By Elsa Claro on April 22, 2021
Whenever the United States accuses other countries of spying on them, they hide or justify their extensive world-wide network dedicated to finding out movements, their military installations, and their destabilizing operatives who focus on countries and entire regions.
In reference to this reality, in 2017 the Wikileaks team published a substantial report referring to the digital crap of this snooping, employed by the CIA. Later Edward Snowden, former agent of the agency, revealed his role in expanding the spectrum of resources used by Washington for these purposes within and outside of – especially outside of – the national boundaries of the US.
The arsenal of cybernetic weapons that have been developed showed undeniable evidence of the great and extensive businesses that make up the social media networks now so in vogue and the sites or channels of information from which they appropriate or misuse the information of their users. This was the subject of analysis recently, and apparently had Facebook up against the ropes, but little came of it.
This was, we must admit, an affair discussed publicly, but that is not what occurs with the control of cyberspace and the apparatus created by the main organization of US intelligence or its clones, to keep a watch on whomever they wish. If they develop super-sophisticated instruments to acquire secrets that don’t belong to them, it is simply unbelievable that they would be incapable of protecting their own secrets.
It is flat-out difficult to suppose that with such a highly developed technology, their institutions of control would be so weak as to allow Russian hackers to interfere with the elections and change the opinions of a diverse citizenry, with heavy representation of people who would be capable of carrying out an assault on the seat of the U.S. legislature at the urging of Donald Trump.
Was this also planned by Vladimir Putin or Xi Jinping?
It seems to be exactly the opposite. The world-wide extent of the Pentagon, with military bases on every continent, includes, as part of the activities carried out, a mission to obtain information indiscriminately from institutions, public figures, and heads of state, allies or not. Remember the tapping of the telephone call of Angela Merkel, carried out by these friends on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean? Of course, this was not an isolated incident.
Among these machinations conceived with the intention of finding out everything done by friends and foes alike, there exists the Echelon system, capable of controlling email, telephones and any device for the exchange of civilian or tactical information.
There are centers and branch installations strategically located in Europe and other widely distributed parts of the globe. These snooping installations have venerable antecedents, among them those located in Iran during the reign of Shah Reza Pahlavi, used to spy on the USSR, with enormous resources and specialized operatives.
Ever since ancient times, there has been surveillance kept on actions, troop movements, and the like. All governments do this. It is simply that in the past and today also, this is not always done in the interest of self-defense. There are a huge number of facts proving that a number of “revolutions” are neither spontaneously generated in the country where they occur nor legitimate. They were set up by external forces, taking advantage of marginal segments of the population who, motivated by greed or by reasons of class interest, will at times lend themselves to these manipulations without giving thought to the harm done to their country and others like it.
It is already well known that to see – or to invent – motes of dust in the eyes of the enemy, even while those who note this are blinded by the greater amounts of dirt in their own eyes, is something not considered decent among courteous people. But they will insist upon doing so. And it appears clearly in these schemes of “Do what I say, (not what I do) and leave me free to do whatever I please.” That is how the most recent anti-Russian campaign appears to be carried on.
Around mid-March they began military exercises in order to demonstrate, as they said, “the U.S. capacity to be a strategic partner in the Balkans and the Black Sea, in the Caucasus, in Ukraine and in Africa.” Divided up into a series of operations under the name Defender-Europe 2021, these operations will extend to the end of June, with enthusiastic participation of troops from the middle and eastern regions of the Old World, and rather less enthusiastic participation by other NATO countries.
Those who are most motivated do not hide the fact the bulk of the operations are a rehearsal for an attack against Russia, and that the bait is Ukraine. Rusian Khomchak, Chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, admitted at the beginning of April that the armed forces of his country “are preparing for an offensive in the east of Ukraine.” He did not explain why the NATO countries should deploy out of their territory nor what role the neofascist irregular troops, self-assigned or allowed to act due to an absurd idea of what might be convenient, should play within this scheme.
Conservative estimates establish that the U.S. has 600 military bases in countries outside its borders, while a number of other researchers consider that the number is closer to several thousand. Whatever their number may be, intelligence operations are launched from them, as stated, and at the same time they have served to carry out invasions and acts of U.S. aggression in a variety of different scenarios, or they are maintained as a “deterrent force. “
We may suppose – and it is only one example – that among the 150,000 troops that the US has scattered around the world, as least 70,000 are stationed in almost permanent form in Japan and South Korea, but there remain quite a few in Western Europe, the Persian Gulf, and the Middle East as well. Apart from the old Warsaw Pact member states, now vehemently pro-NATO, and discounting the positions in the western areas of Europe (where the vessels that bombed Yugoslavia in 1990 came from) they have air and naval bases in Spain used in attacks against Syria and those from which Turkey, NATO willing, made incursions into Syria and Afghanistan.
By common-sense logic, it is counter-productive for them to be accusing Russia of mobilizing troops in the Arctic regions or near the borders with Ukraine, because in both cases Russia is moving these troops within its own territory. It is rather cynical to accuse Russia of taking measures for their own protection and to protect those who live in Donetsk and Crimea, Russians in their great majority, while at the same time a far-reaching operation is put into effect specifically directed against Russia.
Who is the actual aggressor in this crude stratagem? There has been an increase in airspace incursions by NATO near the borders of Russia and the approaches of U.S. Navy ships in the Black Sea, also have augmented in an obvious way; in addition, since February, armed incidents have also increased in the region of Eastern Ukraine. Moscow has made overtures toward France and Germany to revive the Minsk agreements which would, if they were respected, have already settled the problem of Ukraine. Instead, unfriendly acts against Russia have not ceased. “Attempts to accuse Russia with any motive or no motive at all have become a sort of sport in some countries,” as Vladimir Putin said in his recent report to the federal parliament. In this report he firmly declared that “We really do not want to burn bridges, but if someone perceives our good intentions as indifference or weakness and intends to burn or even blow up these bridges, they should know that Russia’s response will be asymmetrical, swift and tough.”
Is the Russian chief of state exaggerating in his assessments? It does not seem that he is, since aside from the obstacles imposed by the West blocking a normal understanding, they seem to be provoking the ridiculous situation of a simultaneous confrontation with Russia and China. U.S. Strategic Command commander Richard Charles assessed the situation in this manner in his appearance testifying before the Senate Armed Services Committee on April 21st.
Shortly before this Russian Chancellor Seguei Lavrov stated, “We are not seeking any confrontation,” but the other side is not acting reciprocally and this was made apparent by the failure of Putin’s effort to work with the United States “for the sake of the people of both countries and of international security.” Hostile actions against Russia have not ceased, alleged Putin, referring to the tendency to blame Russia “for any reason, and more and more frequently, for no reason at all” and in a rude and reckless manner.
This is not good news for a quarter of the year and a period when the world is full of uncertainty, because when there is a storm – and the pandemic is a storm – and the ship’s captain insists on chasing after white whales, the outcome may be that the whales may swallow some of us, or the ship may be damaged beyond repair.
Source: Cubadebate, translation Resumen Latinoamericano – English