The Unz Review: An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPaul Craig Roberts Archive
War Is On the Horizon: Is It Too Late to Stop It?
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

One lesson from military history is that once mobilization for war begins, it takes on a momentum of its own and is uncontrollable.

This might be what is occuring unrecognized before our eyes.

In his September 28 speech at the 70th Anniversity of the United Nations, Russian President Vladimir Putin stated that Russia can no longer tolerate the state of affairs in the world. Two days later at the invitation of the Syrian government Russia began war against ISIS.

Russia was quickly successful in destroying ISIS arms depots and helping the Syrian army to roll back ISIS gains. Russia also destroyed thousands of oil tankers, the contents of which were financing ISIS by transporting stolen Syrian oil to Turkey where it is sold to the family of the current gangster who rules Turkey.

Washington was caught off guard by Russia’s desiveness. Fearful that the quick success of such decisive action by Russia would discourage Washington’s NATO vassals from continuing to support Washington’s war against Assad and Washington’s use of its puppet government in Kiev to pressure Russia, Washington arranged for Turkey to shoot down a Russian fighter-bomber despite the agreement between Russia and NATO that there would be no air-to-air encounters in Russia’s area of air operation in Syria.

Although denying all responsibiity, Washington used Russia’s low key response to the attack, for which Turkey did not apologize, to reassure Europe that Russia is a paper tiger. The Western presstitutes trumpeted: “Russia A Paper Tiger.”

The Russian government’s low key response to the provocation was used by Washington to reassure Europe that there is no risk in continuing to pressure Russia in the Middle East, Ukraine, Georgia, Montenegro, and elsewhere. Washington’s attack on Assad’s military is being used to reinforce the belief that is being inculcated in European governments that Russia’s responsible behavior to avoid war is a sign of fear and weakness.

It is unclear to what extent the Russian and Chinese governments understand that their independent policies, reaffirmed by the Russian and Chinese presidents On September 28, are regarded by Washington as “existential threats” to US hegemony.

The basis of US foreign policy is the commitment to prevent the rise of powers capable of constraining Washington’s unilateral action. The ability of Russia and China to do this makes them both a target.

Washington is not opposed to terrorism. Washington has been purposely creating terrorism for many years. Terrorism is a weapon that Washington intends to use to destabilize Russia and China by exporting it to the Muslim populations in Russia and China.

Washington is using Syria, as it used Ukraine, to demonstrate Russia’s impotence to Europe— and to China, as an impotent Russia is less attractive to China as an ally.

For Russia, responsible response to provocation has become a liability, because it encourages more provocation.

In other words, Washington and the gullibility of its European vassals have put humanity in a very dangerous situation, as the only choices left to Russia and China are to accept American vassalage or to prepare for war.


Putin must be respected for putting more value on human life than do Washington and its European vassals and avoiding military responses to provocations. However, Russia must do something to make the NATO countries aware that there are serious costs of their accommodation of Washington’s aggression against Russia. For example, the Russian government could decide that it makes no sense to sell energy to European countries that are in a de facto state of war against Russia. With winter upon us, the Russian government could announce that Russia does not sell energy to NATO member countries. Russia would lose the money, but that is cheaper than losing one’s sovereignty or a war.

To end the conflict in Ukraine, or to escalate it to a level beyond Europe’s willingness to participate, Russia could accept the requests of the breakaway provinces to be reunited with Russia. For Kiev to continue the conflict, Ukraine would have to attack Russia herself.

The Russian government has relied on responsible, non-provocative responses. Russia has taken the diplomatic approach, relying on European governments coming to their senses, realizing that their national interests diverge from Washington’s, and ceasing to enable Washington’s hegemonic policy. Russia’s policy has failed. To repeat, Russia’s low key, responsible responses have been used by Washington to paint Russia as a paper tiger that no one needs to fear.

We are left with the paradox that Russia’s determination to avoid war is leading directly to war.

Whether or not the Russian media, Russian people, and the entirety of the Russian government understand this, it must be obvious to the Russian military. All that Russian military leaders need to do is to look at the composition of the forces sent by NATO to “combat ISIS.” As George Abert notes, the American, French, and British aircraft that have been deployed are jet fighters whose purpose is air-to-air combat, not ground attack. The jet fighters are not deployed to attack ISIS on the ground, but to threaten the Russian fighter-bombers that are attacking ISIS ground targets.

There is no doubt that Washington is driving the world toward Armageddon, and Europe is the enabler. Washington’s bought-and-paid-for-puppets in Germany, France, and UK are either stupid, unconcerned, or powerless to escape from Washington’s grip. Unless Russia can wake up Europe, war is inevitable.

(Republished from by permission of author or representative)
• Category: Foreign Policy • Tags: ISIS, NATO, Russia, Syria 
Hide 12 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Rehmat says:

    I’m sure, Mr. Roberts know that Ukraine, Georgia and Montenegro don’t pose any “existential” threat to Israel – but Syria being part of “Axis of Resistance” (Iran-Syria-Hizbullah) does. The US and Russian foreign policy in the Middle East revolves around the guideline, “What’s good for Israel”. Assad happens to align himself with the anti-Israel “bad guy”, and Syrians are paying for mistake.

    The US, Canadian, Australian, French, Israeli and Turkish jets had been bombing civilian and army targets long before the Russian airstrikes.

    Putin and Obama are no friends of Muslims. Both are pursuing Russian and American hegemony over Muslim world in order to destroy any future resistance to their combined baby, the Zionist entity. As geopolitical players, both Putin and Obama don’t want peace in the region. The Muslim leaders who trust either of them – are collaborating with anti-Muslim Zionists.

    On November 1, 2015, Isi Liebler, in an Op-Ed at Likud newspaper, The Jerusalem Post admitted the truth. He called Putin a ‘closet Zionist’.

    • Disagree: Kiza, Stephen R. Diamond
  2. attonn says:

    To me it actually looks like Russia is constantly telegraphing its readiness for a nuclear war. Buzzing US and Europe with strategic bomber raids, displaying and using newest nuclear-capable cruise missiles, “leaking” 100-megaton doomsday weapons on live TV…these are “don’t mess with us” warnings for the West, loud and clear.

  3. Occasionally I try to get a friend or relative to read this:

    Very little interest in it and even less in what their rulers are doing.

    This link can personalize it for you:

    I live within five miles of three high probability nuke targets. Moving in 2016 is high on my list.

  4. Thirdeye says:

    Can’t agree with Roberts about how Putin is handling the Ukraine conflict. Ukraine has become a financial and security liability for western Europe. The recent local elections exposed the deep social faultlines within the Ukrainian state that diminish the authority of the Kiev government. As Ukraine’s economy worsens, especially with Russia’s largesse with energy resources coming to an end as a result of Kiev’s acquiescence with the blockade of Crimea, Kiev’s ability to keep a lid on its internal divisions will only worsen. Kiev cannot afford to renew its campaign in the Donbass, but the stasis is politically unacceptable to a big chunk of the coalition keeping the current regime in power. Another showdown is brewing, with the potential to completely destroy the authority of the Kiev government. Letting Ukraine stew in its own juices while getting the Donbas fully functional in economic and military terms is the low cost option for Russia. Russia’s objective is a neutral Ukrainian state and formally annexing the Donbas would not further that objective. I say “formally” because less formal integration of the Donbas with Russia is inevitable while Kiev maintains its no war, no peace stance.

    Poroshenko made a rather crass attempt to use the Paris climate change conference to drum up support for renewed war in the Donbas and it was very coldly received.

  5. Pontius says:

    I am reminded of a passage from Gwynne Dyer’s excellent, but probably somewhat dated now, series “War” back in the 1980’s where he stated that every war game run against the the Soviet Union on the NATO computer systems ended up in global thermonuclear war in less than one week. Every time.

  6. jjc says:

    PCR may be a bit too apocalyptic here. I hope so. The Russian move into Syria was preceded by Putin’s appearance at the UN, where the Syrian situation was presented in the context of international law. Putin’s intended audience was not the USA and its European vassals, it was the rest of the planet – where most of humanity resides. The warmongers can play their paper tiger games, but they do so with a harsh light shining on their activity, so their hypocrisy and mendacity is plain to see. Right now, the USA and its vassals are spending borrowed money on wasteful and useless activity, risking their own economic collapse and ensuing political upheavals.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
  7. Kiza says:

    Dear Dr Roberts, in an asylum, a lone sane person looks like the only crazy/mad person in the establishment. This is why Russia is interpreted as a Paper Tiger. This, of course, is also intended to try provoke the cool-headed Putin to do something irrational. Tough chance.

    The biggest mystery to me personally is the silence of the brainwashed Western masses, they could be roast meet soon but they still trust their leaders with their lives. I would have expected a preservation instinct to kick in.

    • Agree: Orville H. Larson
    • Replies: @Eustace Tilley (not)
  8. @Kiza

    Silence of brainwashed Western masses is no mystery. Main item on news today, 8/XII/2015: Name of Kim Kardashian– Kanye West child will be “Saint”. Oh, how much money is “Mockingjay2” making in theatres of America? More than “Spectre”? Global warming is fake; Why the hell is it so warm this winter? Etc.

  9. Someone needs a smile.

    • Replies: @Kiza
  10. Kiza says:

    This was really, really funny. The RT people are truly creative.

  11. bossel says:

    “We are left with the paradox that Russia’s determination to avoid war is leading directly to war.”
    Well, we’ll be waiting then. For quite some time, I suppose, since we’re also still waiting for PCR’s expected Ebola apocalypse & the following colonization of West Africa.

  12. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Option 1: If Russia can defeat all the various rebel groups including Isis before the US can build up an army in northern Iraq to invade Syria then it would be game over.

    Not sure how likely that is, plus rushing it may backfire, plus it might push the neocons into an air war to slow it down, so…

    Option 2: The weak point is the Kurds. The US can never agree to Kurdistan because of the Turkish alliance. If Russia can square Kurdistan with Syria and Iran then he can pull the plug on the whole thing.

Comments are closed.

Subscribe to All Paul Craig Roberts Comments via RSS