How could the Great Patriotic War in which the Soviet people (including many members of my own family) lost at least 25 million lives, have anything in common with the latest outbreak of the novel coronavirus?

You think this is an absolutely insane question?

However, before you dismiss it, think twice. There are similarities how they are being portrayed. There is a dangerous, even deadly pattern.

The storylines of both monumental events have been shamelessly kidnapped, and perverted by Western propaganda!

Those people and countries that fought hard and heroically, have lost the narrative. At the same time, those who negotiated, to twist and to delay their involvement, have managed to re-write history and to even give themselves the credit for ‘saving the world’.

The greatest sacrifice in human history, that made by the Soviet people who fought for the survival of mankind, defeated Nazism, and later helped to de-colonize the world, has been belittled by the professional masters of disinformation in London, Paris and New York. The Soviet Union itself was first smeared, its history rewritten in hostile foreign countries (to the extent that even the Soviet people themselves began doubting their own past), its internationalist duty discounted and dragged through mud. In the end and mostly as a result of such intellectual aggressions, a tremendous country and the bulwark of anti-imperialism, suddenly collapsed.

No shots were fired, except in Afghanistan, which was virtually sacrificed by the West. It has been converted into a playground of radicals and religious fundamentalists. In the end it broke the spine of the Soviet Union, the country that had been skillfully maneuvered into the conflict by Washington, and which, against all practical sense, decided to rush to the rescue of the Afghan people.

This, last chapter of Soviet history, has been twisted and perverted, too, in Washington and London.

In fact, everything pure, heroic and positive that the Soviet Union represented, was spat on.

The anti-Soviet, and even anti-Russian narrative has become absolutely bulletproof.

Manipulative documentary films, books, school curriculums in Europe and North America; they all pass off as facts in simple propaganda gigs, without offering any evidence. Very often, they take historic events and data, twist them, turn them around, and repeat the consequent fabrications again, again and again.

There are thousands of mass media outlets participating in the project. It definitely works. Such an approach is effective. Deadly effective.

***

China is now being beaten with the same stick as the Soviet Union, and Russia.

The most populous, successful, and enthusiastic Socialist country still does not fully comprehend, what is being done to it. China is trying to be a good world citizen. It does its best to show kindness and solidarity. And yet, the more positive its deeds, the more it gets antagonized, accused of selfishness and malignancy.

The Western propaganda apparatus is now determinedly smearing the Chinese revolution, the Chinese Communist Party, and the Chinese system. Tiananmen Square ‘events’, which were invented by thoroughly hostile Western mass media outlets, are used as proof of China’s “evilness”. Present-day Hong Kong events, a direct attack on China and interference in its internal affairs, are turned upside down. Beijing is being portrayed as the aggressor, not as the victim!

Newspapers like The New York Times or The Independent have absolutely nothing good to say about the socially most successful country on Earth.

That is quite an impressive show of one-sidedness.

Then comes COVID-19.

Before Western propaganda got involved, kicking into top gear, people in all corners of the world were tremendously impressed with the rapid and determined response of the Chinese system. China isolated one province, quarantined it, and defeated the pandemic within a few weeks. Almost immediately, it began helping the rest of the world.

The Chinese government, Chinese scientists, and the Chinese population in general, had no idea what were they up against. They were all alone, facing the new virus. Intuitively, in a socialist way, they mobilized, won the battle and defeated the pandemic with minimum losses and in the shortest possible time.

While several Chinese officials and scientists believed that the virus was injected into China by the United States, Beijing decided to adopt a conciliatory tone, suggesting there should be cooperation, instead of confrontation.

That is the Chinese, but not Western way.

The Western approach towards the COVID-19; from Italy, UK, Spain to the United States across the Atlantic Ocean, has been grotesque, inconsistent, disorganized and for the common people, deadly. In short, it has been a total fiasco.

Therefore, using its traditional methods, Western propaganda system began doing what it does the best: attacking those who are fighting for the survival of the world. Attacking relentlessly, aggressively and often, vulgarly.

If the numbers were to be compared, the entire affair would look ridiculous, even grotesque. The West would soon run out of arguments. The same, if the Chinese and Western general approaches were placed next to each other and analyzed.

But they are not. What is done in Europe and North America is not really reporting or comparing facts. Instead, it is a constant flow of an ideological, propagandist narrative, of disinformation, full of sarcasm, double speak and mud.

The discourses of the U.S. politicians are increasingly racist, perverse and full of spite. When it comes to China, Western leaders lie, they present no proof, but in this ‘game’, all the above is obviously allowed. One after another, they get on the proverbial podium and spit at China: all of them do – Trump, Pompeo, Navarro, Rubio, and others.

The better China does, the more they shout and spit.

The better the Soviet Union did, the louder the accusations against it were, the more brutal the insults.

Now China says loudly and clearly: “We have pulled almost everyone out of poverty. We are a real Socialist country with Chinese characteristics, governed by the Communist Party of China. We are helping the struggling part of the world through the BRI (Belt and Road Initiative). We fought hard and defeated the new and terrible pandemic.”

Western ideologues shout back: “No you are not helping anyone. You are selfish. You are not even socialist. You misinformed us about the pandemic.”

The problem is, the Western regime owns and controls incomparably more media outlets than do China and Russia combined. And both the Russian and Chinese media outlets, including this magazine – New Eastern Outlook – are constantly censored and blocked in the Western countries, on-line and otherwise. It goes without saying, that the Western propaganda is the biggest, and the mightiest disinformation system on the planet.

In the meantime, tens of thousands are dying from the COVID-19, but now especially from the economic and social manipulation, in Europe, North America and their client states in the poor parts of the world.

The contrast is tremendous, if one is allowed to the see that contrast.

It is obvious which system is better for humanity, but the more obvious it gets, the more disinformation blurs the picture; the compliments of the Western media outlets and ‘educational’ institutions.

While all this is going on, people in the West are increasingly complacent, sheepish, and indifferent.

In his recent interview for the RT, the legendary German film director, Werner Herzog, brought up some essential and relevant philosophical points:

“The atrocities carried out by the Nazis were the result of a lockstep narrative of “demonization” which replaced facts.”

“‘Industrialized mass murder’ only possible when people stop questioning narratives.”

“It is not so much what is factually happening, it’s who owns the narrative. And we have to be very, very careful and watchful about looking at the media. What are the media doing? Is there some sort of almost collective brainwashing going on or not? … [W]e have to be quite vigilant and we should think on our own.”

What we are witnessing or participating in, is a horrific, ideological battle. Not just for China, not just for Russia and for the memory of those who gave their lives for the survival of our human race.

Right now, everything is at stake. Perhaps the very essence of mankind.

It is still possible to win. Partially, because Western propaganda, while effective, is not necessarily innovative. It is relatively primitive. It can be exposed. While it repeats its lies, relentlessly and religiously, we have to repeat that the lies are lies, and offer proof.

Let us do it with determination, and in full voice.

Therefore:

“75 years ago, it was the Soviet Union who defeated Nazi Germany, and saved the world, at an unimaginably high cost!”

And:

“It was China, which was first hit by the novel coronavirus. And it was China, which defeated it rapidly and with tremendous socialist determination!”

Andre Vltchek is a philosopher, novelist, filmmaker and investigative journalist. He’s the creator of Vltchek’s World in Word and Images, and a writer that has penned a number of books, including China’s Belt and Road Initiative: Connecting Countries Saving Millions of Lives. He writes especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

Some days I wonder why Russia tries so hard. The hatred and lies slung at them from western leaders, lecturers, and business tycoons is a horrid reality. Take the May 9th Victory Day celebrations, as an example. No one casts even a sloppy salute toward heroes who saved the world from dastardly tyranny 75 years ago. Instead of brotherhood and gratitude, the Russian people have “wished” upon them, more coronavirus death so that Vladimir Putin will finally fall.

It won’t happen. Putin falling, I mean. However, reading the shameful wishes for catastrophe to hit Russia even harder, it makes me wonder what would have happened had the Soviets managed to have peace with Hitler, Mussolini, and Tojo. The New York Times headline reads “Russia Was Ready to Celebrate a Glorious Past. The Present Intervened.” The story by Andrew Higgins paints a grim picture of Moscow under lockdown. But for me, I wonder what the difference between New York or London and Moscow is? I mean, besides the fact Vladimir Putin works in the Russian capital.

Bloomberg, characteristically, questions Moscow’s count of coronavirus cases. Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty is doing a COVID-19 rain dance wishing more pain and suffering on the Russians. And in frosty Germany, Deutsche Welle praises the “new Ukraine” for writing World War II history the way “the west” prefers to. How predictable is that?

Meanwhile, Russia’s foreign ministry has begun publication of a series of archive documents on major events of World War II on the website. And I wonder why the Russians should have to do this? What was once so clear, even though unappreciated from the Russian perspective, is now up for questioning? Is there any logic that does not have many of us speaking German and Japanese today, had so many Soviets not died fighting Hitler? Would 40,000 Nazi airplanes and hundreds of U-boats not have finally crushed Britain? With Russians safe in their beds at home, would France even be France at all? What if Hitler’s war machine truly did join with Tojo’s Kamikazes? Can you envision an alternative Battle of Midway? I can.

What if Stalin, Mussolini, Hitler, and Tojo had been pals? After all, as far as Putin and the Russians are concerned today, they may as well have been. Russophobia in America and Europe is a far cry greater than the SS storm troopers possessed. Hitler’s bunch professed anti-communism, but they wanted more land and riches – look up Lebensraum. Even BBC has a decent layout of this expansion of the fearsome Third Reich.

For those interested in fairness and objectivity, RFM spokeslady Maria Zacharova points out that Mr. Putin’s documentary project to preserve the truth about Russia’s role:

“This project provides open access to 4,000 archive documents of more than 370,000 pages. This resource is to become part of the presidential documentary project on the history of World War II. An unprecedented large-scale long-term project is being implemented at the Russian president’s instruction. The project provides for the compiling of a single collection of information resources about World War II.”

75 years after American and Soviet troops converged at the Elbe River in Germany to split Hitler’s forces in two, and the Cold War dinosaurs run by elites in the west want to revamp history, they are attempting to eradicate it along with any semblance of honor toward Russians. Every battle between the fascists and the Soviets is being combed over. And every time the media or archivists gain an inch propagandizing the western role, a dead Russian gets his or her tombstone bulldozed under. Putin’s Russia may as well launch fullscale invasions across the western front, for all the good detente has done Putin’s people. It’s savage, what the liberal order is up to.

At the center of the monumental rewrite is the Molotov–Ribbentrop Pact of non-aggression signed by German Foreign Minister Joachim von Ribbentrop and his Soviet counterpart Vyacheslav Molotov. Vladimir Putin has been misquoted and lashed out at over his valid assertions the Poles played a role in the start of hostilities in 1939. The Russian president is being accused of creating myths about Russia’s role. But is he?

The reality is this. Vladimir Putin has gone on record condemning this pact as “immoral” while admitting it may have been a “necessary evil”. Putin also stated that the signing of the pact was no worse than the 1938 Munich agreement, which led to the partition of Czechoslovakia. The complexities of geopolitics in the 1930s, particularly in Europe, prevent a detailed analysis here. But Putin’s assertions about the Munich Agreement are correct.

It was Britain’s and France’s fear of Hitler and the dictator’s anti-Soviet rhetoric which led to the Soviet Union not even participate in the 1938 conference. This virtually assured the outcome for not only Czechoslovakia, but for the Soviets, Poles, and all other parties concerned. Had Stalin’s people played a role in Munich, Hitler’s hand would have been forced earlier, and history would have been rewritten organically, instead of at the whims of westerners. Another point the think tanks and propagandists in western capitals fail to mention is that Britain and France were busy courting the Soviets for their own “pact” at the same time Hitler’s diplomats were. My point being, Poland was sold out no matter what.

The reason Stalin was forced to side with Germany over Poland was simple. France and Britain failed to offer the Kremlin an ironclad alliance against Nazi aggression. With Poland ready to wield cavalry against panzer divisions, Stalin had no choice but to “get” the best deal he could from the Germans. The Brits and French made a horrible mistake in assuming the Soviet Union, weakened by the Great Purge, could not be a main military participant.

Of course, this proved to be the reverse when the Nazis fell back from Stalingrad. Had London and Paris begun with the Soviet Union as a meaningful ally, there’s a solid change World War 2 would either have never taken place, or the Germans would have been stopped much sooner. So now, you tell me if the history books should be rewritten? Almost 30 million people in the USSR died because of Nazi aggression which was, by and large, the fault of the British and the French kowtowing to Hitler. And the academicians’ heads swell, their grants grow, the think tanks jabber and the globalist Russia haters wring their hands at the possibility you will and I will forget. The May 9th parade this year may not be as big as last year, but no virus known to man can eradicate the truth.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

]]> https://journal-neo.org/2020/05/11/may-9th-and-the-most-inconvenient-truth-of-world-war-2/feed/ 0 https://journal-neo.org/2020/05/09/happy-victory-day/ https://journal-neo.org/2020/05/09/happy-victory-day/#comments Fri, 08 May 2020 21:10:22 +0000 https://journal-neo.org/?p=135415

Dear readers and authors,

We want to full-heartedly congratulate you on the 75th anniversary of the great victory of the Second World War. This is a day of our common memory, a day of celebration of a great feat.

Victory Day unites everyone, regardless of their religious views, of their nationality, and of their political and social alignment. After all, there is no family in Russia that wasn’t affected by this conflict, granted there were countless families in other states that endured suffering and hardship of one of the most terrible and bloody wars in history.

There’s monuments all over the vast expanse of Russia and far beyond its borders commemorating the soldiers that made the ultimate sacrifice during this war. The eternal flame will never stop burning, as on this day people come to pay gratitude and lay flowers. With the deepest respect and sorrow, we bow our heads to those fallen on the battlefield. We thank them for the opportunity of living under peaceful skies for the last 75 years, building cities, cultivating crops and raising children. The more days that go by, the deeper our awareness becomes of this great feat achieved on the battlefield.

Having liberated the world from the Nazi threat, the Soviet people have always been persistent in their attempts of protecting the world. And today, Russia stands for the cessation of all wars, for peaceful and constructive discussions, for the cooperation of all peoples in the name of common good and the improvement of people’s lives.

On the day of the Great Victory, we wish everyone good health, heartfelt warmth, care and attention of those who are dear to your, and may every new day be peaceful, with clear skies over our heads!

The New Eastern Outlook editorial board.

]]> https://journal-neo.org/2020/05/09/happy-victory-day/feed/ 0 https://journal-neo.org/2020/04/24/did-vladimir-putin-just-create-a-different-world-order/ https://journal-neo.org/2020/04/24/did-vladimir-putin-just-create-a-different-world-order/#comments Fri, 24 Apr 2020 16:43:15 +0000 https://journal-neo.org/?p=134743

One can only imagine how much the Kremlin enjoyed a print of a Radio Free Liberty/Radio Free Europe article headed “Oil War And Peace: A Russian-Saudi Standoff Is Over — At What Cost To The Kremlin?”

Yet, nobody in the business of geopolitics knows RFE/RL stories are a two-way mirror that reflects the truth from the biggest lie while offering an unexpected view of the people behind America’s propaganda circus. After all, who in the world believes Vladimir Putin ever made a bad deal for Russian business expansion? If the US State Department says Russia lost out or made a mistake, you can bet your last dollar, euro, or ruble Putin just outwitted someone at the top. And in the case of the recent oil cutback, a US president begged for, the Russian leader came out in the catbird seat once again. The real story comes at the end of the propaganda piece by RFE/RL:

“The motives behind Russia’s move are murky, though, and may have been multiple. Some analysts said Moscow was out to punish the US shale-oil industry, while others said that Russia’s coordination with OPEC+ may have been undermined by different aims more broadly, beyond energy markets.”

So, the propaganda channel starts out “knowing” that Vladimir Putin knuckled under to the Saudis. Then, to summarize their all-knowing genius, they revert to the truth. Trump was desperate since the coronavirus pandemic had all but wiped out oil demand in America. It’s spring and Europe does not need US LNG shipments, almost every country has more than enough gas to last. Economies are tumbling because most are based on energy and other unsustainable output, and Putin has insulated Russia from such economic squeezes. The reality of Vladimir Putin’s strategy, as always, is in the simple pragmatic approach he takes to problems. A story from News Click summarizes:

“A perfect deal is where all protagonists get something out of it. All oil-producing countries stand to gain if oil price rebounds. In bare-bones, the OPEC+ group led by Saudi Arabia and Russia finalized in a nail-biting photo finish on Sunday an agreement to steeply cut oil production by a combined 9.7 million barrels per day to rebalance the supply and demand in the world market and nudge the prices to go up.”

This new deal brings Mr. Putin’s country an extra of 70-80 million dollars in revenues per day. The Saudi’s get to maintain their sandcastle kingdom a while longer on the boosted price of their last feasible reserves. Trump gets to stave off a couple of foreclosures and wins some time before the joblessness finally does in his re-election campaign. Some American elites protect a few of their billions. But ultimately, only Russia wins.

The game is nothing like the propagandists working in Washington say it is. American shale was over even before it started. Some billionaires got some profits, but it was never meant to last. Russia has always held all the cards, and now Putin has another easily won feather in his energy-policy crown. The Saudis don’t even matter in the long game. Trump is only concerned with reelection and positioning for his elite constituents. Russia continues to gain influence in the world, and without the Kremlin even having to try hard. In a way, the Putin legacy is being built on the thousands of tons of world newspaper reports on his alleged failures. Think about that for a moment. How powerful is your message, when steamship loads of newspapers bear your image? No leader in the history of the world has had so much leveled against him.

Finally, news French President Emmanuel Macron wants to organize a world truce with Putin during the coronavirus pandemic, signals the new reality of Putin’s recent moves. Trump and his America he was supposed to make great again, has turned its back on the rest of the world. Even some of the United States now feel abandoned and pressured by an administration that sounds more like a dictatorship than a democratic executive branch. Simultaneously, the Kremlin is offering olive branches to Washington daily, telling of a Russia eager to be a team player in the crisis to come.

Now, you tell me. What has a Putin move ever cost a Russian citizen? Who is winning for Russia, after all? Maybe the answer is not obvious to everyone on Earth, by now.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

US President Donald Trump says he had a “BIG” talk with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Saudi Arabia’s King Salman over oil production. According to the news, a deal was reached where Russia and the Saudis would cut back production by 10 million bpd from global supply beginning in May. If the deal pans out, Vladimir Putin will have thrown a lifeline to Trump and his shale oil friends.

OPEC just issued a press release, that tells of all producers cutting back from a baseline of their average for October 2018, with the exception of Russia and Saudi Arabia. The announcement lays out a framework for cutbacks, and reads, in part:

“Adjust downwards their overall crude oil production by 10.0 mb/d, starting on 1 May 2020, for an initial period of two months that concludes on 30 June 2020. For the subsequent period of 6 months, from 1 July 2020 to 31 December 2020, the total adjustment agreed will be 8.0 mb/d.”

The coronavirus pandemic has turned the world energy market upside down owing to the almost total stoppage of free movement, and because of the looming economic disaster. The situation has become a kind of perfect storm for all concerned, but especially for President Trump’s shale oil constituencies. Demand is cut down to a bare minimum, and the end is not in sight despite Trump’s promises of opening the economy back up. The COVID-19 nightmare has not even peaked yet.

Meanwhile, Russia and the Saudis were already in the midst of a price/production war where Russia had already squeezed Aramco out of the Asia market. Russia had the Saudis on the ropes back in December of 2019, when the international benchmark for Brent crude traded at $64.70. Brent stands at $31.48 as I write this. That’s less than the cost to produce a barrel in the US Today, Reuters is reporting:

“Major US lenders are preparing to become operators of oil and gas fields across the country for the first time in a generation to avoid losses on loans to energy companies that may go bankrupt.”

Bankrupt! We need to focus on just how ludicrous the idea of a US shale boom was for American policy and for her people. Those who proclaimed they would make American great again may just as well have prophesied her destruction. Russia was already winning the LNG war with the United States as of February 2020, which is when experts began speculating the coronavirus pandemic might destroy America’s shale boom. The aggressive energy strategies Mr. Putin put in place by the end of 2019 were taking a toll, especially on Saudi Arabia. In the midst of Saudis’ declining influence, with rumors of “peak oil” having already been reached, Russia has to emerge to a rightful place. Somehow, today’s crises seem to revolve around the west trying to prevent the inevitable.

Now, COVID-19 has gripped the American administration by the throat, spelling the end of the US unsustainable shale gamble loomed. So, with ghastly western sanctions gripping his own country, why would Russia’s president throw perceived economic enemies a life preserver? The answer is deceptively simple. Vladimir Putin has always had a better understanding of what a global economy should look like. While his western counterparts have been practicing exclusivism through curtailing Russia, Iran, and other perceived competitors through weaponized economics, Putin’s long view was always about cooperation and fair competition. I’ve reported dozens of times on the so-called “Third Way” of Putin. But today’s events make me recall his Lisbon to Vladivostok, which was an extension of the Eurasian Union envisioned to create a harmonized community of economies.

Putin’s ideology and strategy are so simple. He only wants Russia to sit in its proper prosperous seat in the world. Every move he has made since the 2014 Winter Games in Sochi has shown this. The “lifeline” is simply a pragmatic reaction to the situation. If Putin were Stalin or Nikita Khrushchev, as some idiots suggest, he’d starve his own people to run the American’s and the Saudis out of the oil business for good. The “mission” is not that, contrary to popular western beliefs. No, Putin’s pandemic aid to Italy and other nations is not a soft power mechanism as much as it is a European community effort. The Washington think tanks never seem to be able to connect the cultural/tradition dots between Moscow and the European capitals. A few battalions of military medical help looks like a Russian invasion to Cold War mentalities. But to dying Italians, it looks like mercy. Again, America and her allies just cannot translate Russian.

According to the Reuters sources, JP Morgan Chase & Co, Wells Fargo & Co, Bank of America Corp and Citigroup Inc are in the process of setting up independent companies to own oil and gas assets once touted as the engines of America’s resurgence. Whiting Petroleum Corp was the first producer to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy on April 1. According to the reports, Chesapeake Energy Corp, Denbury Resources Inc, and Callon Petroleum Co are panicked into hiring debt advisers. So much for squeezing the last drop of greatness out from under Texas. To make matters even worse, the banks taking over these assets will be left holding an oily bag of nothing. More jobless workers will hit the unemployment lines.

The carnage of America’s disastrous foreign policy does not just destroy the United States’ dream of unbridled shale oil prosperity. On the frontiers of Russia, the Estonians copycat shale operations are a disaster too. State-owned energy company Eesti Energia just got the green light for a €286 million euro oil shale plant. Since 2012, 70% of Estonia’s oil shale was used for producing almost 90 percent of the country’s electricity generation. Now it will be cheaper for Estonia to buy natural gas or oil from Russia. Which, ironically, might have happened under better circumstances anyway, had NATO not needed to play war. Plugin just about every eastern European nation you can think of here. The propaganda we read now seems idiotic, like this Balkan Insight story about Romania’s “failing” to be like the Americans in shale oil brilliance. The story begins with:

“Badly thought-out politically driven interventions in Romania’s energy sector have pushed up the price of gas – and risk leaving the country worryingly dependent on Russia.”

Excuse me, but in a globalized situation, wouldn’t energy from the most sustainable, cheapest, and most stable source be the right move? I mean, if Europe decided to include Russia as a member of the community, wouldn’t all this friction disappear?

Maybe President Trump will accept this olive branch from Mr. Putin in the best possible light. Perhaps the world can finally reach some accord on the best way to proceed past the looming Great Depression II. America cannot, Russia cannot, no country on this world can truly be great without the cooperation of the other nations. Instead of American dominance, we need nature to dominate our actions going forward. Russia, Iran, and Venezuela have “the gas” – why not let these nations and their people benefit? As an American, I can see the United States prospering using something else. Maybe old fashioned ingenuity, like my grandfather preached.

Phil Butler, is a policy investigator and analyst, a political scientist and expert on Eastern Europe, he’s an author of the recent bestseller “Putin’s Praetorians” and other books. He writes exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook.”

The recent agreement between Russia and Saudi Arabia to cut oil production is reported by the US media only as it affects American shale production and the price of various grades of oil on the global market, overlooking an important signal: When the country that for nearly a century has been the principle source of US oil investments joins a system that openly challenges American hegemony, Washington will inevitably gravitate toward that system.

Since the turn of the century, Russia and China have been building a multi-polar world in which the leaders of each geographic area of the globe would share responsibility for the advancement and safety of all. Seeking to deflect interest in this notion by its allies, Washington refers to it derogatorily as ‘a return to the nineteenth century notion of spheres of influence or so-called balance-of-power politics’. In fact, the real problem is that a multi-polar world challenges American hegemony, modestly expressed as being ‘the indispensable nation’. The sight of Saudi’s de facto ruler, the young and impetuous MBS, hobnobbing with Vladimir Putin challenges that notion as no amount of military hardware or money can. It can only become acceptable to a US that is a member of that club.

A recent book intended to confirm the Western view of President Putin as an unacceptable partner actually describes a man most people would love to have as their leader. In doing so, it reveals why the Russian President is invariably seen greeting other leaders with a shy smile, offering bouquets to their wives: he was trained by the KGB to ‘work with people’. Although President Trump also likes working with people, the ‘Deep State’, having painted Russia as an adversary that interfered in the 2016 election, will not allow the creation of a new ‘Big Three’. (During World War II, the term referred to the US, Great Britain and the Soviet Union, with Roosevelt and Churchill sharing the spotlight with ‘Uncle Joe’ Stalin.)

The multi-polar world’s signature achievement is the New Silk Road. While the US has persuaded most of Europe to shun it (Italy being the outlier thus far) the emerging Russia-Saudi entente facilitates Riyadh’s access to this web of rails, roads and sea ports that serves a Southeast Asia struggling to resolve domestic conflicts and throw off American military domination. As that region gains easier access to the Holy sites of Mecca and Media, Washington may realize it must re-evaluate the advantages of hegemony versus cooperation and shared decision-making in a multi-polar world, as it struggles with its latest achievement: that of being the country with the largest number of deaths in a world-wide pandemic.

Deena Stryker is a US-born international expert, author and journalist that lived in Eastern and Western Europe and has been writing about the big picture for 50 years. Over the years she penned a number of books, including Russia’s Americans. Her essays can also be found at Otherjones. Especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

When Russian military planes and trucks arrived in Italy to provide relief for communities hit by the Covid-19 outbreak, the Italian government, elected into power by the Italian people, was thankful for the assistance offered by Moscow.

Named officials within the Italian government, including the foreign minister, the minister of defense and the governor of Apulia, Michele Emiliano, publically expressed thanks to Russia for the aid.

But finding any mention of this across the Western media is difficult, often buried deep within articles aimed entirely at smearing Russia for sending aid and depicting Italians as victims of a publicity stunt.

Reuters, in a smear piece published by the New York Times and aimed at vilifying Moscow, still had to admit regarding Russian aid that Italians were grateful, noting:

“There are no new geopolitical scenarios to trace, there is a country that needs help and other countries that are helping us,” Foreign Minister Luigi Di Maio was quoted as saying by Italy’s Il Corriere della Sera newspaper on Thursday.

Despite Italy being capable of speaking for itself and bringing up any suspicions (if they had any), the West decided to step in and speak for Italy instead.

Sneering and Smearing 

Western headlines are flooded with scorn for both Russia and the aid they sent, completely indifferent to how Italians themselves perceived the gesture.

Articles like Bloomberg’s “Italy Questions Russians Over Their Goodwill Virus Gestures,” admit several paragraphs in that officially, Italy was grateful for the aid, noting:

“Our country can only be grateful” for the solidarity of many countries, including Russia, the Italian defense and foreign ministries said in a joint statement Friday.

Yet claims that “Italy questions Russia” suggest the entire nation is suspicious of the aid. Upon reading Bloomberg’s article, the only source cited is a single article in the Italian newspaper “La Stampa.” It is hard to believe an article in “La Stampa” constitutes all of “Italy.”

According to the pro-Western Moscow Times in their article, “80% of Russia’s Coronavirus Aid to Italy ‘Useless’ – La Stampa,” also entirely based on the La Stampa article, its admits La Stampa’s information came from an “unnamed source.”

Other articles, like the BBC’s “Coronavirus: What does ‘from Russia with love’ really mean?,” Foreign Policy’s “Beware of Bad Samaritans,” and Forbes’ “From Russia With Love? Putin’s Medical Supplies Gift To Coronavirus-Hit Italy Raises Questions,” all used similarly disingenuous tactics to depict the Russian aid as somehow sinister and unwanted.

The Guardian in its article, “Coronavirus: Russia sends plane full of medical supplies to US,” explains:

Critics likely to claim Moscow will exploit goodwill gesture as public relations coup. 

France 24 in headline alone makes Western criticism even clearer, claiming, “Flying aid to virus-hit Italy, Moscow flexes soft power.“

So by sending aid to Italy, Russia is somehow supposedly flexing its “soft power.”

So How is the West Using Its Soft Power? 

The West faced a collective decision. They could have used their own, very substantial soft power to one-up Russia by sending even more aid to Italy and other regions of the globe impacted by the spread of Covid-19.

Instead, they mobilized the entirety of their soft power to sneer and smear Russia’s efforts with Western-funded media fronts writing entire articles doing just that.

The West’s attempts to depict the Russian media reporting on the aid as also somehow sinister rather than simply telling the world what Russia is doing is also particularly surreal.

The Western media itself spends the summation of its own time and energy promoting what their respective governments are doing abroad which usually involves illegal invasions, wars, occupations and interventions… not sending aid.

A Missed Opportunity 

Because certain special interests in the West fear some Western governments growing closer to nations like Russia and China in the spirit of cooperation and mutual benefits and derailing the Washington-led “international order” that has prevailed post World War 2, resources have been committed to attacking any development that could spur this process further.

But because these resources have been invested into attacking, even when attacking is not the best option, that is all the West appears capable of doing.

The answer to Russian aid to Italy was Western aid to Italy. The benefit would have been a flood of resources sent to where it was needed and everyone involved enjoying the benefits of lending a helping hand to those who would be grateful in return.

Instead, the West appears to be throwing rocks at a time when others are coming together to help, and throwing those rocks at those who are helping.

Rather than teaching the Italians never to deal with Russia again, it is likely this process is going to remind Italians as to why they’ve diversified their foreign relations outside the West in the first place.

Gunnar Ulson, a New York-based geopolitical analyst and writer especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.

“The Russians are coming”, a phrase allegedly uttered by US Secretary of Defense James Forrestal while suffering from mental illness in 1949, is still in use today by certain media outlets (at the behest of, as conspiracy theorists would say, American and British intelligence agencies). And recently, this “prophecy” has indeed come to pass. The author believes that demand for underground bunkers has risen in the UK and the United States among some powerful people because they do not believe that either NATO or their nations’ medical or socio-economic systems could protect them from Covid-19 and threats posed by Russians and other countries, individuals or organizations.

And now, Russian Air Force’s 15th Ilyushin Il-76 aircraft from its military transport division landed in Italy on 25 March! All of these planes were not carrying either bombs or nuclear weapons but instead very special cargo to fight the Coronavirus outbreak: teams of Russian virologists, diagnostic equipment and means of disinfection. For several days now, the Russian Air Force has continued with its urgent mission to transport approximately 100 expert virologists from the Russian military, dedicated equipment and materials, including 600 ventilators, to Italy’s Pratica di Mare Air Base (situated 30 km west of Rome) in order to help this southern European nation with its battle against the Coronavirus. The aid comes after President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin and Italy’s Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte reached an agreement on the issue on 21 March 2020.

The Russian medical teams will, as a priority, assist in treatment of patients in 65 nursing homes in Bergamo, which are being converted by local authorities into facilities for quarantining and providing aid to the elderly infected with the Coronavirus. A convoy comprising 22 Russian specialized vehicles; buses carrying military experts from the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation; and accompanying automobiles provided by the Italian side travelled 600 km from Italy’s Pratica di Mare Air Base to the city of Bergamo in the north of Italy. A group of purpose built vehicles with military specialists from Russia’s Defense Ministry has already reached the Orio al Serio International Airport near the city of Bergamo where the joint Italy–Russia headquarters in charge of assisting with the Coronavirus outbreak is to be located. The city of Bergamo (in the Lombardy region) is one of the “epicenters” of the coronavirus pandemic with high numbers of confirmed coronavirus cases and Covid-19 related deaths.

There were a number of positive reports about the arrival of the Russian convoy and experts on Italian television. To the disappointment of some westerners who feel threatened by Russia, the broadcasts were not about aggressive Russians “scorching the earth” but instead about the assistance being provided by Russia to Italy, a country facing an unprecedented crisis in its modern history. The humanitarian aid provided by the Russian military was the ultimate example for all to see of the “Russian threat” and “Kremlin’s handiwork”.

Unfortunately, during this difficult time for Italy, its EU “ally” Poland decided to obstruct the urgent operation and continue with its Russophobic policies by not allowing Russian Air Force’s planes, carrying experts and equipment to help combat the coronavirus pandemic in Italy, to pass through its airspace. As a result, the aircraft were forced to make a detour over a number of other countries that added an extra 1,000 km to their journey. This ought to weigh on the conscience of Poland and EU’s leadership who only make a show of “European solidarity” for the public.

Another form of military transport, the Dvinitsa-50 vessel belonging to the Black Sea Fleet of the Russian Navy, also carrying medical equipment is on route to Tartus, a port city in Syria where Russia’s naval facility is located.

In the near future, similar forms of assistance provided to Italy to combat the Coronavirus pandemic may be granted by Russia to Algeria. This issue was in fact discussed by Foreign Minister of Russia Sergey Lavrov and his Algerian counterpart Sabri Boukadoum over the phone on 25 March.

Considering the severity of the Coronavirus related crisis and the number of infections in the United States, Anatoly Antonov, the Ambassador of Russia to the United States, stated that the Russian Federation was prepared to help Americans in their battle against Covid-19 on 24 March. “Ordinary Americans should know that Russia will be ready to help the United States too, if necessary,” he said also noting that Russia had had “repeatedly offered assistance in extinguishing fires in California”. The Ambassador added that the Coronavirus pandemic was a global threat requiring joint efforts to fight it.

“I think we should turn to Russia for help,” stated Vadim Rabinovich, a member of the unicameral parliament of Ukraine (Verkhovna Rada), referring to the fight against the Coronavirus on TV channel NEWSONE. He added that Ukraine needed to stop hoping its “strategic partners” would come to its aid and realize that the nation was left “face to face with misfortune”, hence it was important to seek assistance from those capable of providing it. “As for us, only communist China helps us,” Vadim Rabinovich also said. “I think we should turn to Russia for help. There is nothing shameful here: when it touches upon people’s lives, this must be done,” he pointed out.

Hence, “the Russians are in fact coming” but their arrival is not greeted with fear as anticipated by western puppeteers who had coined this phrase.

Vladimir Odintsov, expert politologist, exclusively for the online magazine ‘New Eastern Outlook’.

There are some serious changes taking place in the international order that has prevailed since the end of World War Two. After what has been almost three decades of Washington openly expressing its desire to establish a world order with a clear-cut US hegemony to serve its own interests, the policies of Russia and China have recently been growing increasingly influential internationally in various different parts of the world. That is why more and more objective attention is universally being paid to the triangular power dynamic of today’s three biggest players in international life: the United States, Russia and China.

“The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either. I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world,” Vladimir Putin said at the Munich Security Conference back in 2007. He went on to criticize the existing world order, and spoke about how NATO has failed to fulfill its obligations, and of America’s disregard for international law, which many Western political elites criticized him for at the time. Ten years later however, one Western leader, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, began speaking about a “multipolar world in which countries such as China and India also have geostrategic goals.” Around the same time, Permanent Representative of France to the UN François Delattre characterized America’s withdrawal from the Paris climate accord as the “birth certificate of a multipolar world”.

In think tanks and at conferences around the world, experts and politicians are saying that large countries need to adapt to multipolarity and the emergence of new poles of power, regional powers, and large economies.

The West’s relations with Russia have never been straight-forward, but categorizing China as a US adversary was a far less predictable turn of events.

Let’s not forget that the United States and China came to a rapprochement in the early 1970s following US President Richard Nixon’s first visit to China, who happened to be ardently anti-Communist. His meeting with Chairman Mao Tse-tung was therefore a true show of American pragmatism in foreign policy.

After Mao’s death, when the Chinese leadership was launching its policy of “reform and opening-up” in the early 1980s, known in the West as the Opening of China, the West was confident that China would move towards democratization and liberalization. That is why Ronald Reagan’s National Security Strategy spoke about fostering “closer relations with the People’s Republic of China.” Under George H. W. Bush, the Celestial Empire was seen as another state that, like the United States, has “contributed crucially to regional stability and the global balance of power.” The need to cooperate with China was mentioned in the national security strategies of Bill Clinton, George W. Bush and Barack Obama from 1994 to 2010. Obama’s National Security Strategy in 2015 even describes the rise of China as having the potential to “significantly impact the future of major power relations.”

However, in the US National Security Strategy for 2017, Beijing is already referred to as adversary, and the report admits that the Americans have lost all hope of liberalizing their partner: “Contrary to our hopes, China expanded its power at the expense of the sovereignty of others.” According to the White House, Beijing is operating similarly to Russia in that “they are contesting [America’s] geopolitical advantages and trying to change the international order in their favor.”

The trends that are currently being observed in relations between Russia, China and the United States indicate that we can expect to see greater strategic rivalry between the United states, the established global hegemon, and the powers that are emerging in Eurasia. In contrast to the United States, which is trying to cling onto its monopolistic control and the position of world domination it gained after the collapse of the socialist Eastern Bloc at the end of the twentieth century, Russia and China are now building their own axis, moving towards the goal of becoming a multipolar world.

Faced with a choice between the US and China, Russia has naturally gravitated closer towards Beijing for two reasons. From a political point of view, in a world where the North Atlantic Treaty Organization continues to exist, Moscow will never be able to reach a full understanding with the West. The existence of this transatlantic security alliance is still premised on a perceived threat posed by Russia, which is also the reason it gives for expanding its borders into other countries whenever an opportunity presents itself. Each new member state joining NATO is a move directed against Russia, and is unambiguously interpreted as a threat by Moscow.

The mutual economic benefits of partnering with the Chinese are another reasonable argument in favor of Russia’s partnership with China. China is a manufacturing powerhouse, while Russia is rich in natural resources. China has a massive labor force, which could help offset Russia’s serious demographic decline.

It is also possible that Russia’s future will be more orientated towards the East. Even from a purely geographical and strategic point of view, Moscow needs to invest heavily in developing its own Eastern regions, which are characterized by an extremely low population density, although they also make up more than 75 percent of the country’s total land area.

It is therefore no wonder that Moscow and Beijing are effectively taking similar stances on many controversial international issues, and the leaders of both countries have repeatedly stressed the importance of their bilateral relations in the face of external threats. They prefer to avoid direct confrontations on certain regional issues, such as Vietnam’s territorial dispute and energy policy in the South China Sea dispute, and avoid bringing up the points on which they do disagree in public discussion.

It should not be forgotten that the Soviet Union was the first state to recognize the People’s Republic of China. It was Moscow that helped lay the foundations to build Chinese industry, and although China is now unparalleled, none of this would have been possible without those foundations. By allowing the Chinese company Huawei to build Russia’s first 5G network, Moscow provided Beijing with the support it desperately needed as the trade war with the United States escalated.

Moscow and Beijing are working to strengthen and modernize their armed forces, and also hold joint military exercises. The goal of these actions is to contain the American war machine, which both China and Russia see as expansionism. The fact that China has purchased more weapons from Russia than from any other country indicates just how strong their ties are. The figures speak for themselves: about 80 percent of all weapons purchased by China are Russian. Beijing, in turn, has become one of Moscow’s top buyers in the defense industry: China’s share in Russian defense exports is about 25 percent.

Moreover, the US itself is encouraging China and Russia to develop closer relations by labeling them “strategic rivals”. By doing so, Washington is trying to achieve the impossible, pushing Beijing and Moscow closer together while trying to drive a wedge between them at the same time.

There is now talk of re-shaping the world order according to a new model as an alternative to the global hegemony proposed by Washington and making the rules of the game fairer, starting with relations on a bilateral level, then broadening out to include an increasing number of other countries. This may perhaps be what the world is looking for from Russia and China. For almost the entire second half of the twentieth century, the socialist system existed alongside the capitalist system. They spurred each other on. It is just as important to have competing motivations, ideologies, and proposed models for our world order as it is important to have competition in business. It drives our progression.

Vladimir Odintsov, expert politologist, exclusively for the online magazine ‘New Eastern Outlook’.

The on-going Saudi ‘oil war’ with Russia has its roots in the logic of increasingly using natural resources for geo-political and geo-economic purposes. While this is not something entirely new, the latest push comes against the backdrop of increasing competition between the US and Russia for global leadership roles and the former’s attempts at forcing the latter out, squeeze its share in the global oil market to increase that of the US shale oil, thus denting Russia’s economic capacity and its ability to project power in regions beyond its borders.

Whereas the Saudis blame Russia for the ‘oil war’ and Kremlin’s refusal to further cut oil production, the proposed cut, as it stands, would have ultimately meant a further decrease in Russia’s share of the global market and a significant increase in the US’ shale-oil production and exports. Ever since OPEC+ agreement of 2016 and the related cuts in oil production, the output of US shale oil has soared by 4.5 million barrels a day. Whereas the Western political pundits have been speaking and writing of Russia as the ‘malign’ player targeting the US’ ‘booming’ shale oil industry, the fact of the matter is that the US shale industry would not have grown in the first place if there had been no OPEC+ agreement. Russia, as it stands, has only refused to further cut its production, and is willing to extend the OPEC+ to continue a stable system of oil production.

How the OPEC+ benefited the US shale oil is evident from the fact that balanced production of crude oil meant stable and high prices, which made the US shale oil more profitable, further allowing the US to use the scenario to build its production and export infrastructure. As it stands, since 2016 when the OPEC+ deal was struck, US oil exports have increased five-fold and shale production increased from 8.9 million barrels per day to 13.1 million barrels per day. Thus, to a significant extent, by refusing the Saudi proposal of further cuts in oil production, Russia essentially refused to allow the US shale oil industry a further free-way for global expansion.

At the same time, Russia continues to stick with the OPEC+ deal. The Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin has said,

“We did not initiate the withdrawal from the agreement [OPEC+ deal]. On the contrary, we proposed to extend the agreement on the existing terms, at least until the end of the second quarter or for a year, so as not to complicate the situation that has developed with the spread of coronavirus.”

At the recent meeting between Russia’s Putin and energy officials, Putin reportedly said that:

“OPEC+ has “proved to be an effective instrument to ensure long-term stability on global energy markets. Thanks to that, we have obtained extra budget revenues and, what is important, provided a possibility for upstream companies to confidently invest in promising development projects.” 

What becomes evident here is that the blame for reduced oil prices can hardly be put on the Russians. Its roots lie in the global struggle for market share. This struggle is taking place at two levels. The first is between the Russians and the Saudis whereby the latter, known for playing on the US side in every war, want to expand their share of the market to sustain their massively oil-dependent economy. The second level, linked as it is with the first, is again about reducing Russian share of the market and allow for the shale-oil to expand. Since this expansion will theoretically come at the expense of Russian oil, the Saudis would still benefit.

There is as such a Saudi-US consensus behind the dropped oil prices. The US President Donald Trump spoke on the phone to the Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman on the eve of the Vienna meeting, and their subject of discussion, according to the White House, was the “energy market.”

That the US and Saudi Arabia have a deep interest in squeezing out Russia’s share of global hydrocarbon market is evident from the way the US has been trying to block and even sanction the joint Russian-German Nord Stream-2 pipeline project.

Who will win this war? Unlike the Saudis, Russia’s economy does not solely depend on oil prices, although it still does play a significant role in enabling the Russian government to fulfil its budgetary commitments. The Saudis would be thus at a loss much sooner than the Russians. If the US president called the Saudi ruler to discuss the “energy market” and it was mainly about finding ways of squeezing Russia, it was equally about finding a way to stabilise oil prices because the continuously falling oil prices would only make shale-oil companies suffer loses. According to a report of Bloomberg, “The US shale sector is getting completely killed. A complete bloodbath. Billions of dollars in equity wiped out.”

Whereas some in the West think that this is a Saudi-Russian project to destroy the US economy, this is not the case; for, if both oil producers had wanted this, they could have done this by doing a new OPEC+ deal in a way that would have allowed cut in prices and still maintain production levels at agreed levels. This has not happened, and given the nature of deep Saudi interests in the US, it is difficult to conceive of a Saudi project to ‘kill’ the US economy. What it signifies is an attempt at squeezing Russian share of the market. This explain Saudi proposal for cutting oil production (and thus allowing that of the shale-oil grow further). The falling oil prices only indicate that the project is failing; Russia is resilient and have enough reserves to sustain itself for a decade.

Salman Rafi Sheikh, research-analyst of International Relations and Pakistan’s foreign and domestic affairs, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.