The United States, NATO and the UK have been positioning in the media the propaganda matrix about Russia’s massive military deployment on Ukraine’s borders, according to them, in order to invade Ukraine. Who benefits from a war between Russia and Ukraine?
The propaganda and disinformation created is aimed at restricting (from the anti-war organisations and peoples) the truth of the military deployment being carried out by NATO, the USA and the UK towards Central and Eastern Europe, Southwest Europe, the Baltic and the Indo-Pacific, with the aim of militarily encircling Russia and China.
It is not Russia and China that are deploying military troops and war materiel in territories outside their jurisdiction, as the US, NATO and the UK want the international public to believe, with the intention of exchanging the roles and the truth about who is carrying out these reckless manoeuvres against international agreements and against humanity.
Russia’s military deployment has been within its own territory, while the US, NATO and the UK are deploying outside their jurisdiction, thousands of miles away. For example, the US has missiles stationed in the Polish town of Redzikovo, which is 180 kilometres from the Russian enclave of Kaliningrad, and in the Romanian town of Deveselu, which is 600 kilometres from the Crimean peninsula. Meanwhile, the UK has deployed troops and war materiel in Latvia and Poland, Baltic countries bordering Russia and Belarus.
Ukrainian political scientist Konstantin Bondarenko has said that the UK (as an independent actor) wants to create a London-Ankara axis, which will include Poland, Ukraine, Moldova and the Baltic states, so Ukraine will be used as “cannon fodder” for the development of this project and would be a large-scale change for Europe.
Prior to Bondarenko’s statement the UK Council on Geostrategy tweeted that Foreign Secretary Liz Truss was considering a tripartite pact made between London, Warsaw and Kiev. The information was confirmed by the Foreign Secretary, who said that the UK is developing new triangular ties with Poland and Ukraine. In September 2021, Australia, the UK and the US announced the creation of a new trilateral security partnership entitled AUKUS, which will provide Australia with a nuclear-powered submarine fleet and long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles.
AUKUS also foresees trilateral cooperation in artificial intelligence, cybersecurity and quantum technology applied to naval weaponry and greater control of the transatlantic area towards the Indo-Pacific. Not to mention India, a member of the BRISC and the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation, which has become a regional strategic hub for the US. The creation of these new security alliances and the deployment of weapons of untold destruction suggest that they are new tools to contain the geopolitical rise of China and Russia in areas of influence such as Europe, the Middle East, Africa, Asia and the Americas.
These new alliances, in addition to NATO’s military deployment in Eastern Europe, have lacked a strong reason to influence international public opinion, which is why the US, the UK and NATO have used Taiwan and Ukraine as the pivots of alternating global geopolitical leadership to expand militarily and contain the emergence of new actors that could bring about a change of forces in the world.
The US has said that it “does not seek open conflict with Beijing over Taiwan” nor does it seek war with Moscow over Ukraine.
However, its actions say the opposite, it is looking for these countries to start a war, so that it can get indirectly involved and use NATO as a screen, play attrition, impose collective sanctions and slow down Russia’s and China’s development.
China has reacted by developing its own defence forces and asking to join the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership” (CPTPP) led by Japan in order to use its economic, trade and investment (not military) potential as instruments of influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
If included, China would occupy a decisive economic and commercial position in an area where 60 per cent of the world’s population lives.
Meanwhile, Russia has written to the US and NATO asking for solid, legally binding security guarantees of no military expansion of the North Atlantic Alliance to the East, withdrawal of the “Bucharest formula” so that “Ukraine and Georgia do not become NATO members, withdrawal of arms supplied to Kiev and no military bases in post-Soviet countries”.
Russia has said that if these measures are ignored, it will be forced to react, including by implementing military-technical measures.
The response of the US, the UK and NATO has been to intensify their military deployment, to fill Ukraine with weapons, to send troops to Taiwan, to create provocative violations of Chinese and Russian maritime, land and air space, to launch a disinformation campaign through the media and to block any proposals to international bodies that might lead to some kind of security agreement with Beijing and Moscow.
The developing war on the geopolitical map of Taiwan and Ukraine seeks to break the threads of interaction that exist between China and the Silk Road countries and between Russia and Europe over gas. It is a plan to disrupt the mobility and growth of these two powers that are filling the gaps, in all areas, left by Europe and the US in the world.
In this 21st century geopolitical game, who benefits from a war between China and Taiwan? Who benefits from a war between Russia and Ukraine?
*Javier Alexander Roa: Venezuelan diplomat, political analyst and writer, with several books of poetry published. He currently lives in Damascus, Syrian Arab Republic, and writes opinion articles for a number of international media outlets.
.jpg)
I agree that Russia and the USSR before them have not tried to dominate the world far beyond their borders in the way that the US has done – but perhaps Syria is an exception, where Putin supported the terrorist attacks by the Assad regime against its own people in order to maintain Russian influence in the area of west Asia?
As for your claim that it is the West that is stoking problems in the Ukraine – have you noticed that Russia has deployed over 150,000 troops close to Ukraine and Putin is claiming that this country should return to Russia because it was created by the USSR? The Ukrainian people seem to disagree.
The roots of this problem go back at least to the time when Russia wanted to have a joint security area with Europe but was refused. Nevertheless this appeal to Russian nationalistic memories is not the way forward now in 2022. New solutions must be found.
So, ambassador what do you say now about Russian peaceful intentions?
Will the ambassador tell us what he thinks of peace-loving Czar Putin’s invasion of Ukraine?