The EU does not share America's concerns that the European continent is on the verge of a large-scale war due to an upcoming Russian invasion of Ukraine, the EU's chief diplomat said on Tuesday.
Speaking during a trip to the US, the High Representative for Foreign Affairs, Josep Borrell, played down fears that a serious conflict is pending.
"I wouldn't say that we are on the eve of a fully fledged war, second [world] war style, because I don't believe Russia is going to invade Ukraine as Hitler invaded the Soviet Union in 1941," the EU diplomacy chief said. "I don't think we're facing an immediate fight, classical fight, with tanks and infantry and occupying cities and invading territory."Borrell also rejected US officials' claims that this is the most severe crisis in Europe since the end of WWII.
According to the Eurocrat, Moscow is amassing troops at NATO's Western frontier in an attempt to pressure the US-led military bloc into renegotiating the current security architecture in Europe, in particular noting Moscow's desire to put a stop to its eastward expansion.
Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that his country sees NATO's enlargement as a threat to its national security. In particular, Moscow's primary concern is the possibility of Ukraine and Georgia, its neighbors, joining the bloc. According to the Russian leader, NATO's expansion violates a pledge given to the Soviet Union at the end of the Cold War not to move "one inch eastward."
Last week, the White House revealed that it would no longer call a Russian invasion of Ukraine "imminent," following accusations from Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky that Western nations were exaggerating the threat posed by Moscow. The Kremlin has also accused Washington of scaremongering, with spokesperson Dmitry Peskov stating that the US is "hyping up hysteria" around Ukraine.
"If we are unable to transfer data between the countries and regions in which we operate, or if we are prevented from sharing data between our products and services, this could affect on our ability to provide our services, the way we provide those services or our ability to target ads โ.
Furthermore, the report states that Meta intends to obtain new agreements with the European Union by 2022. Otherwise, it will be forced to suspend the use of its products in Europe.What might seem like a simple confrontation between a private company and political institutions (a confrontation that will probably be resolved with yet another European capitulation in the face of overseas dictates), in reality, conceals something much more relevant on a geopolitical level.
In fact, it should be remembered that there were two main technologies through which the United States managed to make the world an "American economic colony": financial technology and information technology. The first, with the help of the second, promoted the globalization of the US dollar by building a financial empire of unprecedented magnitude. If the first allowed the hegemony of the dollar, the second was fundamental in terms of information management, propaganda and "construction of the enemy": for example, Islamic terrorism, "rogue states", Russian authoritarianism or Chinese, or more recently the virus.
Today, some continue to turn up their noses when it comes to the North American global empire. More than anything else, it is done with the ill-concealed desire to deny the evidence or with the specific political intent of diverting / directing the attention of public opinion to issues that are absolutely consubstantial with the system and not harmful to it at all. The sovereignty / globalism dichotomy, for example, moves within the system, not outside it. The same goes for the novax / provax controversy, largely fed by the same system to hide the most nefarious outcomes of the pandemic crisis: the enormous profit of western drug multinationals, the strengthening of the structures of surveillance capitalism (exploitation of data and citizens' private information for commercial and security reasons), the assault on global common goods hidden behind the measures to combat the crisis itself. In fact, the collaborationist governments of the West have opened the race of investment funds to those goods that are essential for life: water, sea, land (natural and archaeological parks), the space surrounding the earth and the so-called digital space.
It was not by chance that earlier reference was made to the "huge profit" that western drug multinationals have made from the pandemic crisis (despite the cloying rhetoric of the "global good vaccine" peddled by certain political institutions). This, in addition to highlighting that vaccine geopolitics has been used as an instrument of caesura between West and East, requires a brief reflection in the light of the fact that the Genesis Prize (the "Jewish Nobel") has been awarded to Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, and in light of the fact that some European states (Italy in the first place) have chosen (or more likely it was imposed on them) to follow the Israeli model of contrasting the Covid-19 epidemic. This award (the consideration of one million dollars which is usually given to charity to other Jewish foundations) is awarded each year to personalities who have distinguished themselves as an "exceptional expression of Jewish values โโand for the services rendered to the State of Israel. ".
The motivation behind Bourla's choice (a Sephardi Jew originally from Thessaloniki) seems to be the fact that he, contemptuous of bureaucracy, took on the risks (it is not clear exactly which ones, given the protection guaranteed by Western governments against any requests for damages) to produce a vaccine as quickly as possible. Without beating around the bush, the real credit would have been to have earned Pfizer over $ 30 billion in one year. This, however, requires another type of reasoning to which the North American imperialist model is based on finance and information technology.
And this reasoning can start from some considerations of Karl Marx taken from the paper On the Jewish question written in response to some theses of the Hegelian philosopher Bruno Bauer.
Marx writes: "What is the worldly god of the Jew? Money. The Jew has emancipated himself in a Jewish way not only in that he has appropriated the power of money, but also in that money has become a world power through him and without him, and the practical spirit of the Jew, the practical spirit of Christian peoples " .
The reflection of the Trier thinker unwittingly lends itself to geopolitics. The geopolitical crisis (military conflict or pandemic crisis), in fact, is often and willingly used to create a favorable situation for the currency: in this case, for the US dollar. Thus, another feature of North American global power is the fact that geopolitics has been subordinated (has become instrumental) to monetary policy. In order to profit from financial hegemony, the USA must control capital flows and to control capital flows, it must control the most important trade hubs on the planet: in geopolitical terms, "the Mediterranean of Eurasia" (the former Mare Nostrum and the South China Sea).
Now, to be more precise, the United States has been able to develop its world power both through classic colonial forms and through the system of financial, computer and information domination. The United States has its overseas territories: Guam, the US Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico and so on. Their military bases around the world are governed by US law. And the same crimes committed by the American military seem not to fall within the jurisdiction of the "host country / colony" (Cermis docet massacre). Furthermore, from their bases they project the political-economic influence on the vassal state. And military force paves the way for multinationals devoted to exploiting local resources.
Military interventionism beyond borders takes place in the name of "manifest destiny"; of a new covenant with God that allowed America, the embodiment of a typically modern form of messianism, to change the world in its own image and likeness. However, the foreign policy of this imperialist state, set up since the 1970s as a financial and IT techno-structure, is focused on the exclusive safeguarding of its own interests. The interests of allies / vassals are taken into consideration only if they coincide (among other things very rarely) with those of the imperialist center. Otherwise they are completely irrelevant. Indeed, the territory of the vassals themselves is used as a potential theater of war against any rivals (the US nuclear arsenal in Europe has precisely the role of preventing North American territory from becoming the target of nuclear retaliation).
Speaking of non-coincidental interests between the imperialist center and the vassals, one can mention the unilateral US withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran. The choice of the Trump presidency, in fact, came when Washington realized that the progressive removal of the sanctioning regime against Iran was favoring a mutually beneficial "dangerous Eurasian connection". The European Union, in fact, thanks to the US choice has lost quite a few commercial orders with Tehran (Italy alone has lost commercial orders for about 30 billion euros)