NATO summit: ‘Not rational enough’ By Eric Walberg

26 April, 2010 — Eric Walberg

To NATO’s head berates its foes, as the alliance pursues its own version of rationality, oblivious to world pleas for disarmament or its alarming failure in Afghanistan, says Eric Walberg

Just when there seemed to be a glimmer of real change in US-Russian relations — Russia giving in to the US on START and assuring the continuation of the Kyrgyz US airbase — the logic of US empire reasserts itself with a slap in the Russian face. Even Poland, Russia’s age-old nemesis, is trying to bury the hatchet, after the shocking aircrash near Katyn, a tragic, if farcical, repeat of the WWII massacre on Stalin’s orders.

In another echo of that war — Hitler’s siege of Leningrad — NATO cold-bloodedly chose Tallinn, Estonia, a stone’s throw from St Petersburg, as the venue of its latest deliberations about expanding eastward and how best to convince the world and Russia in particular to comply with its ambitious plans to bring the world to heel.

Continue reading

America’s Imperial Design: World Military Superiority Without Nuclear Weapons By Rick Rozoff

11 April, 2010 — Global ResearchStop NATO

A war can be won without being waged. Victory can be attained when an adversary knows it is vulnerable to an instantaneous and undetectable, overwhelming and devastating attack without the ability to defend itself or retaliate.

What applies to an individual country does also to all potential adversaries and indeed to every other nation in the world.

There is only one country that has the military and scientific capacity and has openly proclaimed its intention to achieve that ability. That nation is what its current head of state defined last December as the world’s sole military superpower. [1] One which aspires to remain the only state in history to wield full spectrum military dominance on land, in the air, on the seas and in space.

To maintain and extend military bases and troops, aircraft carrier battle groups and strategic bombers on and to most every latitude and longitude. To do so with a post-World War II record war budget of $708 billion for next year.

Having gained that status in large part through being the first country to develop and use nuclear weapons, it is now in a position to strengthen its global supremacy by superseding the nuclear option.

Continue reading

US-Russian START treaty: A comprehensive flicker By Eric Walberg

30 March, 2010 —

Two floundering presidents grabbed at a chance to show some results. No one will be happy, as always with compromises, says Eric Walberg

The US administration is preening itself on finally clinching a new Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (START) with Russia, President Barack Obama calling it the most comprehensive arms control agreement in nearly two decades. It is to be signed in Prague 8 April, where Obama launched his campaign for a nuclear weapons-free world a year ago, and which was supposed to get a US missile defence base. Obama axed this, at least for the moment, to mollify the Russians.

Despite it being the only flicker of peacefulness out of Washington in nearly two decades, the reaction in the US is one of indifference or hostility as the right now latches on to each and every Obama initiative to show its displeasure over healthcare and other Obama-inspired liberal policies.

In Russia the reaction is sullen caution and hostility. Obama’s announcement was greeted officially only by Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who warned that Russia reserved the right to withdraw from the treaty if it deems American missile defences a threat. Yes, Obama backed down a bit on the original Bush bases in the Czech Republic and Poland. But then all of a sudden, out of the wild blue yonder, Romania and Bulgaria said they would be getting them instead by 2015, and Poland invited the US to station troops there on a new base. What a coincidence. Despite the last minute addition of a few words as a sop to the Russians, US Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs Ellen Tauscher was quick to emphasise there would be no constraints on the expansion of interceptor missile deployments.

Continue reading

Reagan’s ghost: Starwars stops START By Eric Walberg

6 January, 2010 —

Hopes are fading that the historical treaty between the US and the Soviet Union will be renewed, observes Eric Walberg

Russian confidence that US President Barack Obama might represent a fundamental change in the direction of US foreign policy is fast eroding. Even pro-Western analyst Dmitri Trenin, director of the Carnegie Moscow Centre reflects, “The people who see Russia as a problem are still at the Pentagon,” and he predicts that even if Obama lasts another seven years, the Russians are coming to the conclusion that “he may not be able to withstand the pressures on him.”

The hope, as recently as a month ago was that a new version of the Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty (SALT) might be successfully negotiated. But Obama’s two other surges — NATO’s expansion in Eastern Europe and the rush to implement the US missile defence system around the world — follow so closely the hawkish policies of his predecessors, that whatever “Atlantists” there might be in the Kremlin have been put on the defensive, so to speak.

To blame Russia for tripping up the START talks, given the facts on the ground, is nonsense. The writing for the present impasse was on the wall even before SALT I was signed. Anyone old enough can remember Reagan in the 1980s with schoolboy enthusiasm showing the media his Disneyesque coloured charts with US satellites zapping UFOs and unnamed enemy rockets.

Continue reading