Gavin O’Reilly
OPCW mission inspecting the website of a “chemical attack” in Douma, Syria
Over the past 2 weeks, media headlines worldwide have been controlled by the Russian military intervention in Ukraine– released in action to nearly nine years of Western justifications.
These provocations started with the CIA and MI6 managed Euromaidan colour transformation in November 2013, following then-President Viktor Yanukovych’s decision to suspend an EU trade deal.
This coup would, in turn, result in the predominantly ethnic Russian Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in the eastern Donbass region breaking away from Kiev’s control in April 2014. The driver for this secession being the anti-Russian reactionary sympathisers that would make up the Western-backed post-Maidan federal government of Petro Poroshenko.
A near eight-year long war on both Republics would follow, involving Kiev-supported neo-Nazi factions such as Azov Battalion and Right Sector, leading to an estimated 14,000 deaths.
Moscow looked for to resolve this dispute through diplomatic ways through the Minsk Agreements, which would see a federalisation option in which Donetsk and Luhansk would be granted a degree of autonomy whilst still remaining under Ukrainian guideline.
The failure by Kiev to execute their side of the agreements nevertheless, along with the continuous attacks on the ethnic Russians in the Donbass and the inevitability that Ukraine would ultimately go on ended up being a NATO member and host weapons and troops meant to assault Russia, would ultimately require Moscow into introducing a military intervention into its Western neighbour in order to “demilitarise and de-Nazify” the country.
Two weeks into the conflict it has emerged from the corporate media narrative of the ‘Ukrainian resistance’ that the goal of the US and its allies, with little regard for the Ukrainian civilians they declare to care about, is to drag Moscow into a military quagmire in the 2nd biggest country in Europe.
This is a method with historic usage against the Kremlin– in 1979, at the height of the Cold War, the CIA and MI6 would start a concealed operation of arming and training Islamist fundamentalists, consisting of Osama Bin Laden, called the Mujahideen.
These Islamic paramilitaries would go on to wage war on the then-Socialist federal government of Afghanistan– leading to a ten-year long Soviet military intervention, something which numerous commentators have actually seen as a contributing factor to the subsequent split of the bloc in 1991.
Certainly, Zbigniew Brzezinski, National Security Advisor to US President Jimmy Carter when Operation Cyclone was released in 1979, would later recount in a 1998 interview about how drawing the USSR into a pricey military intervention was an encouraging factor in its beginning.
In spite of the intention of the Neocons and the war lobby being to seemingly draw the Russian Federation into an Iraq war-style quagmire nevertheless, there likewise seems an element who favour a method which would result in far more grave consequences: A Libya-style no fly zone over Ukraine, including the shooting down of Russian aircraft by NATO, which would certainly activate a disastrous 3rd world war including making use of nuclear weapons.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, a newfound beloved of the Western media because their protection of the Russian intervention began, has actually repeatedly called for the application of a no fly zone over his nations’ skies, World Economic Forum-linked Ukrainian activist Daria Kaleniuk went viral with her plea for British Prime Minister Boris Johnson to step in militarily versus Russian forces, and a current survey by business media outlet Reuters found that 74% of Americans supported a no fly zone over Ukraine– with it remaining uncertain on whether those polled knew the nuclear apocalypse that such a measure would entail.
Despite this push for a Western military intervention in Ukraine, United States President Joe Biden, Boris Johnson and NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg have actually made it clear that such a procedure is off the table, each citing the global nuclear dispute that would unquestionably follow as the factor.
Though this might seem a reason to be optimistic that the current Ukraine crisis will not turn into World War III nevertheless, it does not rule out the far more hawkish members of the regime change lobby looking for to carry out a false flag operation in Ukraine, one with the intent of implicating Moscow, and to press public and political viewpoint even more towards support for a NATO intervention, a method with extremely recent usage.
In 2017, the Syrian Arab Republic had remained in the six-year long grip of a Western-backed routine modification operation released in reaction to Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s 2009 refusal to allow US-allied Qatar to develop a pipeline through his country, one that would have undermined his relationship with key-ally Russia.
Like the abovementioned Operation Cyclone, Timber Sycamore would see the arming, financing and training of Wahhabi terrorists groups by the West and its allies, with the objective of getting rid of Assad’s nonreligious government and changing it with a Western-friendly management.
In June 2013, Iran and Hezbollah would intervene in the occurring proxy war at the request of the Syrian federal government, offering a key function in helping Damascus in fending off the Western-backed terrorist project; what would maybe be the most decisive consider turning the tide of the dispute in the Arab Republic’s favour nevertheless, would can be found in September 2015.
A Russian air campaign, again at the request of the Syrian federal government, targeting the terrorist groups, and which permitted Damascus to retake the huge swathes of Syrian area which had come under their control, such as the crucial city of Aleppo.
With the Syrian routine change operation not going as prepared, Washington’s Neocons would soon turn to desperate– and reckless– procedures.
On the 4th of April 2017, a false flag chemical attack happened in the Syrian town of Khan Shaykhun, the blame immediately being placed on Damascus and resulting in the then-US administration of Donald Trump launching cruise missiles strikes on a Syrian federal government airbase 3 days later on.
A highly provocative action, though one that simply stopped short of the full-scale military intervention that the regime-change lobby had actually clamoured for
This is not to discount the serious seriousness of NATO launching a military strike versus a Russian ally and the possible consequences that action might have entailed– nevertheless, must a similar false flag operation occur in Ukraine, possibly also involving chemical weapons or a nuclear reactor as Moscow itself has warned of in current days, even a ‘limited’ strike versus Russian military facilities would instantly put the world on an irreversible path to the most severe consequence of all– nuclear war.