NATO’s Options in Ukraine. Propaganda Retrenchment Before “Aggressive Military Aid” Directed against Russia
After provoking what is increasingly a devastating and expandingconflict in Ukraine, NATO appears to be out of options as its proxy
regime loses its grip on both its military campaign against its own
population in eastern Ukraine, as well as political control in the
capital of Kiev itself. However, despite the turn of events, with NATO
apparently rudderless, those seeking to undo and reserve the damage the
West has created in Eastern Europe must not become complacent.
NATO still possesses several options with which it can respond to
its deteriorating proxy regime and the eroding of its interests both in
the region, and around the world.
Propaganda Retrenchment Before Aggressive Military Aid
it now seeks to do in Ukraine – a complete retrenchment of the official
narrative regarding the nature of the ongoing conflict. Previously, the
Western media has gone through great lengths to obscure overt Nazism running throughout both the political front it is propping up in Kiev, as well as across the irregular forces sent alongside what remains of Ukraine’s national army. Western media outlets have briefly touched on the issue in attempts to mitigate and manage growing public concern.
Regarding the formation by the Interior Ministry in Kiev of a battalion of Nazis – the Azov Battalion – the BBC would publish, “Ukraine conflict: ‘White power’ warrior from Sweden,” the Telegraph would publish, “Ukraine crisis: the neo-Nazi brigade fighting pro-Russian separatists,” and Al Jazeera would publish, “Driven by far-right ideology, Azov Battalion mans Ukraine’s front line.”
Each would in turn, admit that literal Nazis are fighting on behalf of
the NATO-backed regime in Kiev – with the regime itself raising
ultra-right, Neo-Nazi battle formations. But each would also attempt to
downplay the implications and role of Nazism within the ongoing
conflict.
That was until Foreign Policy magazine published its article,
praising what it called, “fascist defenders of freedom.” It’s article
titled, “Preparing For War with Ukraine’s Fascist Defenders of Freedom,” claims:
The Azov Battalion —
so named for the Sea of Azov on which this industrial city is located —
is one of dozens of volunteer battalions fighting alongside
pro-government forces in eastern Ukraine. After separatist troops and
armor attacked from the nearby Russian border and took the neighboring
town of Novoazovsk, this openly neo-Nazi unit has suddenly found itself
defending the city against what Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko
called a Russian invasion.
Pro-Russian
forces have said they are fighting against Ukrainian nationalists and
“fascists” in the conflict, and in the case of Azov and other
battalions, these claims are essentially true.
finally admits that indeed, warnings that NATO was backing literal Nazis
in Ukraine were more than mere “Kremlin propaganda,” but rather the
unequivocal truth. Foreign Policy would continue by reporting:
Besides a strong
defense, Ukraine needs the support of the West to defeat the invaders,
Odnorozhenko argued. He called for the Europe and the United States to
take a more aggressive stance on Russia and begin shipping weapons to
Ukrainian pro-government forces.
United States and Europe are attempting to do – begin shipping more
weapons and other forms of lethal aid to continue propping up the regime
in Kiev. By embracing the Nazi militants fighting on behalf of Kiev,
and simply claiming Russia is “worse,” the West can repeat the strategy
it used in Syria after it became apparent that militants fighting the
government in Damascus were hardcore terrorists driven by sectarian
extremism and aligned to Al Qaeda.
In fact, it was also Foreign Policy who, in mid-2012, published an article titled, “Two
Cheers for Syrian Islamists: So the rebels aren’t secular
Jeffersonians. As far as America is concerned, it doesn’t much matter.”
to create a narrative that portrayed the Syrian government as a more
pressing issue than revelations that NATO-backed militants were
sectarian extremists, not the “pro-democracy freedom fighters” they were
portrayed as being during and directly after the so-called “Arab
Spring.” Foreign Policy would also create an array of excuses explaining
why militants were extremists – a strategy expected to play out again
as Kiev’s Nazism continues to emerge into greater public view.
By embracing and excusing two abhorrent ideologies and the heavily
armed militant groups espousing them, NATO is able to continue backing
both terrorists in Syria and Nazis in Ukraine. With the burden of
covering up Nazism in Ukraine “off NATO’s chest,” it can commit to a
more aggressive strategy of arming and aiding them.
The
self-destructive fleeing forward of the West generally takes the form
of political destabilizations, terrorism, false-flag attacks,
incremental mission creep, and covert proxy wars. What it has learned
from Russia in both 2008 in Georgia and again this year in Crimea, is
that direct, unpredictable, bold moves can pay off.
public in stating it has no intention of intervening in Ukraine. Since
NATO perpetually keeps the threat of military intervention “on the
table” for all other conceivable conflicts across the planet, it is
strange that both it, and its proxy regime in Kiev, have gone through extra efforts to insist such a scenario in Ukraine is neither desired, nor even “on the table.”
With NATO building up troops in Eastern Europe, and its attempts to
lull Russia into a false sense of security, planners in Moscow, eastern
Ukrainians confronting NATO-backed troops on the battlefield in Ukraine,
and in theaters across the region, sudden NATO intervention must be
accounted for, as well as a swift counterstroke to disrupt what will be a
precarious proposition for Western interests unaccustomed to such a
risky move, and merely depending on shock, awe, and surprise to follow
it through.
Incremental Escalation
brokered by Kiev that sees its forces withdrawn from eastern Ukraine
and contested provinces forfeited to rebels, it is likely NATO will
continue incremental escalation combining both an increasingly
aggressive strategy of arming and aiding Kiev’s forces regardless of
their overt Nazism, as well as an incremental NATO build-up along
Ukraine’s borders and covertly within them.
desperate strategy entirely depends on whether or not this incremental
escalation can continue at a quicker pace than the regime in Kiev can
collapse.
interests driving its agenda failing in Ukraine and floundering in
Syria, the West has exhibited signs of dangerous desperation causing
lapses in judgement and an overall lack of deep, coherent, strategic
planning. It has gone from forcing its enemies to react to its
provocations in 2011, to a series of backpedaling reactions in the face
of formidable counterstrokes made in return ever since. An enemy that is
desperate, is an enemy that is dangerous. Feeling it has nothing to
lose, it may commit to an increasingly reckless strategy of provocations
in hopes that its enemies’ caution and reason force them to back down.
Tony Cartalucci, Bangkok-based geopolitical researcher and writer, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
GLOBALRESEARCH
Ακολουθήστε το infognomonpolitics.gr στο Google News και μάθετε πρώτοι όλες τις ειδήσεις που αφορούν τα εθνικά θέματα, τις διεθνείς σχέσεις, την εξωτερική πολιτική, τα ελληνοτουρκικά και την εθνική άμυνα.
Ακολουθήστε το infognomonpolitics.gr στο Facebook
Ακολουθήστε τον Σάββα Καλεντερίδη στο Facebook
Ακολουθήστε τον Σάββα Καλεντερίδη στο Twitter
Εγγραφείτε στο κανάλι του infognomonpolitics.gr στο Youtube