World's Largest English Language News Service with Over 500
Articles Updated Daily
"The News You Need Today…For The World You’ll Live In Tomorrow."
What You Aren’t
Being Told About The World You Live In
How The “Conspiracy Theory” Label Was Conceived To Derail The
Truth Movement
How Covert American Agents Infiltrate the Internet to Manipulate, Deceive and Destroy Reputations
February 2, 2022
Putin Weighs Three Options: War, Permanent Tension, Or, Just Smile And Wave
By: Sorcha Faal, and as
reported to her Western Subscribers
An enlightening new Security Council (SC) report circulating in the Kremlin today first noting President Putin warning that a potential NATO membership would see Ukraine “filled chock-full” with arms could prompt Kiev to proceed with its plan to start a military “operation” in Crimea, a sovereign territory of the Russian Federation that Moscow would then be bound to respond to, says to avert such a catastrophe Russia presented proposed security guarantee agreements to both the socialist Biden Regime and its NATO military bloc—but in whose replies President Putin revealed: “Let me note that we are closely analyzing the written responses received from the United States and NATO on 26 January…However, it is already clear, and I informed Mr. Prime Minister about it, that the fundamental Russian concerns were ignored”.
The Biden Regime and NATO answers to the two proposals “Treaty Between the United States of America and the Russian Federation on Security Guarantees” and “Agreement on Measures to Ensure the Security of the Russian Federation and Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization”, this report notes, were leaked this morning to the Spanish newspaper EL PAÍS, that posted a direct link to these restricted documents—and in response to the leaking of these restricted documents top Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated to questioning journalists: “We did not publish anything and I do not want to comment on it…You need to address the newspaper or the Spanish government, at least not to us…We have, of course, seen the publication…Yesterday, President Putin gave a general conceptual assessment of the answers received in the part that concerns fundamentally important issues for Russia”.
In a direct letter sent to all of the heads of these warmongering Western governments yesterday, this report continues, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov stated:
You are well aware that
With a view to avoiding any further
escalation, the Russian side presented on 15 December 2021 the drafts of two
interconnected international legal documents – a Treaty between the Russian
Federation and the United States of America on Security Guarantees and an
Agreement on Measures to Ensure the Security of the Russian Federation and
Member States of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The
We believe it is necessary to
immediately clarify this issue, as it will determine the prospects for future
dialogue.
The Charter for European Security
signed at the OSCE
It underscored the right of each
participating State to be free to choose or change its security arrangements
including treaties of alliances, as they evolve, as well as the right of each
State to neutrality.
The same paragraph of the
Charter directly conditions those rights on the obligation of each State not to
strengthen its security at the expense of the security of other States.
It says further that no
State, group of States or Organization can have any pre-eminent responsibility
for maintaining peace and stability in the OSCE area or can consider any part
of the OSCE area as its sphere of influence.
At the OSCE
However, the Western
countries continue to pick up out of it only those elements that suit them, and
namely – the right of States to be free to choose alliances for ensuring
exclusively their own security.
The words ‘as they evolve’
are shamefacedly omitted, because this provision was also an integral part of
the understanding of ‘indivisible security’, and specifically in the sense that
military alliances must abandon their initial deterrence function and integrate
into the all-European architecture based on collective approaches, rather than
as narrow groups.
The principle of indivisible
security is selectively interpreted as a justification for the ongoing course toward
irresponsible expansion of NATO.
It is revealing that
Western representatives, while expressing their readiness to engage in dialogue
on the European security architecture, deliberately avoid making reference to
the Charter for European Security and the Astana Declaration in their comments.
They mention only earlier OSCE
documents, particularly often – the 1990 Charter of Paris for a New Europe that
does not contain the increasingly ‘inconvenient’ obligation not to strengthen
own security at the expense of the security of other States.
Western capitals also attempt to ignore a key
OSCE document – the 1994 Code of Conduct on Politico-Military Aspects of Security, which clearly says that
the States will choose their security arrangements, including membership in
alliances, ‘bearing in mind the legitimate security concerns of other States’.
It will not work that way.
The very essence of the
agreements on indivisible security is that either there is security for all or
there is no security for anyone.
The Istanbul Charter provides that
each OSCE participating State has equal right to security, and not only NATO countries that interpret this right as an
exceptional privilege of membership in the ‘exclusive’ North Atlantic club.
While outright ignoring every agreement on European security they’ve signed over the past 32-years, this report details, yesterday it saw Britain, Poland and Ukraine announcing that they will collaborate in military moves designed to confront Russia—an announcement for war quickly followed by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signing an order to expand his country’s military, including bolstering the ranks of its army by at least 100,000 soldiers—after which Poland announced it had joined Latvia and Lithuania to send shoulder-fired anti-aircraft missiles (MANPADs) to Ukraine, along with other weapons—then it saw Ukraine demanding that these warmongering Western nations send it even more weapons—and in assessing the West flooding Ukraine with weapons, top Russian military strategist retired Colonel Mikhail Khodarenok factually observes: “The question is, can they significantly improve Ukraine’s military arsenals and capacity?...Would that be enough to help the Ukrainian Army withstand a Russian Army assault, and prevail in a hypothetical battle?...The answer to both these questions is ‘no’...Russia’s economic and military potential significantly exceeds Ukraine’s...No supplies of single-use missile launchers or MANPADs can balance out the forces – which is why all the involved parties would be better off looking for a diplomatic solution”.
Most surprisingly agreeing with Colonel Khodarenok’s observation that “the involved parties would be better off looking for a diplomatic solution”, this report notes, is a new poll just released by Data for Progress, a left-leaning progressive think tank, that reveals American voters “overwhelmingly support the idea of striking a diplomatic deal with Russia to avoid war over Ukraine”, with some 58% of respondents in favor—and even more surprisingly agreeing with Colonel Khodarenok is one of America’s most powerful and influential leftist publishers Katrina vanden Heuvel, who in her open letter just published by the Washington Post titled “The Exit From The Ukraine Crisis That’s Hiding In Plain Sight” factually states:
The crisis over
The only hope is the
The agreement essentially called for
recognition of reality in law.
It guaranteed an independent
It promised full autonomy for the
Russian-speaking region of the
Samantha Power, then U.S. ambassador
to the United Nations, told the Security Council in June 2015, “The consensus here, and in
the international community, remains that
What is the alternative? For all the screeching of the hawks, there is none
in sight.
The Russians have served
notice that the status quo can’t go on.
In speaking at the United Nations on Monday, this report continues, Russian
Ambassador Vassily Nebenzya warned the entire world: “Ukraine’s continued refusal to implement the Minsk peace
agreements means that Kiev only has itself to blame for its impending
destruction…If our Western colleagues are pushing Kiev to sabotage the Minsk
agreements, which the Ukrainian authorities are happy to do, this could end in
the most disastrous way for Ukraine...And not because someone will destroy
it...But because it will destroy itself...And Russia has absolutely nothing to
do with it...Don’t try to shift the blame from the sick to the healthy”—a warning responded to a few hours ago by Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba,
who decreed that Ukraine will not abide by the Minsk II agreement
they signed promising full autonomy for the Russian-speaking region of Donbass, and declared: “No Ukrainian region will have a right power for national
state decisions…This is set in stone!”.
With Ukraine having now “set in stone”
the total obliteration of the Minsk II
agreement it signed, that even President
Obama’s UN Ambassador Samantha Powers warned “is the only way out of this deadly conflict”, this report concludes, it led to the Kremlin’s leading foreign policy expert
Valdai Club Programme
Director Ivan Timofeev presenting to President Putin this morning the following three scenarios to weigh:
Scenario One: War
It is inevitable that amid peaceful
conditions,
An outwardly loose but sufficiently
stable political regime has been formed in the country, for which compromises
with
The Ukrainian government itself sees
no alternative way of ensuring the country’s security other than through NATO
membership.
The West will also work towards
integrating
The Ukrainian army could be defeated
relatively quickly, and it is possible to avoid a protracted war by carrying
out a lightning-fast operation.
Furthermore, it would then be
possible either to divide the country into two states, one of which (Eastern
Ukraine) remains in the Russian orbit, and the other (
Another option is a forceful regime
change in
Western sanctions will be a painful
blow to Russia, but they won’t be fatal.
The benefits to military security
are greater than the economic damage.
The harm to the economy will not
translate into public protest in
The prestige of the authorities will
grow due to their solving a major historical task.
Sanctions against
An exit from the global economy is
possible, and even desirable.
The West itself is in decline. Its imminent death is inevitable.
A victory in
Scenario Two: Permanent Tension
Maintaining permanent tension in
relations with the West is producing results.
At least the Western powers are
beginning to listen to
Tension is a useful tool for
diplomacy.
It is necessary to keep it on
Ukraine’s borders, and to also apply it in other regions – Latin America, the
Middle East, the Asia-Pacific Region (together with China), and Africa.
If possible,
This scenario does not radically
change the situation in
Relations between
Scenario Three: Smile And
Wave
The country is not a supplier, but a
consumer of security.
Its NATO membership is
counterproductive for the bloc due to unresolved conflicts and dubious
contributions to common security.
On the contrary,
If the West goes for it, then
While it remains in the Western
sphere,
There will be a 'Moldovisation
of
The West has no reason to support
Aid will dwindle as
Without any military intervention,
In this scenario, there is a partial
de-escalation of the Ukrainian issue, although rivalry with the West remains.
Moscow skilfully manages such rivalries, facilitating them where possible,
and thereby overloading the West with toxic assets in the form of free-riders
and fiery liberals.
[Note: Some words and/or phrases appearing in quotes in this report are English language approximations of Russian words/phrases having no exact counterpart.]
February 2, 2022 © EU and US all rights reserved.
Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it
is linked to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content
licensed under CC-BY
and GFDL.
[Note:
Many governments and their intelligence services actively campaign against the
information found in these reports so as not to alarm their citizens about the
many catastrophic Earth changes and events to come, a stance that the Sisters of Sorcha Faal
strongly disagree with in believing that it is every human being’s right to
know the truth. Due to our mission’s conflicts with that of those governments,
the responses of their ‘agents’ has been a longstanding
misinformation/misdirection campaign designed to discredit us, and others like
us, that is exampled in numerous places, including HERE.]
[Note:
The WhatDoesItMean.com website was created for and
donated to the Sisters of Sorcha Faal in 2003 by a small group of American
computer experts led by the late global technology guru Wayne Green (1922-2013) to
counter the propaganda being used by the West to promote their illegal 2003
invasion of Iraq.]
[Note:
The word Kremlin (fortress inside a city) as used in
this report refers to Russian citadels, including in
“Destruction Of The
World” Forecasted Thanks To “Amazing Stupidity”
of Americans
Fear
Stalking America Awakens Europe To True Terror