Majorityrights News > Category: European Union

There are war mongers operating behind the scenes of power whose motives highly resemble those of the Cold War era: Russia, adjacent geopolitical objectives, resource acquisition and control are seen as central problems which require strong military force.

What is insufficient in John Marshall’s investigative critique and whistle blowing article, however, is a failure to make clear the facts that:

1) The particular people, including at NATO, behind these strategies - viz., war with Russia, control in the Middle East and the borders of Russia - do not identify as White; and are not acting with White (i.e., European peoples) interests in mind first and foremost.

2) In normal ethno-nationalist terms, Russia is, in fact, a problematic nation, which is not circumscribed to their, let alone to our common White/European interests; not committed to cooperation in geopolitical ordering; border and demographic defense; and provisioning of The European Ethno-National Region and its necessary alliance with The Asian Region and its Ethno-Nations.

The point is, these are very real, not trumped-up concerns, and White Nationalism must take the helm in cooperation with Asian Nationalisms to handle these concerns.

I will venture an outline of why that is and how it might come about in few days. I will do this in anticipation that Kumiko will contribute her considerable insight to correct oversights, flesh-out a myriad of details and augment points where emphasis is needed.

My perspective on this is that we’ve got the stuff of war at hand all around us already. It is now up to us to wrest the lines from the hands of Jews and others who do not identify with Whites, to shape and craft the battle lines in White Nationalist interests instead. I will argue that that will require European and Asian cooperation and, in terms of their prior imperialist overreaches and capacity to offer cooperation, a significantly chastened U.S. and Russia.

First, a look at how “obscure people’ can start wars” by John Marshall - talking about Victoria Nuland and her fellow Jewish and neocon cohorts, though, of course, he does not name the YKW as such:

Consortiumnews.com, “How ‘Obscure’ Bureaucrats Cause Wars”, 15 Dec. 2015

Exclusive: Official Washington’s anti-Russian “group think” is now so dominant that no one with career aspirations dares challenge it, a victory for “obscure” government bureaucrats, like Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland, as Jonathan Marshall explains.

History isn’t just made by impersonal forces and “great men” or “great women.” Sometimes relatively obscure men and women acting in key bureaucratic posts make a real difference.

Thus, the international crisis in Syria traces back in part to the decision of President Barack Obama’s first ambassador to Syria, Robert Ford, to reject peaceful rapprochement with the Damascus regime in favor of “radically redesign[ing] his mission” to promote anti-government protests that triggered the civil war in 2011.

                                                         

Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs Victoria Nuland during a press conference at the U.S. Embassy in Kiev, Ukraine, on Feb. 7, 2014. (U.S. State Department photo)

In much the same way, Obama’s Assistant Secretary of State for European Affairs Victoria Nuland did her best to foment the Feb. 22, 2014 putsch against the democratically elected Ukrainian government of President Viktor Yanukovych, “while convincing the ever-gullible U.S. mainstream media that the coup wasn’t really a coup but a victory for ‘democracy,’” as journalist Robert Parry wrote last July.

Nuland, a former adviser to Vice President Dick Cheney and wife of neoconservative luminary Robert Kagan, helped achieve in Ukraine the kind of “regime change” that her husband had long promoted in the Middle East through the Project for a New American Century.

Nuland now has a new counterpart in the Department of Defense who bears close watching for signs of whether the Obama administration will keep escalating military confrontation with Russia over Eastern Europe, or look for opportunities to find common ground and ease tensions.

On Dec. 14, Dr. Michael Carpenter started work at the Pentagon as deputy assistant secretary of defense for Russia, Ukraine and Eurasia, with added responsibilities for the Western Balkans and Conventional Arms Control. He replaced Evelyn Farkas, who stepped down in October.

Farkas was a firebrand who accused Russia of “shredding international law and conventions that have held firm for decades.” In a call to arms straight out of the early Cold War, she wrote, “Russia’s challenge is so fundamental to the international system, to democracy and free market capitalism that we cannot allow the Kremlin’s policy to succeed in Syria or elsewhere.”

In a remarkable display of “projection” — ascribing to others one’s own motives and actions — she declared that “Russia has invaded neighboring countries, occupied their territory, and funded NGOs and political parties not only in its periphery but also in NATO countries.” Its goal, she asserted, was nothing less than “breaking NATO, the EU and transatlantic unity.”

Farkas declared that the United States must continue its military buildup to deter Russia; provide “lethal assistance” to countries on Russia’s periphery, including Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova; and step up economic sanctions “to pressure Russia . . . so that U.S. national security interests and objectives prevail.”

With people like that helping to shape official policy over the past three years, it’s no wonder U.S.-Russia relations have hit such a low point. Might her replacement, Michael Carpenter, take a less confrontational approach?

Carpenter moved to the Pentagon from the office of Vice President Joe Biden, where he was special adviser for Europe and Eurasia. Previously he ran the Russia desk at the National Security Council and spent several years in the Foreign Service.

Carpenter has kept a low public profile, with few publications or speeches to his name. One of his few quasi-public appearances was this April at a symposium on “Baltic Defense & Security After Ukraine: New Challenges, New Threats,” sponsored by The Jamestown Foundation.

His prepared remarks were off the record, but they were greeted warmly — “you’ve hit it right on the head” — by discussant Kurt Volker, former NATO ambassador under President George W. Bush and foreign policy adviser to Sen. John McCain. McCain has demanded that the United States arm Ukraine to fight Russia and he helped inflame the Ukraine crisis by meeting with the anti-Semitic leader of the country’s right-wing nationalist party for photo-ops in 2013.

During a short Q&A session at the symposium, captured on video, Carpenter declared that “Russia has completely shredded the NATO-Russian Founding Act,” a choice of words strikingly reminiscent of Farkas’s denunciation of Russia for “shredding international law.” He accused Russia of “pursuing a neo-imperial revanchist policy” in Eastern Europe, inflammatory words that Sen. McCain lifted for an op-ed column in the Washington Post a couple of months later. Carpenter also indicated that he would personally favor permanent NATO bases in the Baltic states if such an escalation would not fragment the alliance.

The fact that Carpenter chose to make one of his few appearances at the The Jamestown Foundation is itself highly telling. According to IPS Right Web, which tracks conservative think tanks, the foundation’s president, Glen Howard, “is the former executive director of the American Committee for Peace in Chechnya, a largely neoconservative-led campaign aimed at undermining Russia by bolstering U.S. support for militant nationalist and Islamist movements in the North Caucasus.” He has also been consultant to the Pentagon and to “major oil companies operating in Central Asia and the Middle East.”

The foundation was formed in 1984 by “a leading Cold Warrior close to the Reagan administration,” with the blessing of CIA Director William Casey, to provide extra funding for Soviet bloc defectors to supplement meager stipends offered by the CIA. Its board members today include former CIA Director Michael Hayden, and previous board members included Dick Cheney and former CIA Director R. James Woolsey, a prominent neoconservative activist.

All this matters hugely for several reasons. Increased confrontation with Russia, particularly along its highly sensitive Western border, will continue to poison relationships with Moscow that are crucial for achieving U.S. interests ranging from Afghanistan to Iran to Syria. Ratcheting up a new Cold War will divert tens or hundreds of billions of dollars into military spending at the expense of domestic priorities.

Most important, the action-reaction cycle between NATO and Russia in Eastern Europe is dramatically increasing chances for an unwanted, unneeded and disastrous war involving the world’s great nuclear powers. Ian Kearns, director of the European Leadership Network, noted in a recent commentary for the Arms Control Association:

“Despite protestations by both sides that the exercises are aimed at no particular adversary, it is clear that each side is exercising with the most likely war plans of the other in mind. The Russian military is preparing for a confrontation with NATO, and NATO is preparing for a confrontation with Russia. This does not mean either side has the political intent to start a war, but it does mean that both believe a war is no longer unthinkable. . . .

“Too few appear to recognize that the current cocktail of incidents, mistrust, changed military posture, and nuclear signaling is creating the conditions in which a single event or combination of events could result in a NATO-Russian war, even if neither side intends it.”

In such a way, the actions of relatively minor figures in history – if their provocations are not reined in – can lead the world to cataclysm.

The pushback from Central and Eastern Europe continues, as Donald Tusk is now criticising Germany’s mass migration drive:

EU Observer, ‘Tusk: ‘Wave of migrants too big not to be stopped’‘, 03 Dec 2015 (emphasis added):

‘Access to Europe is too easy,’ Tusk said. (Photo: Consillium)

The current influx of migrants is “too big not to stop them,” European Council president Donald Tusk has said. He proposed that irregular migrants are detained for up to 18 months to check their identity.

In an interview with six European newspapers, Tusk said there is “no majority” in Europe for plans to relocate asylum seekers and that the priority should be the protection of Schengen’s external borders.

The scheme to relocate 160,000 refugees from Italy and Greece has been pushed by Tusk’s EU Commission counterpart, Jean-Claude Juncker, and by Germany’s Angela Merkel. So far, just a few dozen people have been relocated.

“I am convinced there is no majority in the EU for such a system,” Tusk said, adding that “this time, central Europe is not the only problem.”

“Let’s avoid hypocrisy: it is not a question of international solidarity anymore, but a problem of European capacities. Europeans would be less reluctant if the EU’s external border was really under control,” he said.

“Today access to Europe is, simply speaking, too easy,” he added.

Tusk, who chairs the summits of EU leaders, asked them to “change [their] mindset” and covertly took on Merkel.

“Some [leaders] say the wave of migrants is too big to stop them. That is dangerous,” he said.

“This wave of migrants is too big not to stop them,” he said, adding that nobody is ready “to absorb these high numbers, Germany included.”

Effective controls

He noted that debate on migration has slipped out of the hands of “politicians or intellectuals or commentators” and has gone “really public because the fear and uncertainty is so genuine.”

He also reiterated that the key is border control.

“Every country must respect and apply the Schengen Borders Code, including the rule that asylum requests be filed in the country of arrival, for example Greece, and not somewhere else,” Tusk said.

“It is often said that we must be open to Syrian refugees. But these are only 30 percent of the inflow. Seventy percent are economic migrants. Also for this reason we need more effective controls,” Tusk noted.

Controls are not only a matter of stemming the flow, but also a question of security, he said, floating the idea that the EU should be ready to detain illegal migrants as long as it can to check them.

“If you want to screen migrants and refugees, you need more time than only one minute to fingerprint,” he noted, adding that international and European law allow up to 18 months “for the screening we need.”

Will Donald Tusk’s voice be heeded though, I wonder?

Well, here’s a story:

Bloomberg, ‘Hungary’s Orban Says Germany Struck ‘Secret’ Turkey Refugee Deal’, 02 Dec 2015 (emphasis added):

Angela Merkel with Ahmet Davutoglu.

• EU may take up to 500,000 refugees from Turkey, Orban says
• German government official denies that secret deal was made

Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, a staunch opponent of accepting refugees into the European Union, said Germany struck a “secret pact” with Turkey to take in as many as half a million people.

The initiative, which wasn’t part of a weekend agreement between Turkey and the EU on curbing the flow of refugees, may be announced by Germany within days, Orban told a forum of ethnic Hungarian leaders in Budapest on Wednesday. European Commission Vice President Frans Timmermans dismissed reports of a covert deal as “nonsense.”

“Beyond what we agreed with Turkey in Brussels there’s something that doesn’t figure in the agreement,” Orban said. “We’ll wake up one day—and I think this will be announced in Berlin as soon as this week—that we have to take in 400,000 to 500,000 refugees directly from Turkey.”

Facing the biggest influx of refugees since World War II and reeling from the terrorist attacks in Paris last month, the EU over the weekend agreed to relaunch Turkey’s bid for membership in the bloc and offered a package of 3 billion euros ($3.2 billion) to help finance refugee camps.

French Reaction

“France and Germany are working together to manage the flow of migrants, which is a challenge to everyone,” French government spokesman Stephane Le Foll told reporters in Paris on Wednesday. “Last weekend the union reached an agreement with Turkey,” and Orban should be aware of the details since he was there, Le Foll said.

A German government official, requesting anonymity because EU-Turkey talks are ongoing, said Orban’s claim that Germany made a secret deal is false.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker met with the leaders of eight member states on the sidelines of the EU-Turkey summit in Brussels, spokeswoman Mina Andreeva told reporters on Nov. 30 without disclosing details of the meeting. The EU commission agreed to prepare a framework for a “voluntary scheme” by Dec. 15, she said.

While some leaders, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel, have insisted Europe must honor its asylum commitments and want EU members to accept refugees according to binding quotas, others such as Orban reject immigration by Muslims and sealed off their borders with fences. Merkel also confirmed after the Brussels summit that she had met with seven other EU leaders to discuss a plan to settle refugees from Turkey.

The plan to take in refugees from Turkey directly was also raised at a summit of EU leaders in Malta last month and was shelved after it became clear that some countries including Hungary were prepared to use their veto power to block it, Orban said.

“There’ll be tremendous pressure on us” and on other central European countries “that if somebody already agreed to this—and to avoid causing a diplomatic tussle by naming the country I’m not going to say where Berlin is—that we shouldn’t just take them in but distribute them according to binding quotas,” Orban said. “This nasty surprise is still waiting for Europeans.”

People have underestimated the Hungarians, but it seems that they are truly acting as Europe’s demographic gendarme at this stage in the game.

Hopefully whatever the people in Berlin are cooking up this time, will be stopped through the valiant efforts of the people on the streets, through mass protests and mass demonstrations.

Guardian, ‘Jeremy Corbyn demands two-day Commons debate on Syria airstrikes’, 30 Nov 2015 (emphasis added):

Today’s shadow cabinet agreed to back Jeremy Corbyn’s recommendation of a free vote on the government’s proposal to authorise UK bombing in Syria.

The shadow cabinet decided to support the call for David Cameron to step back from the rush to war and hold a full two day [public] debate in the House of Commons on such a crucial national decision.

Shadow Cabinet members agreed to call David Cameron to account on the unanswered questions raised by his case for bombing: including how it would accelerate a negotiated settlement of the Syrian civil war; what ground troops would take territory evacuated by ISIS; military co-ordination and strategy; the refugee crisis and the imperative to cut-off of supplies to ISIS.

It’s almost as though the Labour party is staffed by actual retards.

The Local, ‘14,000 illegal immigrants disappear without trace’, 27 Nov 2015 (emphasis added):

More than 14,000 foreign nationals told to leave Sweden have instead gone underground, with police saying there is little they can do to enforce deportation orders.

A total of 21,748 people had been given deportation orders by the Migration Agency at the end of October – the largest number in history, the Aftonbladet tabloid reported on Friday.

Of those, 14,140 are registered by police as ‘departed’ or ‘wanted’. Some are believed to still be at unknown locations in Sweden while others are thought to have left the country.

“We simply don’t know where they are,” Patrik Engström, head of the national border police, told the newspaper.

The rest of the individuals either remain in refugee centres, are in custody, or are living in separate accommodation which they have arranged themselves, awaiting deportation.

The government has previously announced it wants to step up efforts to ensure people without legal right to stay in Sweden exit the country. But police say most of its resources are currently devoted to carrying out ID checks after Sweden stepped up border controls.

“It’s a huge task and it is completely dependent on the police being allocated resources,” said Engström.

The Local reported in May that an increasing proportion of refugees due to be deported from Sweden were instead disappearing.

Last year the proportion of those leaving the country voluntarily after an expulsion order was 41 percent. Some of the remaining numbers were forcibly deported, but in most cases the refugees went underground.

The Migration Agency said at the time that the vast majority of the “disappeared” were Dublin Regulation cases.

Under the Dublin Regulation, refugees should be deported back to the first EU country they entered, often Italy or Greece, which have the worst welfare provision. But if refugees can delay their re-applications by 18 months, they may be able to stay in Sweden, hence the motivation to go underground.

It is often difficult to deport refugees directly to their home countries, which in many cases refuse to accept them.

There’s a lesson to be learned here, but I wonder if anyone will be learning it? Did anyone really entertain the fantasy that you could invite thousands of illegal migrants to flood into your country out of some misguided notion of hospitality, and that you could then change your mind and say, “Okay, please go away now”, and that the migrants would be all like, “Oh, okay, we are voluntarily self-deporting now”.

Also, would anyone like to take bets as to how many of those 14,000 people might actually be terrorists?

               
                    Poles burn effigy of an ultra-Orthodox Jew holding an E.U. flag

Jerusalem Post, ‘Jew burned in effigy by Polish anti-migrant demonstrators’, Nov 18, 2015:

Anti-migrant resentment boiled over into anti-Semitism in Poland on Wednesday, when a protest against taking in Muslim refugees ended with the burning of an effigy of an ultra-Orthodox Jew holding the flag of the European Union.

Several dozen people were reported in attendance at the rally, in the western Polish city of Wroclaw, which was held in response to last Friday’s Paris terrorist attacks, one of whose perpetrators was said to have entered the EU with the flood of Syrian refugees.

The crown shouted: “United Catholic Poland! National radicalism! Down with the European Union!” The demonstration was organized by the National Radical Camp and All-Polish Youth.

“Our duty, the duty of lawmakers and the government, is to say that we won’t take a single Islamist in to Poland because Poland is for Poles,” proclaimed one of the demonstration’s speakers. .

At the end of the demonstration one of the participants set fire to a previously prepared effigy of a haredi Jew as the crowd chanted, “God, honor and fatherland!”

READ MORE...

* No peace sign executed by Kumiko

It is not time for peace, but for the comprehensive conceptualization of non-European peoples as other, their place overwhelmingly is not among Europeans, and their imposition upon European EGI an act of war that calls for war in response.

Further, this calls for the undoing of “anti-racism”, reversing it, to a legitimization of the comprehensive social classification of peoples, including full comprehension of non-Europeans, including their outliers (their “nice exceptions” to their pejorative patterns) as distinct others to be discriminated against in accordance of European interests. 

Important and true though that statement is, it is necessary to capture the point in a pithy caption, that this is not a time for peace nor to be concerned for “the nice ones”, if “the nice ones” refuse our terms and/or will not go back to their native countries, from amidst our citizenship. We would more assuredly die through differential birthrates and interbreeding with “the nice ones” than we would through acts of terrorism.

So, let there be a contest to capture the nuance of our concerns: supply a caption for the image, something like “No peace for non-European imposition”... or “No peace for non-European invaders”, etc.

* Note: Kumiko and I had the same reaction (revulsion) to the peace sign in this context. When I saw it I was eager to make a statement to the effect of, no! it is not the time for that and this does not represent our stance. I wanted to put up the image with the typical street-sign type of cross-out (circle with one diagonal line through the center - in this case, over the peace sign). I discussed it with Kumiko and she was thinking something quite similar, but only much more emphatic - she was considering using an X scribbled with enraged thoroughness through the peace sign… but it was so thorough that you could barely see that there was a peace sign there. Still, I liked her idea of the hand written zeal of the strike through the peace sign, and suggested just one diagonal strike so that what was being crossed-out could still be seen; she agreed and we both had a try to see which of our renderings looked best. Interestingly, we both chose the same color, but hers looked better and there it is.

Despite our pugnacious enthusiasm, Ryan raises a hand of restraint, itemizing “peace as war” campaigns that had backfired. I wonder if that is not all the more reason to be explicit about who our enemies are. Kumiko is going to have some very interesting things to say about that in days to come in a discussion of the neo-cons.

And she might add her own evergreen post about the anti-peace sign.

In the meantime, I am importing the first few comments by way of responding to them in a first comment, and Kumiko’s first comment will be added here (though I will also leave the comments under the Paris attack thread).

Kumiko Oumae in comment 148102 on Sun, 15 Nov 2015:

1. Yes. When I saw all these people holding up these idiotic signs calling for peace, the first thing I wanted was to cross it out because now is not the time for some mawkish calls for ‘peace’. So that logo is one that will be used on Majorityrights so that we can express our fundamental disagreement with their idea of ‘peace’.

The Telegraph, ‘EU flag burned as tens of thousands join Warsaw nationalist demo’, 11 Nov 2015:

Demonstrators wave Polish flags during annual march commemorating Poland’s Independence Day in Warsaw. Photo: AFP

Organisers said that up to 50,000 were on the march which marked the anniversary of Poland’s independence after the Second World War.

Tens of thousands of protesters poured into Warsaw’s streets on Wednesday for a demonstration organised by the far right, marching under the slogan “Poland for the Polish” and burning an EU flag.

Demonstrators trampled and burned a European Union flag at one point, while a banner added to the anti-EU theme with the slogan “EU macht frei” (“Work makes you free” in German), a reference to the slogan over the gates at Auschwitz.

Police said 25,000 people joined the march, which marked the anniversary of Poland’s return to independence after the Second World War, while organisers put the numbers at 50,000.

“God, honour, homeland,” chanted the protesters as they marched under a sea of red-and-white Polish flags.

Demonstrators watch European Union flag burning during annual march commemorating Poland’s National Independence Day. Photo: AFP

“Yesterday it was Moscow, today it’s Brussels which takes away our freedom,” chanted one group of protesters.

Other banners read “Great Catholic Poland” and “Stop Islamisation”.

Polish nationalists (lit) flares in front of the National Stadium during the ‘March of Independence’ under the slogan ‘Poland for the Poles, the Poles for Poland’, which is part of Polish Independence Day celebrations in Warsaw.

Several thousand riot police officers were deployed for the protest, which was punctuated by numerous firecrackers and smoke bombs but otherwise went off peacefully.

The annual march, organised by Poland’s nationalist right, has seen clashes in previous years.

“I came here because I love Poland and want to show it,” said 27-year-old Piotr, who came with his fiancée. He added: “I came here for my grandfather, who fought in the Warsaw Uprising (against the Nazi occupation of the Polish capital), and for his father, who fought for independence”.

[...] thousands of Polish nationalists march(ed) on the Poniatowski bridge marking the Independence Day in Warsaw, Poland.

Poland is returning to conservative rule after eight years of centrist government, following the Law and Justice (PiS) party’s landslide election victory last month on a platform playing strongly on fears over the European migrant crisis.