German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s ‘sensational revelations’ about the British and French participating in the target acquisition of Storm Shadow/SCALP missiles employed by Ukraine have stirred the proverbial hornet’s nest.
These revelations were made by Scholz with his back to the wall, under pressure from accusations by Macron – from the height of his 600 million military aid to Ukraine since the start of the conflict, compared to Germany’s 17.7 billion – of not contributing enough to the war effort because of his reluctance to supply Kiev with Taurus cruise missiles.
In his creative outburst – part of a clash between Germany and France[1] to gain pre-eminence in Central and Eastern Europe, during what looks like an American disengagement – Macron even suggested that France ‘could’ send special forces to Ukraine, to create a ‘strategic dilemma’ for Russia.
The former British Defence Secretary Ben Wallace – who accused Scholz of having “abused intelligence information” – should have had it out first and foremost with American soldier Jack Texeira, who already a year ago disclosed documents[2] (confirmed as true) that incontrovertibly prove that in fact French, British, American and other NATO countries’ special forces – as well as hundreds of officials in various capacities – have already been in Ukraine for at least a year. Or with British Lieutenant General Robert Magowan, who in late 2022 candidly told The Times of how the Royal Marines were engaged in “high-risk covert operations” in Ukraine[3]. And even more so with the Polish minister who told journalist Zbigniew Parafianowicz that British and Polish special forces had been operating in Ukraine since immediately after the Maidan of 2014, and had been involved in the fighting north of Kiev already in the first weeks of the war[4].
In order not to be the least bit surprised by Scholz’s ‘revelations’, one does not need to have indulged in “Russian propaganda”, its sufficient to have read through newspapers whose political correctness for a loyal citizen of the American Empire is beyond assured.
One could, for example, have read in the New York Times about a Ukrainian border dotted with CIA bunkers with all the best American technology and personnel, engaged in intelligence activities against Russia since 2014. Or in Politico of former chief of staff Valery Zaluzhny’s disagreements[5] with the ‘Western advisors’ in charge of planning the Ukrainian spring-summer offensive[6].
It is no secret that a full-scale Russia-NATO war is being fought in Ukraine, with NATO weapons, NATO intelligence, NATO satellites, NATO planning and NATO soldiers on the ground, albeit “only” as special forces, mercenaries, secret agents and ‘advisors’.
Moving from what is undoubtedly proven to what is highly probable, or presumable beyond reasonable doubt, one can also go further: Do we want to believe that the sabotage of the Nord Stream pipeline (a widely pre-announced[7] act of war against both Russia and Germany) took place without the direct involvement of one or more NATO countries? That the attack on the Crimean Bridge whose logistics passed through Bulgaria, Turkey and Georgia was not planned and participated by one or more NATO countries? That the American AWACS constantly present in the Black Sea are not actively engaged in attacks on the Russian fleet?
So where is the element of novelty in Scholz’s statements or in what Macron ‘might’ do in the future (and in fact has already done)? Is simply cannot be found.
We are witnessing a rather bitter – and ugly to behold – political clash within an EU confused about what to do in a European theatre in which American involvement, Russian intentions and Ukrainian resilience appear today as rather uncertain variables.
The only thing we can hope for is that the East-European ‘little geopolitics’ of the two statesmen – Macron and Scholz, by the way rather close to their political twilight – does not nip in the bud any possibility of substantial European unity. A possibility that should become more concrete – not less – in the face of a possible American reorientation on the Pacific quadrant, and of the planned conventional (perhaps even nuclear) rearmament of the continent.
[1]https://x.com/Inimicizie/status/1763555832078401805?s=20
[2]https://inimicizie.com/2023/04/11/fuga-documenti-riservati-usa-guerra-ucraina/
[3]https://archive.ph/x7MPX
[4]https://www.declassifieduk.org/polish-minister-saw-uk-special-forces-operating-in-ukraine/
[5]https://www.politico.eu/article/ukraine-general-runs-out-of-road-kyiv-washington/
[6]https://southfront.press/100-days-of-ukrainian-offensive/
[7]https://inimicizie.com/2022/11/18/sabotaggio-nord-stream/
Pietro Pinter, Doctor of International Relations, author of inimicizie.com