The absurdity of the meeting in Switzerland organised by the USA and the other aggressive nations intent on war with Russia, the fact that it was not a peace summit but a device to obtain support and justification for the aggression against Russia, raises a question in the minds of many.
Economic and Social Consequences
Reason demands that with the rolling defeat of the Americans, their allies and puppets in Kiev, they should seek peace on negotiated terms and relieve the burden of the war on themselves. The damage to their economies is severe; a result of their own sanctions or war embargo on Russia, the sabotage by the Americans of the North Stream gas pipeline disrupting energy supplies for German industry, the loss of markets, the expenditure of vast sums in monies and armaments which bring them ever closer to bankruptcy – a state the USA is actually in when its debt is compared to its income, the intention to steal Russian funds sitting in European and American banks and other assets, which has undermined world trust in those banks, the entire Western financial system, the dumping of US Treasury bonds, disrupted supplies of commodities, energy, transportation and money, all factors in the rise in prices in the West, reduction of services, and the rise of misery for the people.
Valuable resources that should be used for the betterment of their people, in all spheres of society, are squandered on armaments and munitions. They drain their own arsenals without result as quickly as they send hundreds of thousands to their deaths for reasons none of them understand because the war is not fought for them, but for others who hope to profit from the war. We are not talking about the war profiteers that exist in every war, the manufacturers of the arms and munitions. Yes, they make profits. But the economy of the aggressor nation as a whole does not profit but suffers a huge loss.
The claim is often made that it is the industrialists and financiers who provoke wars to increase their profits. This is a misunderstanding of the nature of war and only states the obvious that in the capitalist system, capitalists will make money out of any situation if they can. They don’t care how money is made, by hook or by crook; it’s all the same to them.
The Nature of War and Secret Treaties
But war is not just about the profits of the arms business. It is, as Clausewitz famously said, “politics by other means” so that the objective of war is not to make profits for a few companies, while ignoring the harm to the many other companies who suffer the consequences of the war; rather It is to force the attacked nation to do their will in most cases. But in the case of Russia, it is much more than that. It is to achieve the same objectives Hitler and his Nazis had, to destroy Russia as a nation of people, to break it into pieces, controlled by the attacking powers in order to have complete control of its vast resources, its markets. It’s people who will be made virtual slaves.
Therefore, the nations who have joined in this attack on Russia must be willing to suffer huge losses in the short term because they have been promised something to make it worthwhile if their victory is ever achieved. We have to assume that it is probable that these nations have entered into secret agreements with the USA and each other, or secret treaties, in which each is given control over certain regions of Russia, for those nations that intend to physically occupy Russia, or a share in the benefits flowing from the seizure of Russian resources and assets. In other words, there must be some understanding of who gets what out of this war.
Historical and Contemporary Context
Secrete treaties have existed for centuries, that is, secret to the enemy to be attacked and their own people. Frederick the Great famously discovered, at the beginning of the Seven Years War fought in the 1750s-60s, that various neighbouring countries, which claimed to be for peace, had in reality signed secret treaties with each other, agreeing to attack Prussia and divided it between them. Alerted by a sympathetic archivist in a state library to their existence, he sent officers to seize them, and later showed them to the world as proof that the wars that soon began were decided upon by them, not by him.
On June 21, Tass reported on the release of documents proving that Japan had a secret agreement with Germany that Japan would join in the attack on the USSR if Germany could seize Leningrad.
“Japan’s top brass considers the question of going to war with the USSR to be settled and are merely waiting for a convenient opportunity. The Germans are certain that Japan will go ahead after they occupy Leningrad. If the government [of Japan] backs away from the Axis (the countries of the military and economic alliance of Germany, Italy and Japan – TASS), the army will start an internal coup and even go as far as the assassination of the Emperor,” reads an agent’s message from Shanghai, received in Moscow in September 1941.
“Postwar testimonies by Japanese generals confirm this message. In particular, according to reports by the military counter-intelligence Smersh (Death to Spies) in 1941, in collusion with the German government Japan intensified preparations for war and for this purpose, the Japanese General Staff developed its own plan for an attack on the USSR, codenamed Kantokuen, which translates as Special Manoeuvres by the Kwantung Army.”
The agent in question may have been the famous Soviet Military Intelligence agent, Richard Sorge, a German journalist who sent the famous report to Stalin warning of the German invasion of the USSR, and later in 1941 reported that Japan would not attack the USSR in the next few months, which allowed Stalin to transfer forces from the east to the defence of Moscow and the Red Army achieved their decisive victory over fascist forces at the gates of Moscow that year. Sorge was arrested in Tokyo just after his reports were sent, and in 1944 was executed by the Japanese. But Tass does not disclose the agent’s name.
The point is that secret agreements are used and exist, and it is likely they exist between the NATO countries with regard to Russia. If that is the case, and I have no proof whatsoever that this is a fact, only reason which tells me that it must be the case, then we can expect for them to continue with the war and to intensify it. Surely, it is for these reasons that Russia is renewing and expanding its defensive alliances and carrying out its operations in Ukraine in a cautious, methodical but effective strategy. The Russian government is aware of what they face and as President Putin said in Vietnam,
“Apparently, they count on us to chicken out at some point. But at the same time, they say they want to achieve a strategic defeat against Russia on the battlefield. The question then is: why would we be afraid? Would it not be better to go all the way?”
The Burden of Leadership
President Putin wants peace. But his realistic offer to negotiate made in reply to the Swiss debacle was rejected out of hand by the war party in the West, and he is beset by war. Frederick the Great also desired peace, but was forced to fight wars of survival. I end this with a letter from Frederick to his close friend, the French philosopher and writer par excellence, Voltaire, dated July 2, 1759, not just for historical interest of the curious but because it expresses what President Putin, and all Russians must feel in the face of a war forced upon them. Voltaire had written to Frederick asking if he could arrange peace. Frederick replied,
“Asking me for peace: there is a bitter joke! It is to them, you must address yourself-but these people have their heads filled with ambitious projects: these peopk you there is any pleasure in leading this dog of a life? In seeing and causing the butchery of people you know nothing of; in losing daily those you do know and love; in seeing perpetually your reputation exposed to the caprices of chance; in passing year after year in disquietudes and apprehensions, in risking; without end, your life and your fortunes?”
“Think you there is any pleasure in leading this dog of a life? In seeing and causing the butchery of people you know nothing of; in losing daily those you do know and love; in seeing perpetually your reputation exposed to the caprices of chance; in passing year after year in disquietudes and apprehensions, in risking; without end, your life and your fortunes?”
“I know right well the value of tranquillity; the sweets of society, the charms of life; and I love to be happy, as much as anybody whatever. But much as I desire these blessings, I will not purchase them by baseness and infamies. Philosophy enjoins us to do our duty; faithfully to serve our Country, at the price of our blood, of our repose, and of every sacrifice that can be required of us. The illustrious Zadig went through a good many adventures which were not to his taste, Candide the like, and nevertheless took their misfortune in patience. What finer example to follow than that of those heroes?”
Christopher Black is an international criminal lawyer based in Toronto. He is known for a number of high-profile war crimes cases and recently published his novel Beneath the Clouds. He writes essays on international law, politics and world events, especially for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”
Source: New Eastern Outlook
Photo: A plenary session at the Swiss summit (AFP).