflicts are interpreted inside the country as a testimony of the return of the
power of yesteryear which seemed to be lost forever”, commented on Russian daily newspaper KOMMERSANT
In response to this crisis, the Russian Defense
Minister Sergueï Ivanov proposed to divide the world between the
Organization of the Treaty of collective security (CSTO) and
NATO. According to him, “the
development of a mechanism of co-operation between NATO and the CSTO, then the
clear delimitation of the spheres of responsibility, will contribute to the
reinforcement of international
security (...) the
proposal of Sergueï Ivanov brings
back at the time of confrontation between NATO and the countries of the Warsaw
In Washington, the Yankee hawks seek confrontation.
The American senator Richard
the remarks in the spirit of the “cold war” aimed at Russia, accusing it not
to want to share its energy sovereignty. However, one
of the principal objectives of the CSTO is to ensure the energy sovereignty of
the Member States of this organization. The
very influential republican
senator Richard Lugar, president of the
senatorial Committee of the Foreign Affairs declared
that the NATO military block was to be held ready to react to an “attack”
and to a blackmail with use of energy as a weapon on behalf of country as Russia.
“The use of
energy as a weapon is not a theoretical threat of the future: it is already in
affirmed Mr. Lugar in Riga, this 28 November 2006, the day before the
NATO summit. According to the
Yankee senator, “the
suspension by Russia of the energy matter deliveries to Ukraine testified to a
temptation to use energy in order to achieve political goals”.
“Russia gave up
confrontation after a severe reaction of the West, but which would
have been the response of NATO if Russia had maintained the embargo?”,
asked the American senator, informing that, in this case, “the
economy and the Ukrainian armed forces would have been sapped for sure, and the
danger and the losses suffered by several NATO countries would have been
must determine the measures to be taken if Poland, Germany, Hungary or Latvia
were the subject of the same threat as the Ukraine”,
Richard Lugar hammered, inviting
to extend to the energy sector “chapter 5” of the statutes of NATO which
specifies that an aggression against a member of the Alliance is equivalent to
an aggression against the entire military block. “Since
an attack with use of energy as a weapon can ruin the economy of a country and
make hundreds, even thousands of victims, the Alliance must pledge according to
which the defense against such an attack is within the framework of “chapter
5” the president of the senatorial committee continued,
stressing that, under
the current conditions, an energy conflict was
equivalent to a war. “That does not make practically any difference
when a member (of NATO) is constrained to subject himself to the will of others
because of a cut of energy or when it encounters a military blockade or a show
of force at his borders”,
he has said.
“Accepting the demolition of the Berlin Wall,
Russia hoped that NATO would hold its promises not to be extended to the East, but
the former members of the Warsaw Pact and the Baltic
States joined to the Alliance. Reacting
to the notes of confrontation which point in the relationship with NATO, Moscow
proposes to the Alliance of the North Atlantic a new format
of the relations in Europe. NATO would like to continue to extend by
admitting new States from the CIS (the Community of the independent States).
Russia is opposed to it actively. The
diplomatic steps do nothing there. Hardly remains the alternative of
violent measures”, still informs KOMMERSANT.
The opposition of the blocks in the spirit of the
“cold war” must dissuade certain postsoviet republics to join in a
precipitated way to the Alliance. For
this reason the CSTO – “this
new Warsaw Pact” dixit KOMMERSANT - DEFINES CLEARLY ITS PLACE IN EUROPE.
block counts, among its potential allies, the countries of Asia belonging to the
Six of Shanghai, before all China, which represents an imposing force in the
competition with NATO.
Why we fight today (Part
PRIDNESTROVIE, ABKHAZIA AND SOUTH-OSSETIA :
ON THE FRONT OF THE "CIS-2" REPUBLICS
(Article published initially in the Frenchspeaking review LA CAUSE DES PEUPLES – THE PEOPLES’ CAUSE, Brussels-Paris, n° 31, December 2006 / Copyright Luc MICHEL, all rights reserved of reproduction and translation – Free reproduction with mention of the author: firstname.lastname@example.org)