OMNI

RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #11,
February 24, 2022

https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2022/02/omni-russia-newsletter-11-february-24.html

Compiled by Dick Bennett for a Culture of Peace, Justice, and Ecology

Omnicenter.org/donate/

US leaders have suffered so severely and so long in foreign policy from advanced political cataracts that I doubt if they will ever recover.  However, here is another anthology providing views alternative to those of our ruling Warriors.   I hope to send #12 soon (and #13!).   (I have called these “newsletters,” but they are more accurately described as anthologies, perhaps Resistance Anthologies.)  (Will you consider taking over the editorship of one of them?)

CONTENTS RUSSIA (AND UKRAINE)NEWSLETTER #11, 2-21-22

Perspectives Leading to Diplomacy

Putin’s/Russia’s Thinking

    Ray McGovern, Russia and China

    Whitney, Germany and Russia, Nordstream 2 Pipeline

    John Foster (author of Oil and World Politics), Nordstream,
         NATO, and Equal Security
   Donbass Refugees

US’/Biden’s Thinking

   Tomlinson, War on Russia

   Hess and Davis, Sanctions as War

   “Hidden Costs of Sanctions”

   Kuzmarov, Yalta: US and Soviet Russia
   Bromwich, Mainstream Media for War

Peace Thinking

   What could Ukraine Think? 

        Art Hobson, Neutrality

        Shea and Pavlova, Austria’s Neutrality

    J. William Fulbright, Empathy, Democratic Humanism, Diplomacy

Anthology #10, 1-8-22

TEXTS #11

AVOIDING WAR, GETTNG TO DIPLOMACY

Putin/Russia’s Thinking

Minsk Accords and China
2-23-22 Putin  recognized the independence of the pro-Russian Ukrainian provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk.

“What accounts for Putin’s assertiveness on Ukraine?”

Editor.  Mronline.org (2-24-22).

What about this China factor? Why do Western pundits/savants pay so little heed to this game-changer? It should not require my half-century of studying/reporting on Russia-China relations to notice that China and Russia have never been so strategically close as now.    

Originally published: Antiwar.com by Ray McGovern (February 22, 2022 ) – Posted Feb 23, 2022

Strategy, War, China, Russia, United StatesNewswire

Russian President Vladimir Putin’s well choreographed decision yesterday to recognize the independence of the pro-Russian Ukrainian provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk points to two key realities: (1) Putin despairs of persuading U.S. allies, Germany and France, to press Ukraine to honor its commitments under the Minsk accords that provide for regional autonomy as well as a ceasefire; and (2) Putin feels assured of very strong backing from China (as long as he is not stupid enough to invade Ukraine).

What about this China factor? Why do Western pundits/savants pay so little heed to this game-changer? It should not require my half-century of studying/reporting on Russia-China relations to notice that China and Russia have never been so strategically close as now. Putin and Xi have done their part to demonstrate that. Why cannot most Western pundits and savants see it and recognize the implications?

There are, happily, notable exceptions–for example, Edward Wong’s Bond Between China and Russia Alarms U.S. and Europe Amid Ukraine Crisis.    MORE

German and Russian PipelineThinking:  2 Articles on Nordstream 2

Crisis in Ukraine is about Germany and Russian Energy

Mike Whitney.  “The Crisis in Ukraine Is Not About Ukraine. It’s About Germany.” Information Clearing House (February 17, 2022). 

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/57002.html 

“The primordial interest of the United States, over which for centuries we have fought wars– the First, the Second and Cold Wars– has been the relationship between Germany and Russia, because united there, they’re the only force that could threaten us. And to make sure that that doesn’t happen.” George Friedman, STRATFOR CEO at The Chicago Council on Foreign Affairs 

 The Ukrainian crisis has nothing to do with Ukraine. It’s about Germany and, in particular, a pipeline that connects Germany to Russia called Nord Stream 2. Washington sees the pipeline as a threat to its primacy in Europe and has tried to sabotage the project at every turn. Even so, Nord Stream has pushed ahead and is now fully-operational and ready-to-go. Once German regulators provide the final certification, the gas deliveries will begin. German homeowners and businesses will have a reliable source of clean and inexpensive energy while Russia will see a significant boost to their gas revenues. It’s a win-win situation for both parties. 

The US Foreign Policy establishment is not happy about these developments. They don’t want Germany to become more dependent on Russian gas because commerce builds trust and trust leads to the expansion of trade. As relations grow warmer, more trade barriers are lifted, regulations are eased, travel and tourism increase, and a new security architecture evolves. In a world where Germany and Russia are friends and trading partners, there is no need for US military bases, no need for expensive US-made weapons and missile systems, and no need for NATO. There’s also no need to transact energy deals in US Dollars or to stockpile US Treasuries to balance accounts. Transactions between business partners can be conducted in their own currencies which is bound to precipitate a sharp decline in the value of the dollar and a dramatic shift in economic power. This is why the Biden administration opposes Nord Stream. It’s not just a pipeline, it’s a window into the future; a future in which Europe and Asia are drawn closer together into a massive free trade zone that increases their mutual power and prosperity while leaving the US on the outside looking in. Warmer relations between Germany and Russia signal an end to the “unipolar” world order the US has overseen for the last 75 years. A German-Russo alliance threatens to hasten the decline of the Superpower that is presently inching closer to the abyss. This is why Washington is determined to do everything it can to sabotage Nord Stream and keep Germany within its orbit. It’s a matter of survival. 

That’s where Ukraine comes into the picture. Ukraine is Washington’s ‘weapon of choice’ for torpedoing Nord Stream and putting a wedge between Germany and Russia. The strategy is taken from page one of the US Foreign Policy Handbook under the rubric: Divide and Rule. Washington needs to create the perception that Russia poses a security threat to Europe. That’s the goal. They need to show that Putin is a bloodthirsty aggressor with a hair-trigger temper who cannot be trusted. To that end, the media has been given the assignment of reiterating over and over again, “Russia is planning to invade Ukraine.” What’s left unsaid is that Russia has not invaded any country since the dissolution of the Soviet Union, and that the US has invaded or toppled regimes in more than 50 countries in the same period of time, and that the US maintains over 800 military bases in countries around the world. None of this is reported by the media, instead the focus is on “evil Putin” who has amassed an estimated 100,000 troops along the Ukrainian border threatening to plunge all of Europe into another bloody war. 

All of the hysterical war propaganda is created with the intention of manufacturing a crisis that can be used to isolate, demonize and, ultimately, splinter Russia into smaller units. The real target, however, is not Russia, but Germany.    MORE  http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/57002.html 

Responses by George Paulson and Art Hobson

Great article, Dick.   Thanks for sharing.  

I agree with the author’s main point, that the goal of this manufactured crisis is to kill Nord Stream 2 (Trump tried, but failed, and now his successor istrying as well).  However, there are other contextual factors that enter into this.  The at times hysterical fear mongering about Russia and the almost cartoonish demonization of Putin serve a number of other interests.  Russia provides a handy excuse to continue to ramp up “defense” spending–we need an enemy, a credible, easily identifiable enemy.  It also serves the interests of a largely disgusting, mendacious, discredited legacy media (trust in the media is at an all time low) which relies on both sensationalism and sucking up to DC elites (“access journalism”).  It also serves the interests of the Democratic party, by feeding an influential constituency–I’m referring to relatively affluent socially liberal voters who were traumatized and even unhinged by the 2016 election and chose to blame Russia for Hillary Cliinton’s loss to a vulgar, buffoonish, openly corrupt, politically inexperienced game show host–exactly the narrative they crave.  It also serves the Democrats’  interests because it serves to distract the public from the numerous crises that the Biden administration has so miserably failed to address.  

The fact that the people responsible for crafting US policy regarding Ukraine are willing to risk a war with nuclear-armed Russia underscores that they are sociopaths.  

Thanks again for sharing.  

Peace, 

George

Dick – There is a lot of truth in this article.  America is being deeply misled in this crisis.  Yes, the Nordstream pipeline is a key element in all this, and I certainly hope that Germany goes through with it.  I was appalled when Biden announced “We will bring an end to it” (i.e. to the pipeline).  Who the hell are we to dictate Germany’s foreign and economic policy?   I think that the economic cooperation created by this pipeline will be good for Europe, good for the world, and bad for militarism in both Russia and in America.  I’m copying this to good friends in Germany.    Peace – Art

PIPELINE POLITICS AND THE UKRAINE CRISIS
By John Foster, Canadian . February 15, 2022

“Why Nord Stream 2 is a key part of the impasse.”

Click on this link for the first part of the essay: https://popularresistance.org/pipeline-politics-and-the-ukraine-crisis/

The current crisis between Russia and the US/NATO has been brewing for many years. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union, NATO expanded membership to Eastern Europe. NATO facilitates US leadership, keeping European countries on its side against Russia. From a Russian viewpoint, NATO is provocative and threatening.

Part of the agreement underpinning the USSR’s dissolution was Western assurance that it would not expand into Russia’s sphere of influence, a pledge NATO most recently violated by stationing troops, ships and planes along Russia’s borders. The West accuses Russia of interference in Ukraine. Russia points to a 2014 Western-inspired coup in Ukraine and legitimate grievances of Russian-speakers in the breakaway Donbas republics. I document the two narratives in my book Oil and World Politics.

In December 2021, Russia presented draft treaties to the US and NATO, demanding a complete overhaul of Europe’s security architecture. Russia stressed the principle of indivisible and equal security for all countries, as agreed by all 56 members of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) at Istanbul (1999) and reaffirmed at Astana (2010). Countries expressly agreed not to strengthen their security at the expense of others. In January, Russia wrote to all signatory countries, including Canada, demanding clear answers on how they each intended to fulfil these obligations in the current circumstances.

Map of transit pipelines through Poland and Ukraine. Image courtesy Lorimer Books.

Russian President Vladimir Putin warned that if the West continued its aggressive policies (NATO’s expansion and missile deployment in eastern Europe), Russia would take ‘military-technical’ reciprocal measures. In his words, “They have pushed us to a line that we can’t cross.”

Russia’s initiative put the cat among the pigeons. A succession of high-level meetings occurred between Russia and the US, NATO and OSCE. On January 26, Washington presented written responses, seeking to narrow the debate to Ukraine and alleging the Russians were poised to invade it. Russia insisted repeatedly it would not initiate an invasion but would support Donbas if the latter were attacked.

The US escalated tensions by repeating claims of an “imminent” Russian invasion, even as Ukraine’s leaders expressed doubts. Washington threatened new sanctions of unprecedented severity, including major Russian banks, high-tech goods, the SWIFT financial messaging system, and Nord Stream 2. Britain and Canada followed suit. On January 11, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau asserted any Russian incursion into Ukraine would have “serious consequences,” including sanctions.

France, Germany and Italy balked because the sanctions would backfire on their economies. They appeared unconvinced Russia intended to attack unless provoked. A flurry of high-level bilateral discussions with Russia followed.

Significantly, on January 26, representatives of France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine confirmed support for the 2015 Minsk II agreement and an unconditional ceasefire. Minsk-II requires Ukraine to negotiate with the two Donbas republics on autonomy within a federalized Ukraine but, thus far, no negotiations have been held.

The EU imports 40 percent of its gas from Russia. For Russia, the routes through Ukraine and Poland are unreliable, because of hostility in both countries. Ukraine has a long-term deal with Gazprom for gas transit until 2024. Ukraine earns big transit fees, roughly US$2 billion per year, and desperately wants to keep them. For its internal market, Ukraine buys Russian gas indirectly from Poland, Romania and Slovakia.

Whatever happens with Western sanctions, Russia has a strategic new market in China. Russia’s Power of Siberia pipeline began exporting gas from east Siberia to northeast China two years ago. The two countries have agreed to build a second line, Power of Siberia 2. It will bring gas from the Yamal Peninsula in the Russian Arctic to China’s northeast. That means Yamal gas will be able to flow to China as easily as to Europe.

The current situation is dangerous and could easily escalate. Nord Stream 2 is critically important but national security trumps all. Security can only be achieved if it is universal. US efforts to contain Russia and maintain leadership over Europe are not working. It’s wake-up time for Canada, too. The world has become multi-polar and Nord Stream 2 is a fulcrum at the centre of the current crisis.

THE DONBASS REFUGEES THINKING

“Russian region declares emergency amid influx of refugees.”

The two self-proclaimed Donbass republics in eastern Ukraine have announced they are evacuating civilians across the border

Buses with refugees leave for Russia, in Donetsk, Ukraine, February 18, 2022. © Sergey Baturin/Sputnik

A Russian region bordering Eastern Ukraine has declared a state of emergency on Saturday, with reports of refugees from the separatist-held Donbass crossing over the border amid a military escalation with Kiev.  

The self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) and Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR) announced that they had begun evacuating civilians to Russia on Friday, with rebels and Ukrainian army forces accusing each other of shelling across the contact line. It is unclear how many residents may be following the guidance from local leaders, and those living near the front line on both sides have faced regular firefights since 2014.  MORE  https://www.rt.com/russia/549954-russia-ukraine-refugess-influx/

US THINKING

US Already Waging War on Russia

The US strategy to start war with Russia, (along with rampant pro-war media propaganda) is to arm their client-state Govt in Kiev as they bomb ethnic Russian minorities in East Ukraine, to try to goad Russia into the conflict.  This allows the US to try to pretend they are not the aggressor.  Meanwhile US weapons are destroying villages as we speak, causing a mass refugee state of emergency. The US is already waging warfare (not to mention the U.S. backed coup previously)

https://www.rt.com/russia/549954-russia-ukraine-refugess-influx/

US/WESTERN THINKING WAR: SANCTIONS

Immanuel Ness and Stuart Davis, eds.  Sanctions as War: Anti-Imperialist Perspectives on American Geo-economic Strategy.  Leiden: Brill, 202l. 

SANCTIONS: WHAT ARE THEY ALL THINKING? 

“Hidden costs of sanctions…as the sky falls”

Economist: If US cuts Russia off from SWIFT, China will turn to

CIPS, & US will lose its financial dominance.   

This means the End of Seigneurage, no more free lunch for the USA, i.e,

no more Current Account Deficit, because the rest of the world would no

longer accept its checks (cheques).     MORE  https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.economist.com%2Ffinance-and-economics%2F2021%2F12%2F18%2Fthe-hidden-costs-of-cutting-russia-off-from-Swift& =PQA%2Fo8VE4oZRbK9Fz80OBPmzE4YQw8TVeLZqeP15KVg%3D&reserved=0

 Dec 18th 2021 edition, The Economist

 SWIFT thinking………The hidden costs of cutting Russia off from SWIFT

America’s foes would rush to alternatives, hastening its financial decline.

US/FDR’s/Biden’s Thinking
>From Yalta to Ukraine Today

Seventy-Seven Years Ago, U.S. and Russia Signed Historic Agreement at Yalta

By Jeremy Kuzmarov and Jacques Pauwels on Feb 12, 2022 12:22 am

With tensions between the U.S. and Russia at historic levels and threat of a hot war breaking out in Ukraine, we would do well to remember FDR’s visionary leadership and pursuit of diplomacy

Reuters reported last week that the Ukrainian military was carrying out war games with newly delivered American military hardware in preparation for a conflict that could break out at any time.

For years now, the U.S. media has been demonizing Russia, accusing its leader Vladimir Putin of being an iron-fisted dictator who has interfered in U.S. elections, poisoned opponents, and carried out aggression by illegally annexing Crimea.

With Russia having amassed over 100,000 troops on Ukraine’s border, the U.S. Congress is prepared to pass a “sanctions bill from hell” whose purpose would be to cripple Russia’s economy.

Mississippi Senator, Roger Wicker, the second highest Republican on the Senate Armed Services Committee, went so far as to suggest in an interview with Fox News that the U.S. should not rule out a preemptive nuclear strike on Russia if it invaded Ukraine. […]

The post Seventy-Seven Years Ago, U.S. and Russia Signed Historic Agreement at Yalta appeared first on CovertAction Magazine.

MAINSTREAM MEDIA PRO-WAR THINKING
MAINSTREAM MEDIA TAKE SIDES      David Bromwich.   “Russia, Ukraine, and The New York Times.” The Nation https://www.thenation.com › Article.  “The paper of record’s coverage of the crisis has been a series of shameless provocative conjectures posing as facts.” The NYT heats up the root cause of the crisis: fortifying Ukraine as a Western bulwark on Russia’s border. I. NATO Expansion.  II. NYT.  Feb 5, 2022.  

Closely Related Russia/Europe/NATO/Energy: What Can They Be Thinking?

NEW COLD WAR ON CHINA Special No. of Monthly Review (July-August 2021).

Nine articles plus “Notes from the Editors.”

Peace Thinking  Neutrality, Empathy

WHAT COULD UKRAINE BE THINKING?  NEUTRALITY: Articles by Hobson and Shea/Pavlova

U.S. should support neutrality for Ukraine

Militarism and moral advice aren’t working

Art Hobson, ahobson@uark.edu

NWADG, 01 February 2022

Americans seem to have no idea of the degree to which fear of attack by the

West motivates Russian behavior toward Ukraine.

Some relevant history: Hitler attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941. World

War II had been underway for nearly two years, during which Germany and

Mussolini’s Italy occupied most of Europe. Hitler started the war by invading Poland

and then signed a non-aggression pact with the Soviet Union in order to avoid

fighting on two fronts. But by 1940 Hitler, who had always dreamed of acquiring

“Lebensraum” (living room) by expanding into Russia, began planning his conquest

of the Soviet Union.

This Nazi offensive was probably the bloodiest military operation of all time.

The heroism and self-sacrifice of the Soviet people were crucial in eventually turning

the tide. By war’s end, 24 million Soviet citizens, mostly civilians, lay dead. For

comparison, U.S. military and civilian deaths totaled about 0.4 million. U.S. soil

was not touched. Russians did most of the fighting and dying, inflicting 80 percent

of Germany’s casualties, and the Russian homeland was devastated. Without them,

Hitler would have won.

There is much more. France’s Napoleon invaded Russia and was defeated in

the “Patriotic War of 1812.”

In the 1853-1856 Crimean War, France, Britain and Turkey invaded Russia.

During World War I, Germany invaded and occupied much of European

Russia.

In 1918, Poland launched a 3-year invasion of the new Soviet Union that

reached as far as Kiev.

There’s more: Hoping to strangle the Bolshevik revolution before it could

spread to the rest of Europe, America and an alliance of 14 other Western powers

intervened during the 1917-1922 Russian Civil War. 250,000 troops, including

11,000 Americans of whom 424 died, contributed to this endeavor.

Thus it was fully predictable that Vladimir Putin would react vehemently to

the possibility of Ukraine’s membership in an opposing military alliance that had

been expanding toward his doorstep since 1990.

Walk a mile in Russia’s shoes. Imagine that an anti-American military

alliance led by Russia and China has incorporated Central America, Mexico and

Cuba, and that Canada now wants to join this alliance. In fact something like this

occurred during the Cuban Missile Crisis, and America was, to say the least,

outraged.

We seem to feel free to intimidate the other two superpowers at will, stationing

warships and military bases just outside their borders. Yet neither Russia nor China

makes corresponding military moves against the U.S. homeland.

What’s the goal of U.S. policy? Is it for America to elbow the world into

following our economic and political norms? If so, I suggest that our own example

is not that great given last year’s insurrection and other disasters. Nevertheless, we

plow ahead with annual military investments ($778 billion plus “off-budget” items

such as nuclear weapons) that outstrip the next nine nations combined. As a thought

experiment, think of what could be accomplished if 50 percent of this were instead

invested in global human needs.

Humankind’s leading international problem is war itself. It’s outrageous that

humans organize, and spend trillions, in order to kill their own species. Surely we

can do better. War seems to attract us as a kind of macho zero-sum game, a game

that is highly profitable for the rich and powerful, especially those who own military

industries. But war is not a zero-sum game: Everybody loses.

Our goal should surely be human happiness, rather than “winning.” Instead

of expanding military alliances, all nations should work toward demilitarization, i.e.

neutrality in military affairs. Finland, for example, declared neutrality throughout

the 1950-1990 Cold War, signing a Treaty of Friendship with the Soviet Union. This

is basically what Putin is asking Ukraine to do.

What’s wrong with neutrality for Ukraine? I visited Finland for a week in

1985 in connection with a sabbatical at Sweden’s Stockholm International Peace

Research Institute. Finland was and is a free, democratic, rich, happy nation.

Neutrality has also worked for nations such as Sweden, Switzerland, and Austria.

What has been the point of NATO expansion since 1990? After all, NATO’s

presumed enemy, the Warsaw Pact, disbanded. Why should NATO have continued?

In 1951 we were warned by NATO Supreme Commander Dwight Eisenhower that

NATO will have failed if in 10 years all American troops stationed in Europe have

not been returned to the United States.

U.S. militarism, and U.S. moral advice to the entire world, foster resentment

and feed humankind’s worst instincts. We need to back off, reduce our military

budgets, and support neutrality instead of “victory.”

Revised bio for this week only:

Art Hobson is Professor Emeritus of Physics at U. Arkansas, and co-editor of The Future of Land-Based Strategic Missiles (Am. Inst. of Physics 1989). .Email  ahobson@uark.edu

See original article for references

 AUSTRIA’S NEUTRALITY
“Austria escaped crisis by declaring neutrality. Ukraine could follow that lead.”  By Thomas Shea, Kateryna Pavlova | February 7, 2022

Salzburg, Austria. Credit: Jorge Franganillo. Accessed via Wikipedia. CC BY 2.0.

At the end of World War II, Austria was occupied by France, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Soviet Union. It might have remained divided like Germany. Instead, Austria and the four powers agreed to Austrian neutrality in 1955, which has proved remarkably successful. Today, Vienna hosts well-respected international organizations like the United Nations and the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries. The city was deemed the “most livable” for 10 years running on a survey that compared world cities on political, social and economic climate, medical care, education, and infrastructure conditions.

As Russia bears down on Ukraine, Austria’s experience warrants examination. Could Ukraine follow Austria’s lead to resolve the current crisis? To be sure, the circumstances of post-World War II Austria differ from the current moment. In 1955, Austrians were defeated, disarmed, and desperate to recover. By then, the Soviet Union, the United Kingdom, and the United States possessed nuclear weapons, and Cold War tensions were palpable. Today, Ukraine is besieged by Russia but strengthened by support from Western military powers. Ukrainian citizens are desperately preparing—for what? No one knows, given the uncertain course of the current crisis.

Would Ukrainian citizens accept neutrality? The Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic was founded in 1922 and, following the end of World War II, became an integral part of the Soviet Union’s nuclear force structure.

But many Ukrainians wanted a different future. Months before the collapse of the Soviet Union, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic declared “its intention of becoming a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs and adheres to three nuclear free principles: to accept, to produce and to purchase no nuclear weapons.” The declaration made clear that it was “the basis for a new constitution and laws of Ukraine and determines the positions of the Republic for the purpose of international agreements.”

In 1994, Ukraine, Russia, the United States, and the United Kingdom signed the Budapest Memorandum in which they reaffirmed their commitments to respect the independence, sovereignty, and existing borders of Ukraine. President Putin refused to be bound by what former Russian president Yeltsin had accepted. Instead, he supported insurrections and brazenly seized Ukrainian territory, while neither the United States nor the United Kingdom were prepared to act on their Budapest Memorandum commitments.  MORE   https://toda.org/news-and-announcements/2022/austria-escaped-crisis-by-declaring-neutrality.-ukraine-could-follow-that-lead.html

EMPATHY CAN BRING PEACE TO BORDERS (Dick)

Never has former Senator J. William Fulbright’s affirmation of empathy in foreign affairs been needed more than now.   The US establishment—the Pentagon-Corporate-White House-Republican/Democrat Congressional-Mainstream Media Complex—is threatening  war, blind to or suppressing the several decades of NATO’s eastward expansion to encircle Russia’s border from Finland to Kazakhstan.  The final chapter of J. William Fulbright’s The Arrogance of Power (1966) is entitled “The Two Americas.”   Here Fulbright contrasts the values and practices of “intolerant puritanism” underlying US “zealous nationalism” and empire to the “democratic humanism” he espoused.  Equally important is his chapter 7 in The Price of Empire, “Seeing the World as Others See It.”  If we are to understand our differences and to change our aggressions, we must “acquire some capacity for empathy” (196).   Democratic humanism and empathy make neutrality and diplomacy possible.

CONTENTS RUSSIA NEWSLETTER  #10, Jan. 28, 2022

https://jamesrichardbennett.blogspot.com/2022/01/omni-russia-newsletter-10-january-28.html

This anthology begins with indignation by Tomlinson, WBW, and Butterfield, moves to analysis and action by Lowendorf, Franklin, and Prashad, to an appeal for peace by WBW, and to the extensive scholarship of Prof.  Zunes

REVISED 1-30-22 TO ADD 3 ESSAYS FROM POPULAR RESISTANCE.ORG 1-30-22.
Call To Action: No War With Russia Over Ukraine.

Endless War Is the Empire’s Last Dance.

A War Only America And Britain Seem To Want.

Abel Tomlinson. “The US Wants War, Not Russia.”

World Beyond War.   “No War in Ukraine!”

Greg Butterfield.  “Ukraine, U.S. drum up war threats against Donbass and Russia.”  April 8,  2021.

Henry Lowendorf reports the ”terribly destructive U.S. foreign policy” that “has no moral, or legal, or logical authority.”

Matt Taibbi via George Paulson. “Let’s Not Have a War.” 

H. Bruce Franklin.  “Another Game of Russian Roulette,” on the Cuban Missile Crisis.

Vijay Prashad.  “Why Ukraine’s borders are back at the center of geopolitics.”
WBW, Appeal for Negotiation, a mini-anthology within a mini-anthology.
Stephen Zunes.  “The U.S., Russia, and Ukraine.” (and critiques of Zunes)

Contents Russia Newsletter #9

END RUSSIA NEWSLETTER #11, 2-24-22–
OMNI Peace Newsletter |  OMNI Facebook |  OMNI WebsiteDick Bennett
(479) 442-4600
2582 Jimmie Ave.
Fayetteville, AR 72703