By Richard C. Cook This is a brief post in response to an article appearing in today’s VT Foreign Policy by my colleague Claudio Resta entitled: "Russian Roulette": the unspeakable objective of the US proxy war in Ukraine is clear: either to cause a regime change in Russia or to kill us all.
Richard, I followed the link to Haas' biography at Spookipedia and was somewhat surprised to find the following:
"In April 2023 former U.S. officials including Richard Haas, Charles Kupchan, Thomas Graham, and Mary Beth Long, among others, were reported to have conducted unofficial meetings with Russian diplomat Lavrov.[16] In an extensive article published by the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs, Haass and Kupchan detailed what they termed as a "a plan for getting from the battlefield to the negotiating table." These interactions were allegedly centered on adjusting U.S. policy with the intent of facilitating Russia's acquisition of Ukrainian territory, an action that is purportedly in violation of U.S. law. The engagement of former U.S. officials in informal dialogues with Russians has led to a schism among American diplomats, foreign policy academics, and national security experts. Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia under President Obama, voiced concern that conversations about potential resolutions without involvement of Ukrainian representatives, could undermine the stance of the Biden administration insisting that Ukraine’s future can't be decided in backrooms: “If you’re having Track Two negotiations about how to end the war, Ukrainians have to be there,” said McFaul."
Resta's article seems to indicate that Haas wants to prolong the Ukraine proxy war. How do we reconcile these seemingly contradictory positions - where on the one hand it looks like he wants to make concessions to Russia and end the war, but on the other to serve the wishes of Empire and bleed Russia further?
Good question, but these so-called diplomats often dance around with contradictory statements and positions looking for an advantage or a propaganda victory. Now they can say, we tried to make piece but those bad Russians (or whomever) didn't let us. Lavrov, being a genuine diplomat, is always ready to listen.
FWIW, I've read more than one article stating that, contrary to accepted belief, Russia and Putin are fully on board with the global agenda. The Russian central bank has pushed out a digital ID and CBDC and appears to be implementing the same kind of digital prison contemplated by the ultra-billionaires. It is becoming increasingly difficult to separate fact from fiction; perhaps that confusion is part of the plan. One thing is certain; weapons manufacturers all over the world are reaping a bloody fortune and will continue to do so as long as the conflict continues; perhaps that's part of the plan, too. Nothing generates profit like war; that's a lesson the ultra-billionaires learned centuries ago, and it holds true more than ever today.
Well said in this piece!
Richard, I followed the link to Haas' biography at Spookipedia and was somewhat surprised to find the following:
"In April 2023 former U.S. officials including Richard Haas, Charles Kupchan, Thomas Graham, and Mary Beth Long, among others, were reported to have conducted unofficial meetings with Russian diplomat Lavrov.[16] In an extensive article published by the Council on Foreign Relations' Foreign Affairs, Haass and Kupchan detailed what they termed as a "a plan for getting from the battlefield to the negotiating table." These interactions were allegedly centered on adjusting U.S. policy with the intent of facilitating Russia's acquisition of Ukrainian territory, an action that is purportedly in violation of U.S. law. The engagement of former U.S. officials in informal dialogues with Russians has led to a schism among American diplomats, foreign policy academics, and national security experts. Michael McFaul, former U.S. ambassador to Russia under President Obama, voiced concern that conversations about potential resolutions without involvement of Ukrainian representatives, could undermine the stance of the Biden administration insisting that Ukraine’s future can't be decided in backrooms: “If you’re having Track Two negotiations about how to end the war, Ukrainians have to be there,” said McFaul."
Resta's article seems to indicate that Haas wants to prolong the Ukraine proxy war. How do we reconcile these seemingly contradictory positions - where on the one hand it looks like he wants to make concessions to Russia and end the war, but on the other to serve the wishes of Empire and bleed Russia further?
Good question, but these so-called diplomats often dance around with contradictory statements and positions looking for an advantage or a propaganda victory. Now they can say, we tried to make piece but those bad Russians (or whomever) didn't let us. Lavrov, being a genuine diplomat, is always ready to listen.
FWIW, I've read more than one article stating that, contrary to accepted belief, Russia and Putin are fully on board with the global agenda. The Russian central bank has pushed out a digital ID and CBDC and appears to be implementing the same kind of digital prison contemplated by the ultra-billionaires. It is becoming increasingly difficult to separate fact from fiction; perhaps that confusion is part of the plan. One thing is certain; weapons manufacturers all over the world are reaping a bloody fortune and will continue to do so as long as the conflict continues; perhaps that's part of the plan, too. Nothing generates profit like war; that's a lesson the ultra-billionaires learned centuries ago, and it holds true more than ever today.
I would certainly welcome any authentic information about what is happening in Russia. I wonder if Dmitri Orlov has written about it.
I couldn't find anything written in 2024, but there are a couple good interviews here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h-Eqk8BCFzg