Danon made the remarks in an interview with Israeli broadcaster i24NEWS on Wednesday evening, responding to comments by US Vice-President JD Vance, who linked the Republican Party’s losses in Tuesday’s midterm elections to the war with Iran, amid calls to reconsider US-Israeli relations.

“I think it’s unfortunate that many made the link between rising prices, mainly oil prices, and the situation here in Israel,” Danon said.

“The decision to attack Iran was the decision of the United States. It wasn’t our decision. We supported the US effort, and we think it was the right decision,” he added.

I don’t believe this.. Israel and the US work hand in glove.

Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Secretary Major General Mohsen Rezaei has delivered a message from the Leader of the Islamic Revolution to Russian President Vladimir Putin during a meeting at the Kremlin, where the two sides discussed bilateral strategic relations, regional and international developments, and prospects for expanding cooperation.

My understanding, and I could be mistaken, is the message was in the form of a hand written letter- delivered personally to Putin at this meeting.

Speaking after Thursday’s meeting in Moscow, Rezaei said the discussions covered regional security arrangements in the aftermath of the US-Israeli war on Iran, Moscow’s support for ending the aggression, and plans to expand energy and transit cooperation, including the construction of gas pipelines from Russia to Iran.

Rezaei said Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Mojtaba Khamenei had wanted the message to be delivered to Putin as soon as possible. He added that the Russian president conveyed his “warm and sincere greetings” to the Leader in response.

According to Rezaei, the meeting also addressed the broad agenda of relations between Tehran and Moscow, with the Iranian official stressing the need to deepen strategic ties and accelerate the implementation of major agreements between the two countries.

He emphasized that strategic cooperation between Iran and Russia plays a significant role in promoting regional stability and countering unilateralism in international affairs.

A substantial part of the meeting was devoted to examining the latest developments in West Asia and the Persian Gulf.

Rezaei also outlined Iran’s position on recent US actions and threats against the country, saying responses from Western parties to Tehran’s demands had not been satisfactory.

He stressed that Iran has clearly stated its positions and that the opposing parties must explicitly comply with the conditions set by Tehran.

Putin, for his part, welcomed the message from the Leader of the Islamic Revolution and underscored Iran’s constructive and key role in the region.

Referring to the shared positions of Tehran and Moscow on numerous regional and international issues, the Russian president reaffirmed Moscow’s determination to expand relations with Iran and called for continued consultations between the two countries’ security and political officials.

Rezaei also said discussions with Putin focused on major regional developments, particularly the future security architecture of West Asia following the war.

“Important issues concerning the region were discussed with Mr. Putin, including significant discussions on the postwar period and regional security arrangements,” he said.

He further reported that Putin condemned the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facilities and described the war against the country as unjust.

According to Rezaei, the Russian president pledged to provide whatever assistance he could to help bring the aggression to an end.

“Mr. Putin said that he would provide any assistance to end the war,” Rezaei said.

The meeting comes amid intensified diplomatic and strategic engagement between Tehran and Moscow as Iran seeks to address the consequences of the war and establish arrangements for regional security and postwar reconstruction.

The two countries have repeatedly emphasized their commitment to expanding strategic cooperation across political, security, economic and energy sectors.

Alongside the security discussions, energy cooperation featured prominently in the meeting, with Rezaei announcing that the two sides had discussed and reached an agreement on plans to build gas pipelines connecting Russia and Iran.

He said the proposed infrastructure would serve two purposes: helping Iran address domestic gas shortages while enabling it to receive Russian gas and sell it to neighboring countries, potentially strengthening its position as a regional gas distribution hub.

“An agreement was reached on building gas pipelines from Russia to Iran so that Iran can both overcome its gas shortages and sell Russian gas to neighboring countries,” Rezaei said.

The proposed arrangement would expand energy cooperation beyond direct bilateral supplies, creating opportunities for Iran to serve as a transit and distribution route for Russian gas to regional markets.

According to a reporter for the Islamic Republic of Iran Broadcaster (IRIB), the Kremlin meeting lasted more than three hours and also covered the International North-South Transport Corridor (INSTC), as well as discussions on developing Iran into a regional gas hub.

News covered at this site as well

Related;

US sanctions India, Turkey-based firms over support for Iran

The US Treasury issued fresh sanctions on Wednesday against companies and individuals based in India and Turkey for their support of Iran, warning that it would continue to go after anyone who supported the Iranian government.

The sanctions are part of the Trump administration’s “Operation Economic Outcast,” which aims to cut off Iran’s ability to sell oil to fund the war with the US and Israel.

Treasury unveiled the new sanctions a day after Democrats made huge gains in midterm elections, winning control of both houses of Congress as voters expressed anger about the Iran war and its impact in fueling US inflation.

Clearly, the Trump administration does not care even after the very big losses

We know where you are’: US imposes sanctions on India and Turkey-based entities over support for Iran

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the US government would continue to go after anyone who supported Tehran. “We know where you are, and we will sanction those who continue supporting the Iranian regime, whether by land, sea, or air,” he said in a statement.

Clearly Americans were upset about the US attack on Iran. The increased costs and inflation. Some Trump supporters were probably deeply disappointed that the Trump administration didn’t keep it’s promises- Releasing Epstein files and being the “peace president” The insistence on wielding the tariff stick , was very costly for many Americans.. Wondering also how much Trump's arrogance played into this loss?

Democrats usher in a new era with their resounding sweep of the House and the Senate

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats are riding their sweep of Congress into a new era, eager to meet voter demands for change with plans to tackle high costs of living and confront President Donald Trump’s final years in the White House.

In a nationwide romp, Democrats ousted Republicans from coast to coast, with many surprising places in between, as voters rejected the president’s party for the promise of something different for the country. Their majorities will be padded by wide margins in both the House and the Senate.

All told, the results present a fundamental reshaping of power in Washington, with new opportunities and challenges for governing.

Vice President JD Vance blamed war in Iran for Republican midterm losses.

Trump struck a conciliatory tone, suggesting he could work with the Democrats, but he also warned of gridlock ahead as he threatened to use the power of the presidential veto to strike down their agenda.

“I don’t want to be just sitting there for two years vetoing everything,” he told Politico.

Democrats vow a 100-day agenda and investigations of Trump

House Democrats are promising a 100-day agenda starting with efforts to lower the costs of gas, groceries and other goods, as well as bills to reverse cuts to the Affordable Care Act and Medicaid healthcare programs. They’re also ready to launch a robust oversight agenda to, as Hakeem Jeffries says, “hold the crooks accountable.”

Hakeem Jeffries is enthralled by the Israel lobby- not sure the Dems will cut the cord with Israel- Although it seems to me this is what the vast majority of Americans want

JD Vance states quite plainly the attack on Iran cost the Republicans the win. He calls it the war, but, it was really a Usrael attack on Iran. Maybe the Trump administration shouldn’t have followed along or partnered with Israel?

Vance cites the Iran war for Republicans’ losses

In a lengthy online post, the vice president seemingly sought to distance himself from election results seen as a referendum on Trump that featured big Republican losses across the country.

“The reason we lost is the war,” Vance wrote, adding, “If you’d like to argue it was worth it, that losing the Senate for the next 6 years was worth it, then do so. Argue it was a worthwhile cost to pay. Agree or disagree, that’s at least honest.”

http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2010/04/poland-imf-loans-and-radoslaw-sikorski.html

Friday, April 30, 2010

Poland- IMF loans and Radoslaw Sikorski does the US

So what is happening politically with Poland?
Let me drop a name. The name for the day is Radoslaw Sikorski.

*** 2026- If you’ve been following the geopolitical bouncing ball will recall Sikorski applauding the destruction of the North Stream Pipeline- And you will have noticed Mr Sikorsky has been front and center along with Donald Tusk obfuscating the recent coup plot for western audiences.

Polands Foreign Minister is making the rounds in the US, on the arm of Hilary Rodham Clinton.
Just what have Rad and Hil been up to?! Reaffirming their firm committment to one another?

Indeed, they have. Both countries have agreed to resume a strategic dialogue. They made the announcement together after talks in Washington, yesterday.

Some interesting statements, that may be relevant to the recent plane crash that wiped out the previous government.

Clinton and Sikorski also discussed the conflict in Afghanistan and new areas of U.S.-Polish cooperation on energy and climate.

Sikorski said if American companies exploring energy resources in Poland “strike it lucky,” it would enhance the energy security of Poland and Europe and forge new investment links between Poland and the United States.

2026- Keeping in mind that Poland and Russia had previously made energy agreements prior to the entire government being killed in a plane crash- and yes, you do have to read all 3 parts to understand the timeline.

That is kind of surprising.
I thought Russia and Poland had just struck some kind of energy pipeline deal?
Now Sikorski is talking ‘energy security’ with the US?

A delegation led by Sikorski is on a week-long U.S. tour since Tuesday with the focus on renewing the Polish-American Strategic Dialogue.

Sikorski is also scheduled to meet with U.S. National Security Advisor James Jones, representatives of the U.S. Congress, and Washington think tanks.

Then Sikorski announced that Clinton is visiting Poland as a member of the elite group of countries which will meet in Krakow during July 2-4 to re-launch the Community of Democracies.

Joint Statement on the US and Polish Bilateral Strategic Dialogue

Hilary, is such a gal pal to Sikorski, she is promising to look in Polish Visas.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has promised to look into the issue of Poles requiring visas to enter the United States after a meeting with Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski.

Earlier this week, European Parliament President JerzyBuzekcriticised the U.S. visa policy, which divides EU member states into “better” and “worse” countries according to which ones are included in the Visa Waiver Program (VWP).

Poland is the only member of the Schengen zone that is not included in the VWP.

The official criteria to enter the VWP is based on the ratio of rejected visa applications to total visa applications, which must fall under 10 percent. At the moment, the figure is at 13 percent. If the number of visas granted were to increase, Poland would soon be within range of entry into the VWP.

Don’t worry Hilary is on the job!

Wait, there is more.. Missiles on Sikorski’s Washington Agenda

“Such weapons are placed around Poland’s borders so it would be both in the interest of Poland and NATO to reduce the nuclear arsenal. Reducing tactical weapons would be the next step after reducing strategic weapons,” Sikorski said after the meeting.

Missile reduction, is most certainly not what they are speaking of.

Some additional news has the IMF popping up!

Poland: does Warsaw really want a new IMF credit line?

The question is would the government, including the central banker, that died in the plane crash have wanted a new IMF credit line?

The Polish central bank insists the country has no need to ask the Fund for a replacement for the current facility

The government takes a different view. Earlier this week Dominik Radziwill, deputy finance minister, said an extension of the FCL was called for because of the turmoil caused by the recent downgrades of Greece, Portugal and Spain

Uber thought provoking statement from linked article, I am going to bold it for you to read and contemplate-

The issue had been a sore point between the ministry and the bank, but the death of Slawomir Skrzyepk, the former central bank governor, in the April 10 air crash, has taken some heat out of the argument.

The death of the former central bank governor has taken some heat out of the argument???

Who would benefit from Poland taking on more IMF loans? Not Poland, of course. For their would be austerity measures put in place. Hmmmmm……..

I find all this interesting, because the main stream media has been giving us the news for the past couple of weeks that Russia and Poland could get closer and Russia could benefit from this tragedy, etc., etc. Then Sikorski is in the US two timing with Hilary?
And, the IMF is largely hooked in with the the US branch of the political banking cartel.

And another picture emerges entirely.

Original url

http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2010/04/deadheading-polish-government-pt-2.html

Monday, April 12, 2010

Deadheading the Polish government Pt 2

As I wrote the first part of this post, I realized it was going to be much longer then anticipated and was going to require a second part.

The first post contained background, a ‘whose who’ on the dead, and the many political ties of Poland.
I will admit wholeheartedly I can’t rule out some kind of coup or mass assassination plot at this time.

One really never should. The number of important people on one plane, could have provided an opportunity to rid oneself of an impotent or uncooperative government in a cleaner manner then a military coup or colour revolution. Who really knows?

I did some reading on the plane. The Tupolev Tu-154. Most often described as aged and prone to accidents. However, I came across a number of articles, here and below, that indicated the plane had been completely refurbished, new engines etc.,

The plane carrying Kaczynski was refurbished and repaired last year, according to Alexei Gusev, general director of Aviakor Factory, the company that performed the service.

“Speaking openly, we believe that this tragedy could not have been caused by equipment failure,” he said.

So unless there was some kind of sabotage, equipment failure seems to be a dead end.

How about the Pilot?
By all accounts the Pilot was repeatedly informed to not land. Yet, he persisted in landing.

It has been reported the crew of the plane were infact offered three alternative aiports to land at, as a result of the dense fog conditions. They opted instead to continue the flight in order to assess the weather situation.

Two Belarussian airports – Minsk and Vitebsk – as well as Moscow Vnukovo were suggested to the pilots said Russia’s presidential plenipotentiary representative Georgy Poltavchenko

Poltavchenko, who was among the delegates waiting to receive the aircraft, states that he was informed that the weather conditions were “difficult”, with visibility below 400m – and possibly as low as 100-150m.

But he says the flight crew considered they had sufficient fuel to continue flying to the Smolensk terminal area, to “look around, and then decide”.

“Then we were told that they were going to land,” he says, adding that the Tu-154 was not heard approaching before there was the noise of an impact. He says the sounds were “strange” and “not typical” of a crash.

Air transport regulator Rosaviatsia’s chief, Alexander Neradko, told Putin during the briefing that visibility was below the minimum of 1,000m.

Neradko says the Tu-154 struck an 8m-tall tree at a distance of 1,200m from the runway. At this distance the tri-jet should have been at a height of 60m, he says, the standard for a 3° glideslope.

“The aircraft proceeded to strike more trees, broke up in mid-air, hit the ground and exploded,” he adds.

No indication has been given, during the briefing, on whether the crew attempted to abort the landing. Earlier information had suggested that the Tu-154 had been executing a go-around.Strange sounds, not typical of a crash? Is this important?

Another possibility for the Pilot ignoring the orders from the air traffic controllers lies in the Polish Presidents’ previous behaviour. He may have ordered the Pilot to make the landing despite the dicey conditions. So was the Pilot being pressured to make the landing?

Still, attention has been drawn to the pilot’s state of mind because of a previous incident involving the Polish president, Lech Kaczynski.In August 2008, during Russia’s brief war with Georgia, Mr. Kaczynski got into a dispute with a pilot flying his plane to the Georgian capital, Tbilisi, according to reports at the time. Mr. Kaczynski demanded that the pilot land despite dangerous conditions, but the pilot disagreed and diverted to neighboring Azerbaijan.

Mr. Kaczynski threatened that there would be consequences for the pilot, the Polish newspaper Dziennik reported. “If someone decides to become a pilot, he cannot be fearful,” Mr. Kaczynski said. “After returning to the country, we shall deal with this matter.”

Was this crash the result of Kaczynski’s demands?

There is no way of knowing what was going on in the plane, or in the pilots mind. Because, like all the others he died in the crash.

I feel it is important to mention that a push is on to quickly name a central banker replacement. Despite all the pomp and circumstance over the death of the President, the absolute importance of the countries central banker cannot be discounted, ever.

Poland Must Name Central Bank Head Immediately, Official Says

Much more important then a new President!
Poland must immediately replace central bank Governor Slawomir Skrzypek, who died in the April 10 plane crash.The economy and concern for the country’s finances require a quick decision and the authorities have started handling the matter.

Bronislaw Komorowski, who assumed Presidency said “we need quick decisions, because the governor calls meetings of the Monetary Policy Council, and that body oversees exchange rates, a role absolutely essential to the functioning of government.”

Seems so odd…this priority.

By all accounts the Russian government is going out of their way to cooperate, to investigate along with representatives from the Polish government.

I spent some time surfing around on the net. A lot of fingers are pointing at Russia and the Russian government surely must be aware of how this entire situation appears to the public and possibly to other heads of state.

At this point in time, I will say, nothing may be as it seems. Given Russia’s warming of relations as of late, the newest natural gas deal with Poland. I would hesitate, if this was some kind of coup attempt, to point my fingers at Russia.

https://web.archive.org/web/20101020035129/http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2010/04/deadheading-polish-government.html

Original url

http://pennyforyourthoughts2.blogspot.com/2010/04/deadheading-polish-government.html

Saturday, April 10, 2010

Deadheading the Polish government

Deadheading, is the act of removing the spent heads of your flowers and encouraging new growth.

The recent plane crash effectively dead headed the Polish government. So like a plant, there will be new growth, in the form of a new government.
What will the new government bring? Who will benefit from the new government?

Let’s take a look at who was lost, their roles and their allegiances-
The who’s who of the deceased.

Lech Kaczynski, 60. Poland’s president, a nationalist conservative who had been in office since 2005. A founder of the Law and Justice party, now in opposition, and the twin brother of its leader, former Prime Minister Jaroslaw Kaczynski.

_ Maria Kaczynska, 66, Poland’s first lady; an economist and translator of English and French, had carried out charity work in her role as first lady. Her uncle was killed at Katyn.

_ Gen. Franciszek Gagor, 58. Army chief of staff since Feb. 2006. From 2004 to 2006, was Poland’s representative at NATO in Brussels.

_ Gen. Andrzej Blasik, 47, head of the Air Force since 2007. Received professional military education in Montgomery, Alabama, in 2005.

_ Vice Admiral Andrzej Karweta, 51, Navy chief commander since November 2009. From 2002-2005 served at the Supreme Allied Command Atlantic, SACLANT in Norfolk, Virginia.

_ Gen. Tadeusz Buk, 49, land forces commander since Sept. 2009. Served in 2007 as commander of Polish troops in Iraq.

_ Slawomir Skrzypek, 46, president of the National Bank of Poland since 2007. A longtime colleague of Lech Kaczynski, served under him at Warsaw City Hall from 2002-5.

_ Aleksander Szczyglo, 46, head of the National Security Office, a former defense minister under Kaczynski’s brother.From this list, we can see the President is gone, the President of the National Bank is gone,
the head of the Army, Navy, Airforce, National Security etc., all gone.

Deadheaded. All the top people gone.
Is this a real political loss in terms of Western interests?
In terms of the interests of Russia?

The Polish President was a noted friend of a number of nations, as they proclaim it.

He was an admirer of India, noted critic of China. He also had a soft corner for the Dalai Lama. He is also recognized as a friend to Israel.

Though Poland joined the European Union in 2004, Mr. Kaczynski often preferred dealing with the United States. Often times annoying other European Union members, which I find odd. Why bother at all joining the EU, if one is not going to play ball with the EU and plot strategy with the US.

One must consider that Poland was part and parcel of a different political agenda.
A political agenda which may have it’s roots in the west.
One has to consider that the so called labour revolution in Poland, led by that spunky electrician Lech Walesa, may not have really been initiated as a people movement.

The revolution may have grown through the labour movement, but, quite realistically could have been seeded and nurtured by interests outside of the labour movement and outside of Poland. Realistically this early revolution could not have come about without some serious backing from outside political interests. Realistically this revolution may have been the progenitor of the modern day colour revolutions that many have witnessed sweeping through the former Soviet States.

That said, back to Mr Kaczynski.
As soon as Mr. Kaczynski took office in the presidential headquarters in the center of Warsaw, he forged close relations with Ukraine and Georgia determined to bring them into the NATO fold
He lobbied hard for the United States to deploy part of its controversial shield against ballistic missiles in Poland, arguing that it would enhance Poland’s security against Russia.

All of his actions demonstrate him to be a pro-western leader. All of his allegiances are the friends of his friends, as they say. India, Israel, Ukraine and Georgia.

While these alliances made him popular with the West, he was most definitely unpopular in Poland. He was up for election and was expected to lose.
So his political value to his western supporters was over.

“This is a political earthquake, a lot of leaders have perished, and first we have to let this moment of shock pass. But the reality is that the Kaczynski’s [President Lech Kaczynski has an identical twin brother Jaroslaw] are not very popular in Poland,” said Piotr Kaczynski, an analyst at the Center for European Policy Studies.

The unflinching support for American missiles in Poland, the missiles hated by the masses, no doubt played a role in his lack of popularity in Poland and his inevitable election loss.

So, did the West lose an important ally in the plane crash? Or was he an ally whose usefulness was coming to an end?

Especially considering news of a recent long term natural gas agreement signed between Russian and Poland

Poland and Russia had made long term natural gas agreements. With all relevant documents to be signed shortly.

Putin told journalists after the talks on Wednesday that the relevant documents would be signed shortly.

At the same time, he stressed that gas cooperation had not been discussed as a separate issue at the talks. “The Polish side has long been raising the issue of increasing Russian gas supplies, and business entities have generally come to agreement,” Putin said, adding that the documents formalising this agreement would be signed shortly.

He was referring to a long-term contract for gas supplies up to 2037 and a transit agreement up to 2045.

Is there someone in place to sign these documents?

Where does this leave Poland? What about this agreement?
Was the US/West unhappy with this?
How about another recent move on the part of Russia, a move to patch up, to reconcile old grievances ?

‘ Putin made an unprecedented gesture of good will on this issue, becoming the first Russian leader ever to commemorate Stalin’s mass executions of Poles alongside a Polish leader. Prime Minister Tusk had flown in to Smolensk that day for the ceremony in the village of Katyn, where most of the 22,000 political murders were carried’

The Polish President believed that ties between Russia and Poland could not be normalized without reconciliation without achieving reconciliation over these crimes.

Poland is a pivotal nation in the struggle between the east and the west. Right now it is pretty tough to tell which interests have lost an important ally.I am sure the coming weeks and months will give us all an indication. It will be interesting to watch how the new growth, in the form of a new government, flowers in the coming weeks.

2026**** We understand that Poland was pivotal nation in the struggle between the US led NATO nations and Russia. All these years later I can understand how concerned the US would have been should Poland had become increasingly dependent on Russia oil. And the overture Putin has made to Poland regarding Smolensk was substantive. You”ll notice Donald Tusk was already on the scene?

You really have to make the commitment to read all 3 posts- to understand why I said Tusk and Sikorski are shady.. and why I was not surprised to see both those players involved in the most recent coup attempt

• Straight of Hormuz COULD Open in 2 days if demands met

Iran’s delegation has left negotiations in Qatar after a tense weekend. Here’s where things stand

A regional official briefed on the talks said an Iranian delegation left Qatar on Sunday after negotiations aimed at reaching a deal to end the war. A draft proposal has been circulated for feedback, and a follow-up meeting is under discussion.

Here’s where things currently stand.

Trump had a ‘very good’ call with Netanyahu

U.S. President Donald Trump on Sunday evening told reporters he and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu had a “very good” call on Saturday. He said they discussed Iran but gave no details.

Even before Netanyahu and his bloc of allies lost their majority in parliament in last week’s election, there were growing fears that Netanyahu was pushing for new strikes against Iran in an effort to stay in power in an emergency government during renewed war. ( I can see Bibi doing this) Since last Tuesday’s election, the prime minister has publicly commented only on the vote.

There was no word from Netanyahu and his office on the latest call with Trump, who has continued to alternate between public comments about pursuing talks with Iran and threats to strike it hard.

Iran steps up public messaging- ready for diplomacy, ready for war

The Islamic Republic (perception management wording) has stepped up its public messaging during the uncertainty, saying it is ready for both diplomacy and renewed fighting.

The new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei, met with Iran’s military chiefs and said the response to “any kind and level of threat” from the U.S. or Israel should be immediate and without “geographic limits,” and urged an expansion of the list of potential targets.

Middle East is caught in the middle and China offers help

Meanwhile, China will send a special envoy to Iran, Oman and Saudi Arabia in early to mid-November, Foreign Ministry spokesperson Mao Ning told reporters Monday. Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi also met with Ali Bagheri Kani, deputy secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council.

“The Middle East Gulf region should not become an arena for great-power rivalry and geopolitical conflict,” Chinese President Xi Jinping told Oman’s sultan, according to a readout from China’s Foreign Ministry. China and Oman called for a return to dialogue.

Another Tanker Fire in Hormuz

However, fresh maritime security concerns emerged after Iran’s navy reported that an oil tanker caught fire after striking a sea mine in a restricted area east of the Strait of Hormuz. The navy described the area as unsafe and warned commercial vessels against entering the strait without prior coordination.

According to the Iranian navy, the tanker had switched off its navigation identification systems before the incident. Ignoring the fact that Iran had “cautioned shipping operators that unauthorized passage through restricted waters could expose vessels to naval mines, collisions and fires.”

The latest developments highlight the widening gap between diplomatic efforts and military preparations. While Tehran has indicated that it is prepared to negotiate and restore maritime security if Washington accepts its conditions, Trump’s ultimatum and the reported US military build-up have heightened fears of another escalation across the region.

I’m sure not getting the idea there is an agreement at hand. Bibi wants, no, Bibi needs this attack. He will stay in power- He will avoid being held to account for his crimes. After the mid-terms if Republicans do as poorly as it appears they will… Trump isn’t going to care either.

Fool me once, shame on you.. Fool me twice, shame on me

Via archive.ph

This non existent doctrine has been used to justify many things

Everywhere, you’ll find scholars, pundits, and policymakers talking about the threat the “Gerasimov doctrine” — named after Russia’s chief of the general staff — poses to the West. It’s a new way of war, “an expanded theory of modern warfare,” or even “a vision of total warfare.”

There’s one small problem. It doesn’t exist. And the longer we pretend it does, the longer we misunderstand the — real, but different — challenge Russia poses.

I feel I can say that because, to my immense chagrin, I created this term, which has since acquired a destructive life of its own, lumbering clumsily into the world to spread fear and loathing in its wake.

Back in February 2013, the Russian newspaper Military-Industrial Courier — as exciting and widely read as it sounds — reprinted a speech by Gen. Valery Gerasimov. It talks of how in the modern world, the use of propaganda and subversion means that “a perfectly thriving state can, in a matter of months and even days, be transformed into an arena of fierce armed conflict, become a victim of foreign intervention, and sink into a web of chaos, humanitarian catastrophe, and civil war.”

It largely passed unnoticed, but Robert Coalson of Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the U.S. government-funded TV and radio service broadcasting to Russia and other unfree countries, picked up on it and translated it. He sent it to me and, with his permission, I published the translation on my blog, with my own comments.

A blog is as much as anything else a vanity site; obviously I want people to read it. So for a snappy title, I coined the term “Gerasimov doctrine,” though even then I noted in the text that this term was nothing more than “a placeholder,” and “it certainly isn’t a doctrine.” I didn’t think people would genuinely believe either that he came up with it (Gerasimov is a tough and effective chief of the general staff, but no theoretician), less yet than it was a “programmatic” blueprint for war on the West.

But then came the annexation of Crimea, when “little green men” — commandos without insignia — seized the peninsula with scarcely a shot fired. This was followed by the Donbass war, fought initially by a motley collection of local thugs, separatists, Russian adventurers, and special forces, accompanied by a barrage of lurid Russian propaganda.
Suddenly, it seemed that Gerasimov had indeed been describing what was to come, had we but realized it. Prone, as ever, to overcompensation, Western mainstream opinion swung from ignoring Gerasimov’s pronouncements to enshrining them as some kind of bleeding-edge blueprint for a new way of war.

The problems with this formulation are numerous, though. Gerasimov was actually talking about how the Kremlin understands what happened in the “Arab Spring” uprisings, the “color revolutions” against pro-Moscow regimes in Russia’s neighborhood, and in due course Ukraine’s “Maidan” revolt.

The Russians honestly — however wrongly (???)— believe that these were not genuine protests against brutal and corrupt governments, but regime changes orchestrated in Washington, (They were regime change operations) or rather, Langley. This wasn’t a “doctrine” as the Russians understand it, for future adventures abroad: Gerasimov was trying to work out how to fight, not promote, such uprisings at home.

But is this just a case of a pedantic scholar splitting hairs? There is no denying that the West is facing a multivectored, multi-agency campaign of subversion, division, and covert political “active measures” by Russia. Does it matter what we call it? Isn’t that “placeholder” term as good as anything else?

But words have weight; they frame our understanding of that campaign, of how it works, and what it does. Without being aware of it, clinging to this inaccurate moniker also limits and misdirects us in our attempt to grasp and thus combat it.

First of all, there is no single Russian “doctrine.” If anything, their campaign is dangerous precisely because it has no single organizing principle, let alone controlling agency. There is a broad political objective — to distract, divide, and demoralize — but otherwise it is largely opportunistic, fragmented, even sometimes contradictory. Some major operations are coordinated, largely through the presidential administration, but most are not.

Rather, operations are conceived and generally carried out by a bewildering array of “political entrepreneurs” hoping that their success will win them the Kremlin’s favor: diplomats and spies, criminals and think-tankers, oligarchs and journalists.

Secondly, we should not be thinking of this primarily in military terms. What we call “hybrid war” in Russian thinking is actually two separate things. What Gerasimov was talking about was the use of subversion to prepare the battlefield before intervention, precisely the kind of operations used in Ukraine. Breaking the chain of command, stirring up local insurrections, jamming communications — these are all classic moves that hardly began in Crimea.

However, if Gerasimov and the generals think of “active measures” as a prelude to armed operations, the Kremlin’s national security specialists also regard them as an alternative. The Russians may get much wrong, but they are aware that NATO is a formidable enemy, and the odds are that its Article 5 guarantee of mutual defense would hold. In effect, NATO member countries are out of bounds for direct military action. How can a country with an economy perhaps the size of Canada’s, an army that is still going through an expensive modernization and already bogged down in two wars, and precious little soft power compete with a larger, richer coalition of democracies?

The answer is precisely by turning its democratic norms and institutions against itself, by opening existing fault lines, and by taking every opportunity to neutralize the West. This is a textbook case of what George Kennan called political war: “the employment of all the means at a nation’s command, short of war, to achieve its national objectives. Such operations are both overt and covert. They range from such overt actions as political alliances, economic measures … and ‘white’ propaganda to such covert operations as clandestine support of ‘friendly’ foreign elements, ‘black’ psychological warfare and even encouragement of underground resistance in hostile states.”

The point is this: If the subversion is not the prelude to war, but the war itself, this changes our understanding of the threat, and therefore our best responses. Maintaining serious armed forces as a deterrent is still necessary, but perhaps more emphasis ought to go on counterintelligence and media literacy, on fighting corruption (always a boon for the political warriors) and healing the social divisions the Russians gleefully exploit.

Of course, the Gerasimov doctrine is an exciting term, and the man himself an unsmiling and craggy bruiser, an appealing frontman for those eager to portray Russia as a land of thugs and bullies. But by implying a military-led campaign and one with coherence and tight command, it also leads us to misunderstand the threat and miscalculate the response.

It also means we fail to appreciate how U.S. actions look to the Kremlin ( acknowledging destabilization tactics) and the extent to which they have inadvertently contributed to President Vladimir Putin’s grand narrative of a Russia under threat from an insidious West. He is largely wrong, but not entirely so. (Putin is not entirely wrong, which means he is largely correct) Either way, if we also want to try to end the current confrontation, as well as fight off Russia’s political war, we need to understand the motivations behind it.
The “Gerasimov doctrine” was never meant to mean anything, and it doesn’t. It’s time to move past it.

Give this interview a listen- I write about perception management all the time.. For a reason

In its account of the deadly fire at CFB Wainwright, the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) describes an extraordinary chain of events on Oct. 17.

The base, it says, was monitoring a common grass fire that erupted in “uncommonly strong winds,” with flames soon devouring a kilometre in just 30 to 60 seconds.

The military called the event “entirely anomalous.”

A Global News analysis of satellite imagery and weather records, reviewed by seven Canadian wildfire experts, paints a different picture.

As soldiers continued their training on that day, satellites showed the fire had already spread. But the day before, Environment Canada forecast a cold front bringing powerful winds and later issued wind warnings for the area.

And experts say the flames were unlikely to travel at the speed the military suggests, although estimates made during a traumatic event may understandably be imprecise.

More importantly, however, experts say base leadership should have known the dangers posed by the incoming weather, even if they couldn’t predict the precise timing or consequences.

“This was not unexpected given the forecast cold front, the actively spreading fire and the wind warnings that were issued earlier in the day,” says Jen Beverly, an associate professor of wildland fire at the University of Alberta.

Satellite imagery and weather records show a two-kilometre stretch of fire at noon was likely spreading as winds picked up and a violent cold front approached.

An image from Copernicus, the EU’s earth monitoring program, showing the burn scar left behind after the CFB Wainwright fire on Oct. 19. Copernicus (at the link)

Weather records, satellite observations and decades of wildfire research already offer important clues about how the tragedy unfolded.

Global examined the evidence and had seven leading wildfire experts review its findings, reconstructing the hours before the disaster to better understand what happened — and whether the fire behaved as unexpectedly as the military has suggested.

The reconstruction traces how the fire may have spread throughout the day, what warnings were issued, and how a forecast wind shift changed the danger. It also raises questions about how quickly the flames advanced — and why soldiers remained in their path.

A sudden shift in ‘uncommonly strong winds’

Those vast, open grasslands face powerful winds, with few natural barriers to interrupt them as they sweep across the prairie.

While the precise combination of weather and fire conditions on Oct. 17 may have been exceptional, the area has seen destructive winds before.

Exactly nine years earlier, on Oct. 17, 2017, gusts exceeding 100 kilometres per hour derailed 13 railway cars at a trestle bridge west of town.

Local Wainwright residents told Global News the area is known for being windy, but the day’s gusts were extraordinary.

However, forecasts predicted those winds.

Since the previous morning, Environment Canada had forecast strong winds, with gusts expected to rise from 60 to 80 kilometres per hour by Oct. 17. The forecast also predicted a shift in wind direction, from southwest to west, that afternoon.

All this information was available well in advance of the incident at Wainwright.

Two hours before the soldiers were reportedly overrun, at 2:14 p.m., Environment Canada extended a yellow wind warning to Wainwright, indicating “hazardous” winds, and forecast gusts up to 100 kilometres per hour.

The base has its own weather station to monitor conditions, while CFB Wainwright’s

But it remains unclear who was monitoring the weather on Oct. 17.

In a tense exchange with a reporter days after the disaster, Maj.-Gen. Wade Rutland, speaking on behalf of the military, repeatedly declined to say whether Wainwright had a meteorologist or wildfire-behaviour expert, citing the ongoing investigation. Environment Canada provides meteorologists at some military bases, but confirmed none was stationed at Wainwright that day, adding that the base instead received remote forecasting support from CFB Gagetown in New Brunswick.

“You don’t want to be out in the field on a day like Saturday.”

A fire already burning

A grass fire ignited on the automatic grenade launcher range that Saturday, although the military has declined to say precisely when it began. At the time, the Canadian Wildland Fire Information System categorized the wildfire danger in Wainwright as “extreme.”

The military’s account of the blaze’s timing has changed. The morning after the tragedy, officials put the ignition time at around 4 p.m. Later that day, Rutland told a briefing that the fire started “several hours earlier,” adding that officials believed it was “contained.”

I had noticed the change in timing while reading previous news reports..

Asked how big the fire had grown, he declined to say: “I wouldn’t say it was small nor large.”

Four days later, military officials provided more detail, saying the fire was burning inside an area known as Permanent Danger Area 2, a restricted section of the base where live ammunition is fired, and unexploded munitions pose a hazard.

This “restricted the firefighters’ ability to conduct direct suppressive operations,” they said. (military claims)

However, the base’s standing orders explicitly exempt firefighting and emergency vehicles from certain restrictions on entering the area, including the grenade range impact zone, although the danger posed by unexploded munitions could still prevent firefighters from entering.

They also give Range Control authority to halt dangerous training and coordinate emergency responses. Units must also report changes in a fire’s intensity, direction and speed.

The military has declined to say whether those procedures were followed on Oct. 17, citing the ongoing investigation.

Military officials said Range Control and the base’s fire department monitored the blaze while soldiers continued training nearby.

But high above the Alberta prairie, satellites captured images of a fire far larger than a small patch of burning grass as early as noon.

U.S. Earth-observation satellite Landsat 8 showed active fire at 12:17 p.m., stretching roughly two kilometres in length across the grasslands, with scorched ground already visible behind the flames.

Using the co-ordinates of satellite-detected hotspots recorded in NASA’s Fire Information for Resource Management System (FIRMS), Beverly estimates the blaze covered roughly 48 hectares — equivalent to about 50 football stadiums, including their surrounding grounds.

The military did not respond to questions about whether it agreed with that estimate.

So much more to read and view at the opening link

Two previous pieces below

Trump’s trade war with Canada assumed economic size would translate into bargaining power. Ottawa’s refusal to back down, and the strain the tariffs are putting on U.S. border states ahead of the midterms, are opening cracks in the administration’s approach.

Canada Shows the Limits of Trump’s Hardball Trade Tactics

From Edward Alden- CFR Researcher

The U.S. economy is ten times the size of the Canadian economy. It stands to reason, therefore, that in trade disputes between the two countries—which were frequent even before President Donald Trump unleashed his tariff war—the United States will get its way ten times as often.

That was what Robert Lighthizer, Trump’s first-term U.S. trade representative, once told his Canadian counterpart Chrystia Freeland, according to Freeland’s new book on her dealings with the United States, cheekily titled Unreliable Boyfriend. That a negotiator as smart and seasoned as Lighthizer could make such an elementary mistake—confusing economic size with bargaining leverage—goes a long way to explaining why the second Trump administration finds itself mired in a losing trade war with its economically much smaller and militarily much weaker neighbor to the north.

The standoff is counterintuitive. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller’s “iron laws of the world”—a foreign policy approach that argues that force and power are the only things that count—should have caused Canada to capitulate long ago. Yet along with China, it is one of only two countries in the world that have retaliated against Trump’s tariffs. And with Republicans facing tough midterm election races in northern border states that are heavily dependent on trade with Canada, it is the United States that now appears to be backing down by lifting tariffs that are causing too much economic harm. Other countries that will face at least another two years of Trump’s trade bullying, regardless of the midterm outcomes, have much to learn from Canada’s response.

Canada, for reasons known only to Trump, who calls it “one of the worst countries in the entire world,” has been the president’s favorite tariff target. Along with Mexico, it was the first country hit with the 25 percent tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA, which were later overturned by the Supreme Court. Many of its largest exports—autos, gas, steel, aluminum, lumber—are facing tariffs of 25 to 50 percent under Section 232 “national security” authority, and they are likely to stand up to legal challenges and congressional review.

Since July, many Canadian goods have faced 50 percent tariffs under Section 338, a Smoot-Hawley Act relic that has never been used to impose tariffs (the courts will decide this one too). So far, Canada has matched those tariffs nearly dollar for dollar and taken other steps such as banning U.S. alcohol sales in most provinces. Next, the United States is preparing to raise the tariff on autos and auto parts to 50 percent unless a U.S.-friendly deal is reached before January 1, 2027.

The Trump strategy is simple and crude: inflict enough economic pain on Canada through lost exports to the United States that its northern neighbor will be forced to capitulate. If Miller is right, the administration should get its way. Yet, although the damage has been real, Canada has so far shown itself to be remarkably resilient. The International Monetary Fund predicts Canada’s economic growth over the next two years will be second among the Group of Seven countries, behind only the United States. Its fiscal position is the best of the group, allowing the government to support industries hurt by the U.S. tariffs. Prime Minister Mark Carney and Ontario Premier Doug Ford recently announced a C$9 billion package for the auto and metals industries.

Including a few edited excerpts below

Windsor, Ontario, a manufacturing city across from Detroit that depends heavily on auto and component sales to the United States, saw its unemployment rate spike three percentage points following the Trump tariffs in 2025. But it has since largely recovered

The weak Canadian dollar, which has remained near historic lows despite rising oil prices that have historically strengthened the “loonie,” has helped offset the cost of the tariffs. Canada is getting the benefit of surging oil revenues from its Alberta exports without additionally harming the Ontario manufacturing heartland.

The federal government is fighting with U.S.-based Cleveland-Cliffs over its plan to cut five hundred jobs from the Stelco steel facility in Hamilton, Ontario. ( In the news quite a bit lately) Ottawa is similarly suing Stellantis, the carmaker, over its plan to close the Brampton, Ontario, plant building the Jeep Compass and relocate production to Illinois.

Despite the pain, Canadians across the country are in no mood to back down from the fight. Carney’s approval ratings are among the highest ever for a Canadian prime minister…

• As the trade war with Trump has escalated, Carney has pursued alternative partners.
• He has fast-tracked a new pipeline from Alberta’s oil sands to the Pacific coast to double oil exports to Asia.
• It is pursuing “associate membership” in the European Union, the particulars of which are still being ironed out.
• And Carney has sidestepped Canada’s traditional concerns over human rights in China, India, Turkey, and the United Arab Emirates to pursue closer trading relationship ( I don’t buy into the human rights idea at all)

Each of these may take years to come to fruition and will not fill the hole of lost exports to the United States. Yet they demonstrate that Canada will not be the pushover Trump had imagined.

The scholars Robert Keohane and the late Joe Nye used U.S.-Canada negotiations as their template for the 1977 classic Power and Interdependence, which argued that in complex economic relationships, the smaller power still holds many cards.

For Canada, the list includes exports that are critical to the U.S. economy such as oil, potash, and electricity, the dependence of many northern states on selling their goods to Canada—which is the largest market for U.S. exports—and the deep cross-border ties that reach into companies, labor unions, and regulatory agencies.

Given such complex relationships, there are sharp limits to how far any U.S. administration can push Canada around. The 2017–18 negotiations that produced the United States-Canada-Mexico Agreement (or USMCA) demonstrated that clearly; despite playing a seemingly weak hand, Canada got almost everything it wanted from the deal. (That deal was made during the 1st Trump administration- The one he called the best deal)

Oh and last sentence..

“Canada stands alone in resisting U.S. demands. But so far, it seems to be standing tall.”

So, my fellow Canadians, what do you all think?