Save Breedlove

The Independent has offered quite a piece of reading: "Nato commander calls for return to service of U-2 spy plane to help conduct surveillance on a resurgent Russia".

Well, I am not going to discuss the evident fact of Russia being resurgent; I'm rather into another evident fact: this is an insufferable event for some of the big guys around there, and Philip Breedlove is not an exception.

The very idea of bringing back U-2 for surveillance over Russia sounds as kind of a mental diagnosis to a formerly brave US fighter pilot and presently NATO supreme allied commander, who is to step down this spring.

56 year ago, on May 1, 1960 a U-2 did a great service in breaking US-USSR relations; Gary Powers did not commit suicide... Surely, for the US military those were good old times and bright hopes; a great war seemed to be round the corner. Luckily, then, in the sixties, big guys succeeded to overcome all crises and kept the strategic peace till now (I am not talking about local wars; those bloodsheds did not threaten the very existence of life on Earth).

Now, in 2016, the Breedlove's idea is not only desperately outdated; it puts under question the very ability of the high-ranked military to perceive reality adequately.

Mogherini’s Tear and Milica Rakić

The following text wrote recently my Facebook friend Eva Merkuryeva (link below). I couldn't write it better, so my conribution is translation.


It was exactly 17 years ago that 14 NATO countries brought democracy and freedom to the country of this little girl. 78 days of democratization…

And when splinters of a democratic shell hit the house of this girl — Milica Rakić — none of European officials in Brussels cried.

Milica Rakić (1996—1999), one of the victims of the NATO aggression against Yugoslavia.

The democratic air force included 10 planes from Belgium; 42 airplanes from Italy (the homeland of crying Federica Mogherini) brought to Yugoslavia democratic bombs as well, and the total of 559 airplanes participating in the operation “Allied Force” used Italian air bases.

To celebrate freedom and democracy, the American and European “democratizers” decided to destroy the country of this child and to kill her personally.

Fighting back tears following the Brussels terrorist attacks, Europe's foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini abruptly walked out of a news conference in Jordan saying 'today is a difficult day'. Image source.

Therefore the tears of the EU High Representative for foreign affairs and a security policy are those of a crocodile. You should cry when Yugoslavia was bombed. Now, after those terroristic attacks in Brussels, Mogherini’s tears are tears for the security policy which does not exist in Europe any more. And the European officials do not see or rather pretend they do not see the direct cause-effect relationship between local wars and colour revolutions supported warmly by Europe, and the present lack of European security.

All those common people drawing hearts on asphalt of European squares are hostages of that “security policy”. Nobody guarantees them safety. The only thing guaranteed is crocodile tears.

Mogherini considers it is necessary to stop the war in Syria for security. However, she hasn’t spelled a word they shouldn’t even start “democratizing” Syria in 2011.

The terroristic attacks are a direct consequence of that “democratization”; interventions in life of other people; transformation of other countries into ruins and destruction of histories that differ.

If Yugoslavia existed today on the map, if peaceful cities of Syria shone with evening lights, the people who died in Brussels would safely reach their homes, offices, friends...

And three-year-old Milica Rakić, killed with a splinter of a NATO shell, would be twenty now.

Live twenty-year-old Milica would be a guarantee of European security policy.

But when Milica was three, Europe killed its security; and went on killing it in the following 17 years.


The original Russian text.

Will Europe Stop It? Or What?

Having read first coverages of the terroristic attack in Brussels (I love this city; I was thereto about 30 years ago, in 1985 and 1986. I undertsand the city has surely changed meanwhile, yet I do love the you know sweet remembrances of youth) in major media, I remembered an old piece from the Washington Post. It's rather small; I quote it in full.

Why Russia can't stop terrorists
Thursday, January 27, 2011; 8:04 PM
THE HORRIFIC suicide bombing at Moscow's Domodedovo Airport on Monday underlined a couple of sad conclusions about Russia's battle against terrorism. One is that the country's security services, unlike their counterparts in Europe and North America, have failed to develop the means to uncover terrorist networks, prevent attacks or protect public spaces such as airports and subway systems. No country's police can guarantee security. But in Russia over the past decade, as Vladimir Putin has cited the threat of terrorism in consolidating a domestic police state, Moscow alone has suffered eight major attacks, along with the destruction of two airplanes that took off from Domodedovo. Casualties have been heavy: At least 35 died and more than 200 were injured in the latest strike.
Second, Mr. Putin's autocratic form of rule and imperialist policy toward non-Russian nations has made it impossible for him to resolve - or even seriously address - the underlying problem that fuels most of the attacks. That is the restiveness of the mostly Muslim republics of the North Caucasus, including Chechnya, Ingushetia and Dagestan, which for the past two decades have been seeking more autonomy from Moscow. Russia's brutal response, including Mr. Putin's scorched-earth campaign in Chechnya, fueled the rise of Muslim extremist groups that have been growing steadily stronger despite nonstop counterterrorism operations. According to official Russian reports, the number of terrorist attacks in the Caucasus doubled in 2010 - though the bloodshed gets little attention when it occurs outside Moscow or other Russian cities.
Mr. Putin and President Dmitry Medvedev sometimes seem to recognize that sweeps by security forces will never stop the terrorists. Mr. Medvedev has blamed the "economic backwardness" of the Caucasus, and Mr. Putin has promoted a development plan under which the central government will invest $13 billion in the region over the next decade. That could do some good if the programs don't fall victim to Russia's endemic corruption. But the Kremlin leaders won't seriously address the issue of self-rule for the republics. Nor are they willing to take on the federal secret police and other security services, which are more skilled at protection rackets and the persecution of political dissidents than in detecting terrorist plots. It was telling that in the aftermath of the bombing, Mr. Medvedev blamed the management of the privately operated airport rather than federal officials responsible for counterterrorism.
What's particularly worrying about the regime's failures is that Russia is due to host the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi, on the edge of the Caucasus. The International Olympic Committee's unwise decision to accept Russia's bid means that athletes and governments around the world have to depend on the Putin-Medvedev regime to prevent terrorist disruption of the Games. Monday's attack was a reminder of how risky a bet that is.

It's an unsigned editorial piece; I take it for, say, an official position and viewpoint of the editorial office.


Having the recent events in Brussels on mind, I dare to put up some notes and questions, going backwards through the text above.