Et tu Poland? Putin Excluded from Holocaust Commemorations

New Eastern Outlook
January 20, 2015
Ulson Gunnar

Glancing at the headlines one might believe Russian President Vladimir Putin had inappropriately decided not to attend Holocaust commemorations in Poland.

In one breathtaking display of misinformation, Reuters would report in its article Putin will not attend Holocaust commemorations in Poland that, "Sources told Reuters on Monday that Putin was unlikely to join world leaders gathering at the site of the Auschwitz death camp because distrust caused by the conflict in Ukraine has cast a pall on arrangements."

In reality, The Russian leader was never invited by Poland, the nation hosting the commemorations.

The geopolitical thrust and accompanying misinformation is designed to reinforce the perception that Russia is now a hegemonic threat, on par with Nazi Germany during World War II. Reality could not contradict this contrived narrative more.

On June 22, 1941, Operation Barbarossa was launched. Three massive German armies moved at lightning speed into the Soviet Union as part of a long anticipated Nazi attempt to conquer Russia. The invasion would quickly overwhelm unprepared Russian forces bringing German armies up to the gates of several major Russian cities, Moscow included.

Alternative Media and the MH17 JIT Reversal

New Eastern Outlook
December 8, 2014
Ulson Gunnar

After weeks of protests and growing suspicion, Dutch authorities overseeing the investigation of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 have finally included Malaysia as a member of its Joint Investigation Team (JIT).

Malaysia had made it clear it was immensely displeased with its inexplicable exclusion from JIT formed after the downing of MH17 over eastern Ukraine. Including NATO members  (Belgium and the Netherlands), a defacto NATO collaborator (Australia) and a potential culprit in the air disaster (Ukraine), Malaysia's exclusion looked to be a part of an ongoing cover-up amid a larger attempt to use the disaster to frame Russia and advance NATO's agenda in Eastern Europe.

The conflict amid which MH17 was shot down is perceived to be a proxy conflict between NATO and Russia. That the investigation includes exclusively pro-NATO members or NATO members themselves, both the conduct of the investigation and any conceivable outcome would be highly suspect. Malaysia, the only nation directly effected by the disaster and perceived of being beyond the direct influence of NATO, would have provided a much needed counterbalance.

MH17: Malaysia's Barring from Investigation Reeks of Cover-up

New Eastern Outlook
Ulson Gunnar
November 28, 2014

It was a Malaysian jet, carrying Malaysian passengers, flown by Malaysian pilots, yet after Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over Ukraine in July 2014, Malaysia has been systematically blocked from participating in the investigation, leaving an overwhelmingly pro-NATO bloc in charge of the evidence, investigation and outcome as well as the manner in which the investigation will be carried out.

Despite the integral role Malaysia has played during several pivotal moments in the aftermath of the disaster, it appears that the closer to the truth the investigation should be getting, the further Malaysia itself is being pushed from both the evidence and any influence it has on the likely conclusions of the investigation. With the downed aircraft in question being Malaysian, Malaysia as a partner in the investigation would seem a given. Its exclusion from the investigation appears to be an indication that the investigation's objectivity has been compromised and that the conclusions it draws will likely be politically motivated.

Joint Investigation Team Includes, Excludes Surprising Members 
With the Dutch leading the investigation, the logic being that the flight originated from the Netherlands and the majority of the passengers were Dutch, it has formed a Joint Investigation Team (JIT). At the onset of its creation it seemed obvious that Malaysia would too be included, considering it lost the second largest number of citizens to the disaster and the plane itself was registered in Malaysia. Instead, JIT would end up comprised of Belgium, Ukraine, and Australia, specifically excluding Malaysia.

Russian-Chinese Gas Vs. Western Hegemony

New Eastern Outlook
Ulson Gunnar
May 21, 2014

Russian energy giant Gazprom's 30 year, 400 billion dollar gas deal with China is set to impact global geopolitics in many profound ways. To understand the future impact of the deal, it is important first to understand the geopolitical conditions that face both Russia and China today that helped seal it. 

The Russian Imperative 

For Russia, diversifying its markets away from the European Union is of vital importance. Persistent economic decline is effecting demand, while special interests within the EU have become increasing belligerent toward Russia as the supranational conglomerate seeks to expand into Russia's traditional spheres of influence. The EU and NATO's insistence on continued eastward expansion, "integrating" nations along Russia' peripheries, is now clearly aimed at the encirclement of Russia proper. The current crisis in Ukraine, and the brief conflict of 2008 on the Russian-Georgian border are both direct results of this expansion. US and EU sanctions aimed at Russia, and Russia's response by leveraging the EU's dependence on its natural gas have reminded both of this vulnerable interdependencies. 

For Russia, it will be difficult to find another market in which to sell the 160 billion cubic meters of natural gas it exported to Europe last year. The new deal with China is expected to begin at 38 billion cubic meters of gas per year, or about a quarter of what it exports to Europe. Additional pipelines are in the works, and the amount of gas routed to China can surely be expanded to meet future demand.

Ukraine's Doomed Elections

New Eastern Outlook
Ulson Gunnar
May 13, 2014

Presidential elections in Ukraine are supposedly to be held on May 25, but the unelected regime to preside over them in Kiev faces a nation not just deeply divided, but literally fleeing out from under its self-proclaimed authority. And as Kiev attempts to hold the country together, primarily through the use of heavy weapons deployed against civilian populations, it is difficult to understand how any election can be held under such conditions, let alone be recognized as legitimate.

Despite this glaring reality, both the United States and the European Union insist that the May 25th elections be held, and held quickly. No mention is made of what legitimacy such elections hold even as running gun battles are waged in the eastern part of the country, particularly the province of Donetsk where a recent referendum has paved way for greater autonomy from Kiev.

Kiev's inability to assert authority over a growing segment of Ukraine's population coupled with the fact that it came to power extralegally poses an acute problem for both the regime itself and its American and European backers. By holding elections, even under such chaotic conditions, Kiev and its backers hope to establish greater legitimacy for their version of Ukraine. Kiev, the US and EU have declared a recent referendum held by the provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk "illegal." This implies that both Donetsk and Luhansk are part of Ukraine and fall under the authority of Kiev. It also implies that they will participate in the upcoming election. A similar stance has been taken regarding now Russian Crimea.

Kiev's Conundrum 

If elections are held "nationwide" as Kiev and its American and European backers define Ukraine (which includes Crimea, Donetsk, and Luhansk) the failure to actually conduct polls in these three regions will by consequence void the entire election or at the very least call into question their legitimacy. Should elections exclude these regions, it will be a concession by Kiev, Washington and Brussels that these three regions no longer exist within Ukraine or under Kiev's authority. With that precedent, other regions who refuse to recognize Kiev's authority will be given a clear-cut exit, particularly if upcoming elections result in the current regime staying in power. Either way Kiev attempts to hold upcoming elections, it will come out the other side weaker still.

Ukrainians Reject Fascism

New Eastern Outlook 

Ulson Gunnar 

May 19, 2014

Referendums in Ukraine's eastern most provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk have overwhelming indicated a greater desire for autonomy from the capital of Kiev. The referendums included provisions to elect each provinces' own respective government, retain locally collected taxes, and have the Russian language given official status (presumably to protect Russian speakers from anti-Russian legislation passed by the unelected regime in Kiev just days after they seized power in a violent coup).

Troops loyal to Kiev continue operations in an attempt to take over Donetsk's city of Slavyansk. Violence across much of Donetsk province appeared to be an attempt by Kiev and its American and European backers to disrupt referendums that have overwhelmingly called for greater autonomy from Kiev. (Reuters/Baz Ratner)

Despite attempts by troops deployed by the regime to disrupt the referendums leading to violence that cost multiple lives, turnout was reported to be over 70 percent.

Russia Asked for Delayed Referendums

Russia had suggested that the referendums be delayed until tensions between eastern Ukrainians and regime troops eased. Policymakers in the United States and Europe had interpreted this as Russia backing down from NATO. Clearly then, the people of Donetsk and Luhansk provinces, and not the Kremlin, were determined to distance themselves from a regime in Kiev they felt does not represent them or their interests, as the referendums were carried out despite Moscow's wishes.

A growing wave of unrest is spreading across the Eastern European nation of Ukraine. The unrest comes in the form of protesters refusing to recognize the current "acting government" in Kiev, which came to power on the back of violent protests that ousted the elected government of Viktor Yanukovych. Polices enacted by Yanukovych that attempted to appeal to both western and eastern Ukrainians were quickly repealed in the wake of the violent coup in Kiev.

In response to Kiev's perceived lack of legitimacy, protesters have taken over government buildings, demonstrated in the streets, and have begun organizing referendums to distance themselves from the regime by granting themselves greater autonomy. The United States and Europe have accused Russia of organizing the unrest, even as they claim Russia has backed down on supporting referendums that have not only taken place, but granted pro-autonomy Ukrainians a sweeping mandate.

In Mariupol, Donetsk province in eastern Ukraine, many civilians risked their lives standing in front of armored vehicles to prevent troops deployed by Kiev from asserting authority. Several civilians can be seen shot on camera as troops advanced. Despite the deaths, Donetsk has overwhelming voted for greater autonomy from Kiev. (Reuters/Marko Djurica) 

The US State Department has issued multiple statements condemning the referendums, regardless of who US politicians and policymakers claim are behind them. One statement dated May 10, 2014, tiled, "On the Illegal Referenda in Eastern Ukraine," claims, "as the United States has said, the referenda being planned for May 11 in portions of eastern Ukraine by armed separatist groups are illegal under Ukrainian law and are an attempt to create further division and disorder. If these referenda go forward, they will violate international law and the territorial integrity of Ukraine. The United States will not recognize the results of these illegal referenda."

The Corporate Colonization of Afghanistan

New Eastern Outlook 

Ulson Gunnar 

April 9, 2014 

A recent TIME Magazine article featured the “US NGO” Roots for Peace, which it portrayed as a victim of a regrouping Taliban bent on subjugating a newly “democratized” Afghanistan. This organization, funded by the US State Department and USAID, claims to be turning “battlefields into bountiful orchards.” But a lack of transparency makes it unclear as to just how they are doing this. With USAID using “aid” to usher in the corporate colonization of Afghanistan through other “NGOs,” its involvement with Roots for Peace raises warranted suspicions.

Already, the War in Afghanistan has given agricultural monopolies like Monsanto a multi-million dollar foothold in the landlocked Central Asian country. As part of efforts to eradicate poppy cultivation across the country, the United States insisted that Kabul sidestep health studies and sign off on an unpopular plan to spray millions of dollars worth of Monsanto’s “RoundUp” glyphosate herbicide across Afghanistan’s countryside. It should be noted that before NATO’s intervention in Afghanistan in 2001, poppy cultivation was nearly eradicated under the Taliban.

In addition to fears that the mass spraying of Afghanistan’s countryside could negatively impact the health of the Afghan people, there were also fears that licit crops could also be destroyed, leaving farmers with failed harvests, anger, and a willingness to further align themselves with armed tribesmen, including the Taliban.

For America’s overarching plan, the eradication of licit crops alongside poppy was ideal. That is because while Monsanto RoundUp herbicide was to be sprayed indiscriminately over the heads of Afghans, its genetically modified, RoundUp Ready terminator seeds were to be sown beneath their feet. The Nutrition and Education International (NEI), a front set up by Western agricultural monopolies, set out to replace Afghanistan’s traditional crops with both Monsanto’s genetically engineered RoundUp Ready soybeans, as well as copious amounts of RoundUp ready herbicide.

Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook...

Afghan Elections & the Myth of Progress

New Eastern Outlook 

Ulson Gunnar 

April 9, 2014 

Elections held this week in Afghanistan, while highly publicized as a showpiece in NATO’s lengthy intervention, will most likely not only achieve very little, but may be the first in a series of steps the nation undergoes as it slips back into regression and darkness. NATO’s inability to establish security even in Afghanistan’s urban centers bodes ill for whatever government takes over in Kabul, particularly as Western troops prepare to permanently withdraw.

Promises of a “democratic tomorrow”are more likely to be replaced at best with an uncomfortable, and perhaps only temporary accommodation between rural tribesmen (including the Taliban) and the new government in Kabul. In time, as rural tribesmen redirect resources from their fight with NATO’s departing troops, and against whichever government presides in Kabul, that accommodation may inevitably lead to a “Taliban” government once again ruling Afghanistan.

When Superficiality Becomes “Progress” 

The elections were praised by the UN and United States. The Washington Post in particular claimed it was a “milestone” particularly for Afghan women who were able to both vote and appear on the ballot. However, the Washington Post’s piece, “Afghan women make election strides,” is suspiciously short for such a supposedly historical breakthrough. Its brevity is due to the fact that any historical examination of women’s social progress in Afghanistan, or any social progress for that matter, would reveal Afghanistan not as a nation finally emerging for the first time into the light of modernization, but instead a nation mired in decades of darkness as the direct result of Western interference during the 1980s.

Continue reading at New Eastern Outlook...