---

Jens Stoltenberg, the secretary general of NATO who answers to Washington declared today (Feb 19) at the Munich Security Conference that “if the Kremlin’s aim is to have less NATO on its borders, it will only get more NATO.” He says NATO is beefing up its forces “across the alliance,” that is, in the NATO countries on Russia’s borders. See this.

This is an extremely aggressive response to Russia’s concern about missile bases placed on her borders. To speak frankly, Stoltenberg is inviting a Russian attack before she finds herself with more missile bases on her borders.

As if this isn’t enough and with Russia already concerned with the unwillingness of the West to abide by any agreements, treaties, and international law, the president of Ukraine declared today at the Munich Security Conference that Ukraine was on the verge of renouncing the Budapest Memorandum in which Ukraine agreed to abstain from nuclear weapons in exchange for its independence from Russia.  As Ukraine has already broken the Minsk Agreement, there is no reason for Ukraine to keep to the Budapest Memorandum. See this.

So, Russia goes to the US and NATO and says frankly: “You are making us uncomfortable by putting missile bases on our borders and by your plans to bring Ukraine into NATO.  This is not something we can accept.  Here is our proposal for mutual security.”  And the reply is more NATO military expansion and Ukraine developing nuclear weapons.

There was never any possibility of any success of Russian negotiations with Ukraine, because Ukraine is not a sovereign country and cannot make its own decisions.  Ukraine is Washington’s pawn used to cause trouble for Russia. Russia brought this upon herself by standing aside while Washington overthrew the Ukraine government and installed a Washington puppet.  Biden, Blinken, Stoltenberg, and the rest of the crew have made it completely clear that they intend to make Russia less secure.  The West thinks that this is riskless because all the Russians will do is complain and ask for more negotiations.  Washington has Russia trapped in the self-defeating process of answering Washington’s accusations. 

Perhaps Biden, Blinken, and Stoltenberg are right.  But on the other hand, what would you do if you were the government of a vast country allied with China and armed with a military force that can walk through any force NATO can muster as if it were a wet paper bag?  Would you sit there wasting time and energy in negotiations that only make things worse while your enemies build up their forces on your borders and Ukraine acquires nuclear weapons?  

I don’t know what Putin has learned.  I have learned that previous Russian and Soviet governments were correct in realizing that Russian security required buffers.  There are solid reasons Ukraine, Belarus, Georgia, and Central Asia were integral parts of Russia and the Soviet Union. The Soviet government formed the Warsaw Pact (East European countries) as a buffer to NATO, which was formed first.  The weak Yeltsin government, by agreeing to strip Russia of her buffers, has produced the insecurity that Putin has tried to resolve peacefully.

Biden, Blinken, Stoltenberg, Inc. have made it clear that there will be no peaceful resolution except the Kremlin’s acceptance of Washington’s hegemony.  As I have written for years, Russia’s choice is surrender or fight.  

I still think peace is achievable, but not until there is a demonstration of judicious Russian force. The West needs to understand that Russia means it when she says she has had enough.

What would be an example of judicious force?  Perhaps this:

• The Kremlin accepts the vote of the Donbass Russians to be returned to Russia like Crimea.  This would end the violence in Ukraine as not even the Ukrainian neo-Nazis are stupid enough to attack Russia.
• The Kremlin announces that Ukraine is in no danger from Russia unless Ukraine becomes a NATO member, accepts US missile bases, or begins developing nuclear weapons, in which case Ukraine will be destroyed.
• The US missile bases in Poland and Romania will be removed or Russia will remove them.
• There will be no further strengthening of NATO military forces in NATO countries bordering Russia.  Any such forces will be destroyed upon arrival.

The red lines would be clear.  If the West crosses them, it will be the West that is responsible for the violence. 

If nothing of this sort is done, Washington will keep pushing until Russia has to take far more drastic action that would bring a much greater chance of nuclear war.  

It is clear from Washington’s negative response to Russia’s demand that her security concerns be addressed that negotiations are pointless.  Washington controls the Western media, and the media spins the outcome to Washington’s satisfaction.  More negotiation just means more Russian frustration.

It is difficult for the Kremlin to act in Russia’s interest because of the Russian fifth column consisting of the Atlanticist Integrationists. These are influential people and organizations who are more concerned to be a part of the West than they are with Russian sovereignty.  Globalism is everywhere, including in the Russian government and economic establishment.  Russian economists have been indoctrinated by their Western counterparts that Russia needs foreign exchange in order to develop the Russian economy.  Consequently, they think energy sales to Europe should be billed in dollars or euros, which strengthens the dollar and the euro instead of the ruble.  It is a sad situation when a country’s economists recommend a policy that strengthens the enemy’s currency instead of its own.

Washington is relying on the Atlanticist Integrationists and the Western-financed NGOs, which the Russian government foolishly permits to operate against itself inside Russia, to make it difficult for Putin to meet the challenges that Washington is bringing in order to weaken and destabilize Russia.

Russia cannot negotiate away either the US military/security complex’s need for an enemy to justify its power and budget or Washington’s desire for hegemony.  This is the reality that Putin faces.

Putin and Lavrov keep trying to rely on reason and fact, but in the West reason and fact have lost their influence.  Reason is a “white construct” that white people who are “systemic racists” use to oppress people of color.  Biologically-based gender is not even a fact.  A physical man can declare himself a woman, and a physical woman can declare herself to be a man. Employers, schools, even the military have to accept the self-declaration of gender regardless of fact, or courts rule they are in violation of the Civil Rights Act and are discriminating on the basis of sex.

The Western world has replaced reason and fact with narratives.  Narratives are official explanations that no matter how false carry the imprimatur of truth. To challenge them can be life-threatening.  We are not yet shot in the back of the head in the Lubyanka.  Instead, we are declared to be “domestic terrorists,” “Russian agents,” “disinformation agents,” “enemies of democracy.”  We are deplatformed, fired from our jobs, our medical licenses are taken away, we are arrested and our property seized for protesting a narrative as is currently happening to the Canadian  protesters.  

Independent scientists of the highest reputation have proven that the Covid narrative is incorrect, that the mRNA vaccines are more dangerous to most people than Covid itself.  Yet the scientific facts do not correct the narrative.  Instead, the narrative bans the facts.  

How is it possible that Putin and Lavrov expect to negotiate with a culture in which reason and fact do not exist? Why do they continue in this folly? Is the reality they face too much to accept compared to the pretend world of negotiation?

*

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts writes on his blog site, PCR Institute for Political Economy, where this article was originally published.