Suntem în război?!

Este curios cum descopăr că multe gânduri pe care le-am avut în trecut doar ca părere au devenit realitate cotidiană. Această înșiruire de biți, adesea inconsecventă, uneori exagerată sau de-a dreptul eronată, am descris-o cu ceva vreme în urmă ca “jurnal de război”. Desigur că referirea la război era în contextul palpabil al temei zilei de atunci – “Animal Assad must go!“. Dar aveam, probabil, senzația că suntem într-un război generalizat, al omenirii-umane împotriva omenirii-satanice. Cum s-ar zice un război pentru ca să fie bine, să nu fie rău…

Maria Zaharova este o personalitate interesantă. Este purtător de cuvânt al Ministerului de externe al Federației Ruse. Conferințele de presă săptămânale pe care le face sunt, adesea, adevărate lecții de istorie și, desigur, de fixări ideologice. Nu, nu este o excepție între multiplele personalități din viața politico-oficială a statului rus, dar mă surprinde faptul că o asemenea capacitate politico-ideologică se găsește la nivelul aparent modest al purtătorului de cuvânt. Nu că ea ar face politica sau ideologia, ci faptul că o transpune intrinsec în ceea ce face cu o naturalețe și iscusință cu care nu suntem obișnuiți… (Ah, știu: din pricină că este o bețâvancă…)

Iată ultima conferință de presă din 6 decembrie a.c. (memorare, memorare)

Inițial am vrut să memorez doar ceea ce spune despre Kaliningrad:

On December 1, 2023, the Kaliningrad Region Court ruled to recognise the crimes perpetrated by the Nazis in Eastern Prussia as an act of genocide against the peoples of the USSR.

Let me quote from the court ruling: “Established and newly discovered crimes perpetrated by Nazi invaders and their accomplices during the Great Patriotic War of 1941-1945 against Soviet civilians who were forcibly displaced and military personnel engaged in forced labour practices, as well as against those who died or were killed while in German captivity on the territory of the Third Reich (Nazi Germany), including crimes committed in Eastern Prussia being part of the Third Reich (within today’s Kaliningrad Region of the Russian Federation) <…> shall be designated as war crimes and crimes against humanity, <…> constituting an act of genocide against national and ethnic groups representing the population of the USSR and the peoples of the Soviet Union.”

Let me remind you that Germany pursued the following goals and objectives in its war against the USSR: to destroy our country’s statehood and seize new territory while also exterminating the people living there. These goals were publicly declared. Special documents and directives instructed SS units to exterminate everyone they referred to as “defenders of the Soviet regime,” to use what they called excessive violence with total impunity against the prisoners of war and civilians, as well as ensure “mass mortality among Soviet nationals from hunger.”

Today, Ukraine glorifies these people. Every year, Ukraine talks about the famine inflicted on it by the Soviet Union. Distorting and misrepresenting the truth in this manner is worse than ignoring it. They know the truth and still remember the facts, but deliberately act in the opposite way.

Eastern Prussia was not an exception to the general rule, despite being part of Nazi Germany when the Great Patriotic War broke out. Just like across the Third Reich, there was a criminal plan here to exploit Soviet prisoners of war and civilians brought here from occupied USSR territory while subjecting them to unbearable conditions and then exterminating them.

To achieve these goals, as early as in September 1941, the German command issued Regulations for the Treatment of Soviet Prisoners of War, which reads: “The Bolshevik soldier has forfeited any right to be treated as an honourable soldier under the Geneva Convention. Disobedience or resistance, whether active or passive, must be immediately suppressed by armed force (bayonet, rifle butt, firearms). Those who fail to use force or do so with insufficient vigour while implementing this order shall be punished. Soviet prisoners of war attempting to escape are to be shot without previous challenge – no warning shot must ever be fired.” This is a document. It was not a mad philosopher sitting somewhere in a detached reality who wrote this. No, this document went through an entire institutional chain of approval and became a Third Reich directive. Doesn’t it remind you of anything? This is what those who picked up this mission and who glorify their predecessors are doing today – I am referring to the neo-Nazis from the Kiev regime.

There were at least 47 concentration camps where these atrocities were carried out in Eastern Prussia, with Stalag I-A being one of the biggest facilities of this kind in the Kaliningrad Region. It operated until January 1945 and held over 250,000 prisoners of war during that time, including about 90,000 Soviet PoWs, as well as 80,000 French, 40,000 Polish, 23,000 Belgian, 12,000 Italian and 7,000 British prisoners of war. It was noted that Soviet prisoners were housed in “extreme density” at the camp. To give you an example, one barrack designed for 100 people could accommodate up to 500 or even more. The Germans made it a rule to subject Soviet prisoners of war to anti-sanitary conditions. Therefore, it is no surprise that the mortality rate among Soviet prisoners of war in this camp was significantly higher than that of Western prisoners of war. Once again, doesn’t it remind you of anything?

We can see this logic today too. They keep talking in the West about the need to cancel everything Russian. EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Defence Policy Josep Borrell referred to Europe as a garden and said that only its ideology should prevail. To the West, this garden requires everything: water, food, and medicine. All the rest do not need it, or will be second in line, feeding on leftovers.

Was it any different during the pandemic? Remember all these Western-inspired manipulations with the Russian vaccines? Russia was the first country to develop a vaccine and offer it to the world, demonstrating its commitment to working with others and cooperating on the development, testing and production of vaccines, including by providing it as humanitarian aid. But what happened? They did not even allow our vaccine to be registered. They started this mayhem in international organisations and within the WHO. Who did it? These were the Western forces eager to prevent the world from relying on the scientific achievements of those whom they have long viewed as second class and labelled us accordingly. During World War II, or the Great Patriotic War, as we call it, they used the OST designation, but today there is a plethora of designations. Western media platforms label news stories by Russian media outlets with a yellow mark. It was created to let everyone know that these stories offer the wrong kind of news and are dangerous. It was the advancing units of the 3rd Byelorussian Front’s 28th Army that liberated the prisoners in this camp on February 10, 1945.

An inspection by the Kaliningrad Region branch of Russia’s Investigative Committee has confirmed cases of cruel treatment of Soviet prisoners of war, including executions, at the Stalag-1A Nazi concentration camp in East Prussia.

One of the strategies Nazi Germany used to achieve its goals in the war against the USSR, was to use the inhabitants of the occupied territory as the resource base of the Nazi army, to provide it with everything it needed to keep fighting. They did that in East Prussia, too. Doesn’t this ring a bell again? Isn’t this what “Ukrainian politicians” – actually a regime installed by the West – are doing to the citizens of Ukraine? They are effectively treating everything as a resource base – Ukrainian people, Ukrainian land, grain, the territory developed during the Soviet era, with our country’s assistance, and technological infrastructure facilities.

That strategy manifested itself in the barbaric exploitation of Soviet citizens who were displaced to East Prussia and pressurised into forced labour, building German defensive lines and working in industry or as domestic staff serving the German population of East Prussia.

Is this not what the West is doing now? Aren’t migrants treated as a resource base in many EU countries? Or does anyone have the illusion that they are accepted as equals? Endowed with the same rights as native-born citizens? Of course not. They are needed as a free and disenfranchised labour force in those countries that have degenerated through promoting the LGBT ideology, which we gave an appropriate assessment. Somebody needs to work, so they are rallying a resource base the same way as the Third Reich. They are using powerless, destitute, and humiliated people who were forced to leave their countries and regions. One example is the Middle East and North Africa. Now Ukraine. They thought they were reaching for the light – they came to the EU countries in an attempt to survive. In fact, they are the resource base. We do not know how this will end, given the processes taking place in the European Union.

From the very beginning of the war, the Nazis systematically relocated our citizens to Germany to make up for the workforce shortage in their industry and agriculture. They labelled them an inferior race and subjected them to severe discrimination. They had to wear signs on their work uniforms that read OST, which was a marker of their “racial inferiority.” They were also made to live in appalling conditions, starved, denied medical care, and severely punished for any minor misdemeanor.

Moreover, the Nazi invaders enslaved the civilian population of the Soviet Union, and residents of East Prussia actually traded in them as if they were goods.

Shortly before the Red Army launched an offensive in January 1945, the Nazis began a mass extermination of Soviet citizens who were prisoners in camps in East Prussia (in the modern Kaliningrad Region), to avoid exposure of their crimes.

Courts have considered the evidence proving that civilians and POWs were trafficked from the occupied Soviet territories to the Third Reich for forced labour and subsequent extermination. It follows from expert testimony and documents presented to the court that the total number of people who were forced to work in metallurgy, agriculture, mining, the chemical, construction and transportation industries exceeded 4.7 million Soviet civilians and 3.3 million POWs from the Red Army and Navy.

And now these same NATO countries are telling us about their technological superiority? That they are better and smarter than everyone else, simply by birth right? Because they have been oppressing others all their lives, in every form including slavery, slave trade, exploitation in colonies and semi-colonies, and even making POWs and civilians work for them in the middle of the 20th century.

East Prussia (the area within the modern borders of Russia’s Kaliningrad Region) was where over 670,000 Soviet civilians and POWs were kept, at least 211,000 of them engaged in forced labour and over 114,000 killed in gas chambers, shot or subjected to other inhuman methods of killing.

The bodies of the victims, drained by forced labour and starvation, were burned in crematoria, and their ashes were used to fertilise farmland. There are recorded cases of Soviet citizens being decapitated or shot, and their remains used to make soap, leather goods or interior items. Fancy, designer goods made from human flesh. That really happened.

The Kaliningrad Regional Court’s decision has again confirmed the scale of the crimes committed during the Great Patriotic War, based on the criminal ideas of misanthropy and racial superiority. We will continue to tell you about them regularly, relying on proven facts and documents. No one is forgotten, nothing is forgotten. (sublinierile mele cu roșu)

Dar secțiunea de întrebări-și-răspunsuri m-a făcut să văd esența din titlul acestei postări:

Question: How would you describe Russia’s relations with Western countries today? Is this a Cold War, or is there perhaps some new definition?

Maria Zakharova: We have already given our definition, and I wonder why you are not using it. It is a hybrid war that the West is waging against Russia, while using the Kiev regime to do the fighting. This is a very clear definition. No need to make anything up. There is no Russian-Ukrainian war or confrontation. There is the West using Ukraine as a tool to inflict a “strategic defeat” on Russia. We can generalise this as a hybrid war against our country.

Why is it a hybrid war? Because it is being waged by proxy: the West is doing it under the colours of another country and in using the political capabilities and figures it has planted in that country in advance. The campaign includes a wide range of trade wars against Russia, which were unleashed long before it, as well as an information aggression against our country, with the latest technologies used to exert information and psychological pressure on Russians. This includes cyberattacks, calls made from Ukraine with callers posing as representatives of Russian law enforcement agencies or banks, or bomb scares concerning civilian infrastructure (we have listed those repeatedly). Furthermore, they are using financial institutions to make our lives even more difficult, complicate economic relations with the world, including in making payments, and disrupt the development of entire industries in Russia by blocking cooperation in technological and scientific spheres. This is a true hybrid war that the West has unleashed against our country using the Kiev regime to do the job. (sublinierile mele cu roșu)

Da, suntem în război. Un război GLOBAL:

Question: Regarding the current battle for sovereignty, Vladimir Putin called it a “national-liberation struggle.” Is this Russia’s official position? For over ten years now, the phrase national-liberation struggle has raised a question that we would like to address now to the Foreign Ministry: who is our country trying to free itself from?

Maria Zakharova: Of course, this is correct. It cannot be otherwise. We are talking about this in the context of both our country and the entire world.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has been talking at length about de-dollarisation as a liberation from the oppression by a system that is used for the wrong purposes. Nobody was against using it as a financial instrument based on equality and law but nobody wants to be involved when it is used as an instrument of exerting pressure on the domestic situation or an element in a trade war.

The majority of countries understand this very well. This is true of both our country and the global majority. The involvement in the global information space was first undertaken under the banner of globalisation, but later it turned out that their presence in our country was represented by their media, resources and online opportunities. But we are not allowed to have such a presence on their territory. They started blocking us, mistreating our journalists and closing our media outlets. This is also oppression – literally enslavement.

Do I need to cite more examples? They have created a bridgehead on Ukrainian territory and have been destabilising the situation in other countries, our neighbours with whom we had historically developed good relations in all areas. What is it if not an attempt to make us directly dependent? The Westerners have realised that we have our own course in the economy, foreign and domestic policy, our own national interests, financial and energy strategies. They have seen that we are winning prestige in the world through genuine cooperation with others whereas they build up their budgets and threaten the whole world at the same time.

They have decided to act as they have decided. I am now talking about the collective West. This is why we are now conducting a national-liberation struggle, but we are not the only ones involved in this struggle. Look at what representatives of Africa, Asia and Latin America are saying. They all talk about this. We are in the vanguard of this liberation struggle.

Multipolarity is a manifestation of the liberation struggle by the entire world for the right of equal attitude towards everyone, equality and national dignity that has been trampled underfoot. In some countries, there have been attempts to destroy national dignity for centuries.

New centres for development and adoption of sovereign decisions are coming into being. Countries are giving priority to their national interests. They are throwing off the yoke of monopoly power, fighting for the right to pursue independent foreign policy and supporting democratisation of international relations. They stand for equal, fair use of global resources. They want every country, all of humanity to have access to natural resources rather than just the inept Western minority. The latter exploits this sooner for enslaving others than promoting its own development and this leads to its own degradation.

Let me repeat that we are in the vanguard of this liberation struggle. We are open to honest partnership with all those that are guided in international relations by the principles of equality and mutual respect. In cooperation with our associates, we are reducing dependence on Western currencies, introducing alternative mechanisms for foreign economic transactions and creating new international transport corridors and supply chains.

We will continue campaigning for truth and justice. This is not an attempt to make the world happy in one day or one year or impose on it our own sense of justice. No one has ever declared a goal like this. Noble tasks should be set as goals, and lofty ideals should be the yardstick. The world should be striving for greater justice rather than encouraging hegemony, despotism, exploitation, theft or deceit. Yes, this won’t be easy, but there is simply no other way. Otherwise, we will have to return to slave trade.

Question: Can you please specify from whom our country is liberating itself?

Maria Zakharova: I just said it. From the ideological, political and financial oppression and dependence on those that historically put themselves above others for some reason. Call it global imperialisms or the collective West. Sometimes they coin a name for themselves or we give them a name. Historically, they reveal themselves in this capacity. 

Countries and regimes that consider themselves better or “higher” than others, assume the illegal right to segregate people, take their resources and destroy whole countries and peoples. This is what it is. Historically, this has had different names and different manifestations but the essence has remained the same. I think EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Josep Borrell described this better than anyone before him or after. We are against those who believe in a philosophy of dividing the world into a “wonderful garden” that can do anything it wants and “a wild jungle” that should work for the “wonderful garden.” I think he did not realise himself what he was saying but he said it. We are trying to get rid of this yoke, this ideology and we have already succeeded in doing this in many respects. (sublinierile mele cu roșu)

Războiul GLOBAL de azi este purtat sub stindardul globalizării. Andrei Costin a deschis sesiunea plenară la un forum recent pe tema <<Making Deglobalisation: Uniting Sovereign Economies>>. (memorare)

Colleagues, friends, the first Russia Calling! forum took place in autumn 2009, when the global financial crisis was at its peak. At the time, geopolitics was still in sync with the world economy, or so it seemed. However, the crisis became the first warning sign hinting at the instability of the existing unipolar globalisation model. In fact, when one economy, even if it was the world’s largest, sneezed, the entire world fell sick. In this way, the crisis forced us to consider whether the principles underpinning this model were just, and to think about the economic and financial risks when a single country and some of its allies dominate across the board.

Subsequent developments confirmed that these concerns were justified. In fact, this group of countries started using finance as their main weapon to further their military and political interests, offering them an essential tool for actively interfering in the domestic affairs of dozens of countries with the aim of undermining their internal political stability and changing duly elected governments.

In 2002, then UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in Moscow that arguing against globalisation is like arguing against the law of gravity. It is not a completely inaccurate view. Everything depends on your understanding of globalisation and whose interests it serves. The events of the past few years show that the previous monocentric model of globalisation is malfunctioning and facing a major crisis.

The world is undergoing a profound transformation. A large part of the world, the global majority whose delegates are present here, would like to live in a fairer multipolar world and to see a new type of globalisation. In fact, the central theme of today’s forum, Making Deglobalisation: Uniting Sovereign Economies, reflects this long-term trend.

Russia and its economy will not revert back to the old system. Life has confirmed the viability of a different development model, which is proved by the geography of the forum’s participants.

In the current situation, not all those who wanted to are attending the forum. But the Rubicon has been crossed. We can only move forward now.

Mi s-a părut excelentă remarca lui Ari:

Cât despre multipolaritate, aceasta reprezintă o continuare a luptei pentru autodeterminare în epoca modernă. După ani de iluzii imperialiste ale neoliberalismului de tipul: „sfârșitul istoriei” și „nu există alternativă”, tendința către o lume multipolară demonstrează că exact opusul este adevărat. De altfel, Vladimir Lenin, probabil, unul dintre cei mai faimoși revoluționari marxiști care a prezentat o teorie modernă a relațiilor internaționale bazată pe lupta de clasă provocată de imperialism, a ajuns la concluzia că dominația monopolului și a capitalului financiar a împărțit lumea în colonii și națiuni asuprite. Dar ce este cu adevărat o lume multipolară? Că definiția lui Severin e complet bătută-n cap! În primul rând, aș defini-o ca pe o lume în care există multe sisteme de dezvoltare, uneori contradictorii și conflictuale între ele, alteori cooperând, dar toate având drept punct de convergență suveranitatea. Unii (precum sfertodocții noștri de politicieni) văd această dezvoltare în termeni abstracți, eliminând, separând, multipolaritatea de caracterul său de clasă. Or, un asemenea raționament se distinge ca fiind o greșeală colosală. Multipolaritatea nu este o dezvoltare favorabilă, ci TOCMAI rezultatul luptei de clasă. (sublinierile mele cu roșu)

Nu pot zice decât: Exactly!

Parafrazând: “Oameni cu mintea la voi, din toate țările, uniți-vă!“