The post China has decided they’re going all in on Russia: KT McFarland first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The New York Times announced on January 23, citing sources in the American administration, that the President of the USA, Joseph Biden, is considering the deployment of American troops, fighter planes and warships in the Baltic states in Eastern Europe.

According to the paper, the American administration is considering sending “several thousand” American soldiers.

“It is this redeployment of troops and military strengthening that will be the cause of escalating tensions in the region. It is now clear who is interested in escalating the situation and who continues to destabilize it – the United States. For us, this is, of course, an alarming situation,” he said to the journalists.

As he emphasized, Russia will not leave these actions unanswered and will take adequate measures to respond to the growing threats.

It should be reminded that NATO allies put their army on standby today and sent additional ships and fighter planes to their bases in Eastern Europe.

Russia is not giving up on its demands for NATO
As confirmed by the spokeswoman of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Russia, Maria Zakharova, Moscow is not changing its demands that it has already made to the West.

“This is our position and that position remains unchanged,” she said, answering questions from journalists. As she stated, Moscow decided to publish the draft agreements submitted by the USA and NATO, because, as she stated, in the past, Russia encountered “fictional stories”, as well as “changes in positions, as well as other nuances”.

It should be reminded that Moscow asked for legally binding guarantees from NATO that the bloc would stop expanding to the east and would return to the 1979 borders.

Asked what that means for Bulgaria and Romania, which joined NATO after 1997, the ministry said Russia wants all foreign equipment and troops to withdraw from those countries, Reuters added.

“It is about the withdrawal of foreign troops, equipment and weapons, as well as other steps aimed at restoring the situation to the circumstances from 1997 in countries that were not NATO members at the time. That includes Bulgaria and Romania,” Lavrov said.

NATO rejected all those requests and sent new weapons and troops to Ukraine.

“Statements full of hysteria”
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said that the probability of the Ukrainian side starting a military conflict in eastern Ukraine is higher than ever, Reuters reports.

Peskov said that Ukraine has deployed a large number of troops near the borders of the region controlled by pro-Russian forces, which, as he stated, indicates that Kiev is preparing to attack them.

On the other hand, Ukraine has repeatedly denied these allegations. Peskov said that the information coming from the West was full of “hysteria” and “permeated with lies”.

Source: https://www.b92.net/eng/news/world.php?dd=24&mm=01&nav_id=112882&yyyy=2022

The post Russia announced – “We will fight back” first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Senior German officials were already scheduled to get together with Russian counterparts in January in a bid to ease geopolitical tensions amid rising alarm that the Kremlin is planning a further military incursion into Ukraine.

According to a report Monday by Germany’s Bild newspaper, foreign policy adviser Jens Plotner has been discussing with the Kremlin a meeting between the German leader and Putin for more than two weeks. The paper, which has a reputation of breaking domestic German political stories well ahead of media rivals, reported that Scholz is seeking “a new start” in relations with Moscow and wants to focus on energy politics and Ukraine.

US-Russia talks

Senior U.S. and Russian officials are to meet in Geneva for talks set for January 9 and 10 to discuss Russia’s military build-up on its border with Ukraine, where it has deployed around 100,000 troops, according to Western and Ukrainian intelligence officials.

Western leaders and officials have already rejected as nonstarters Russian demands, including a halt to further NATO enlargement and a rollback of any alliance military presence in the former Soviet satellite states of Central Europe.

The Geneva talks, which are to be led on the American side by senior State Department officials, are slated to be followed by Russia-NATO council talks and a meeting of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.

Western leaders have warned of severe consequences if the Kremlin decides to mount another attack on Ukraine in a repeat of 2014, when Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula and used armed proxies to seize a large part of the Donbas region in eastern Ukraine, bordering Russia.

U.S. President Joe Biden told reporters Friday that he advised Putin when they spoke by phone a day earlier that the upcoming talks could only work if the Russian leader “de-escalated, not escalated, the situation” going forward. Biden said he also sought to make plain to Russia’s leader in his second conversation in a month with Putin that U.S. and European allies are ready to punish Russia with tough economic sanctions.

“I made it clear to President Putin that if he makes any more moves into Ukraine, we will have severe sanctions,” Biden said. “We will increase our presence in Europe with NATO allies.”

Kremlin officials, though, have doubled down on warnings to the West about making a “colossal mistake” that could have enormous ramifications for an already fraught U.S.-Russian relationship.

Unease among some European nations

But despite the tough talk from Washington, there is unease among smaller European nations who fear bigger Western powers may try to cut a deal with Moscow without their buy-in.

Finnish President Sauli Niinistö is demanding that all European nations, formal Western alliance members or not, be included in the security negotiations between Russia, the United States and NATO.

Niinistö has reiterated his country’s right to join NATO if it wants, a flat rejection of the Russian demand that NATO admits no new members.

“Finland’s room to maneuver and freedom of choice also include the possibility of military alignment and of applying for NATO membership, should we ourselves so decide,” Niinistö said in a strong New Year’s address.

He said Russia’s ultimatums “are in conflict with the European security order,” and he wants a significant role for the European Union in any negotiations to help express the security needs and views of smaller nations.

“In this situation, Europe cannot just listen in,” Niinistö said. “The sovereignty of several member states, also Sweden and Finland, has been challenged from outside the union. This makes the EU an involved party. The EU must not settle merely with the role of a technical coordinator of sanctions.”

Germany’s concerns

Scholz’s New Year’s address to Germans was milder, and while warning of a punishing Western response to any further Russian aggression toward Ukraine, he emphasized the importance of “constructive dialogue” with Russia.

The German chancellor has come under pressure from allies and members of his coalition government, including Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock, leader of the country’s Green Party, to withhold any formal approval for Russian natural gas to be transported through the just-completed Nord Stream 2, an undersea pipeline linking Russia and Germany.

Central and eastern European countries criticized former Chancellor Angela Merkel for her support of the Nord Stream 2 project. They say the pipeline risks deepening European dependence on Russian gas. Last month, Poland’s prime minister publicly called on Scholz to oppose the startup of Nord Stream 2, warning that the pipeline could be used as a coercive economic weapon by Russia.

Aside from what tactics to employ, splits persist also among Western powers over assessments of Putin’s intentions. Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi has downplayed the risk of Russian military action, saying the Kremlin wants to explore diplomacy and is not preparing “for action.”

Some Italian officials say they fear talk of impending war could take on a life of its own, impacting and shaping the behavior of Russia and the United States. They also point to the draft security treaties Russia presented to the U.S. last week as indicating a willingness for further talks.

U.S. officials have been seeking to reassure Central European governments that their views will be fully taken into account. U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken spoke Monday with the Bucharest Nine group of eastern flank NATO allies, according to Ned Price, State Department spokesperson.

Price said in a statement: “The Secretary and Foreign Ministers discussed Russia’s destabilizing military buildup along Ukraine’s border; the need for a united, ready, and resolute NATO stance for the collective defense of Allies; and transatlantic cooperation on issues of shared concern. The Secretary stressed the U.S. commitment to continued close consultation and coordination with all of our Transatlantic Allies and partners as we work toward de-escalation through deterrence, defense, and dialogue.”

The call participants included the foreign ministers of Poland, Bulgaria and Hungary.

On Monday, former NATO secretary general Anders Fogh Rasmussen called on Western powers to reject Russian security demands, saying the proposals from Putin aren’t serious.

Rasmussen, who served as secretary general from 2009 to 2014 and is a former Danish prime minister, said the Russian president had openly told him that he wanted to dismantle the Western security alliance. Writing for the Politico.eu news site, he said agreeing to “negotiate down the barrel of a gun” would only help Putin.

“When I met Russian President Vladimir Putin for the first time as NATO secretary general, he opened our meeting by telling me he wanted to disband NATO. If NATO allies engage with Russia’s most recent proposals … they will be directly helping him move a step closer to achieving his goal,” he added.

Putin and Kremlin officials say they have no plan to invade Ukraine, but they have also warned they will take retaliatory steps, if their conditions aren’t met.

Source: https://www.voanews.com/a/smaller-european-nations-uneasy-as-germany-scholz-plans-to-meet-putin/6379981.html

The post Smaller European Nations Uneasy as Germany’s Scholz Plans to Meet Putin first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Vladimir Putin must be thrilled as he gears up for a week of high-stakes diplomacy between the Kremlin and Western powers. A series of conferences and summits is planned in Geneva, Brussels, Vienna and Brest, France that all aim to serve the same purpose: keeping the Russian president in a good mood and averting a feared Russian invasion of Ukraine.

The diplomatic flurry kicked off in December with two telephone conversations between the American and Russian presidents.

That was followed by a video conference of NATO foreign ministers on Friday, in which the “Western” position on Russia was hammered out.

United States President Joe Biden has promised to closely consult with the Europeans on this issue, and he has stuck to his word. On Monday, top US representatives are set to hold “strategic talks” with Russians delegates in Geneva.

NATO mulls way forward

On Wednesday, there will be a meeting in Brussels of the NATO-Russia Council, a consultation forum that hasn’t met in several years. At the same time, NATO’s military chiefs of staff will come together to consider troop reinforcements on the Black Sea or NATO’s eastern border.

On Thursday, talks will continue in the broader format of the Vienna-based Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, which includes the US as well as Russia, Ukraine and other former Soviet states.

The European Union, too, is determined not to be left out. EU defense and foreign ministers will meet in the French town of Brest on Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. As with all the other planned conferences, the main topic on the agenda will be Russian demands for security guarantees and possible reactions to an escalation by Putin in Ukraine.

EU sidelined on European security

The main takeaway is that the Russian president has managed to get the “West” scrambling, laying bare differing viewpoints in the opposing camp. When it comes to the relationship with Russia, there are clear differences within NATO and the EU, depending on the interests of the member states.

The EU’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, has even complained that the bloc has been left out — he said he wasn’t even asked — when it came to security in Europe and in Ukraine.

To date, the Europeans have not managed to agree on exactly which tough sanctions they want to use to threaten Russia. The only thing the EU has decided is that Moscow should have a high price to pay if it escalates its aggression against Ukraine.

Compromise for the Kremlin

The EU is understandably reluctant to target the sector that would really hurt Russia, namely energy supplies. Without oil and gas from Russia, several countries in Europe, including Germany, would be in serious trouble.

Putin will probably not have to reckon with any serious resolutions being taken during this intense week of diplomacy. It’s likely that we’ll simply see the same warnings that have been issued since 2014, when Russia first deployed its troops on Ukraine’s eastern border.

Neither the US nor other NATO states will be deploying their own military to assist Ukraine. And it remains out of the question that NATO will respond favorably to Moscow’s demand that NATO categorically deny membership to Ukraine and Georgia.

Western powers will not accept Russian blackmail, and Putin knows that very well. However, Biden has already assured the Kremlin that the accession of Georgia and Ukraine to NATO is not on the agenda for the foreseeable future. After all, this state of limbo has existed since the 2008 NATO summit in Bucharest.

Keeping the dialogue going
euvering, relying on diplomacy in a bid not to provoke military action by Russia. And Putin will keep the West on its toes with his deliberate provocations.

Putin will keep the conflicts in and around Belarus, Ukraine, Georgia, Moldova and Armenia simmering in order to prevent these countries from moving closer to the West. For him, the West, which couldn’t even organize its own withdrawal from Afghanistan in August, seems militarily indecisive in the extreme.

For now, Putin won’t expand the war against Ukraine, which he started back in 2014 with the annexation of Crimea. After all, the unpredictable Russian president has basically achieved what he wants.

The US, NATO and the EU will want to keep talking, counting on the fact that Putin cannot afford a full-blown war on the domestic front and at a time when he is busy consolidating his influence in Kazakhstan.

This upcoming week of intense diplomacy is unlikely to be the last. And that is hugely valuable in itself: People who talk to each other usually don’t shoot at each other.

This opinion piece was originally written in German.

Source: https://www.dw.com/en/opinion-putin-gets-his-way-as-west-scrambles/a-60368080

The post Opinion: Putin gets his way as West scrambles first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

President Joe Biden said that the US and its allies would “respond decisively” if Russia further invaded Ukraine, in a phone call with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky.

“President Biden made clear that the United States and its allies and partners will respond decisively if Russia further invades Ukraine,” said a White House statement about the call on Sunday.

Mr Biden also reaffirmed Washington’s commitment to Ukraine’s “sovereignty and territorial integrity” and to the principle of “nothing about you without you,” the statement said.

The US president also expressed support for measures to de-escalate tensions in the Ukrainian separatist region of Donbas and “active diplomacy to advance the implementation of the Minsk Agreements” in support of the so-called Normandy format, a series of Franco-German mediated talks aimed at achieving peace in the eastern Ukraine region.

On Thursday, Mr Biden spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin over the phone for almost an hour, addressing the Ukraine conflict among other key topics.

The call came ahead of talks in Geneva on 9 and 10 January, during which diplomats from both countries will meet to discuss the stand-off. Russia and NATO are planning hold separate talks two days later, on 12 January.

For weeks, the West has been concerned about reports that Russia has massed tens of thousands of soldiers in areas not far from Ukraine, triggering fears of a Russian invasion.

Russia rejects the charge, and in turn accuses Ukraine of having moved more soldiers to the eastern areas held by pro-Russian separatist.

The developments recall the events of 2014, when Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and began its ongoing support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Source: https://www.sbs.com.au/news/joe-biden-says-us-will-respond-decisively-if-russia-further-invades-ukraine/c4710478-c03d-4b0e-80b1-21ad829d6109

The post Joe Biden says US will ‘respond decisively’ if Russia further invades Ukraine first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Look how different the world appears after Donald Trump left office. Biden ordered a precipitous withdrawal from Afghanistan and all the administration could do is brag about what an efficient job it did in moving so many troops out so quickly, despite the 13 U.S. service members killed in the last days and the translators and Americans left behind.

China for the first time is building a naval base in the Atlantic Ocean, off the African coast. Beijing is also ratcheting up military flights over Taiwan and again threatening to invade the democratic island nation. Biden’s response is to announce that he will not send government officials to the 2022 Beijing Olympics. That isn’t likely to put fear into the heart of President Xi Jinping.

Iran appears to be proceeding with its program to build nuclear weapons. Why shouldn’t it, given the belief by the religious regime that Allah wants them to have one in pursuit of the destruction of Israel and eventually the “great Satan,” which would be America.

As a Wall Street Journal editorial accurately put it: “The Biden administration’s problem is that it came into office believing that the main threat to world stability was Donald Trump.” The editorial adds: “China is buying Iranian oil in violation of U.S. sanctions, but the U.S. is also doing little about that. (A) Biden official said that was best handled ‘diplomatically’ and that the President had taken it up directly with Chinese President Xi Jinping. Mr. Biden weakened Mr. Trump’s maximum pressure campaign against Iran’s nuclear program and has put nothing but diplomatic entreaties in its place.”

Rogue regimes only engage in “diplomacy” if they think they can pick the pocket of their adversary.

The West too often believes everyone wants to be like us. If that were true, wouldn’t they already be more like us?

Evil must be opposed, or it grows in nations, as well as in individuals. The crime wave in America is partly the result of soft-on-crime judges, prosecutors, district attorneys and calls to defund the police. Criminals naturally see this weakness as an opportunity to loot and kill, fearing few, if any, consequences.

Rogue regimes only engage in “diplomacy” if they think they can pick the pocket of their adversary.

The West too often believes everyone wants to be like us. If that were true, wouldn’t they already be more like us?

Evil must be opposed, or it grows in nations, as well as in individuals. The crime wave in America is partly the result of soft-on-crime judges, prosecutors, district attorneys and calls to defund the police. Criminals naturally see this weakness as an opportunity to loot and kill, fearing few, if any, consequences.

Source: https://townhall.com/columnists/calthomas/2021/12/09/putin-knows-biden-is-weak-n2600371

The post Putin Knows Biden Is Weak first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Here’s What You Need to Remember: However, given that Russia and the U.S operate lower-yield tactical weapons, some have raised the question as to whether these kinds of weapons could “lower the threshold” to nuclear war and leave potential adversaries to think some kind of nuclear weapons might be a realistic option?

A newly released Navy war strategy does not rule out the possibility that Russia may envision some kind of scenario wherein they could use nuclear weapons in some kind of limited fashion to achieve a combat effect while precluding retaliation.

“In conflict, Russia may threaten cyber or kinetic strikes against Washington or European capitals, or attack undersea communications cables, causing severe impact to the global economy. It may also gamble that use of nuclear weapons might avert defeat in combat or preclude retaliation,” the Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine Corps strategy, “Advantage at Sea: Prevailing With Integrated All Domain Naval Power,” states.

Upon what kind of strategic basis might Russia think it could “preclude retaliation,” something which would undermine, overturn or just simply contradict the basic premises of the U.S. Strategic Nuclear Deterrence concept intended to prevent first use. The thinking might be that some kind of initial targeted, yet crippling first strike tactical nuclear attack could enable rapid take over a disputed area, all while raising the risk level so high that the U.S. simply might choose not to respond to avoid global catastrophe. If something close to this represents any kind of Russian thinking on the question, it would be an extremely risky approach to take. After all, the entire premise of U.S. nuclear deterrence strategy is to ensure complete destruction with retaliatory strikes should any kind of a first-use of nuclear weapons happen. Nuclear-armed ballistic missile submarines, bombers on patrol in the region, fighter jets, or carrier strike groups operating within striking distance would all be key elements of any U.S. strategic interest in preventing any kind of first strike to happen.

However, given that Russia and the U.S operate lower-yield tactical weapons, some have raised the question as to whether these kinds of weapons could “lower the threshold” to nuclear war and leave potential adversaries to think some kind of nuclear weapons might be a realistic option? This is why many advocates for a strong deterrence posture are clear to suggest that a clear message be sent that any use of nuclear weapons, on any scale, will ensure a significant and highly lethal counterattack.

Instead of lowering the threshold and making some kind of nuclear warfare exchange more possible, many prominent U.S. military leaders are clear that the Pentagon’s ongoing efforts to engineer and deploy low-yield tactical nuclear weapons can actually strengthen deterrence by ensuring an immediate response to any kind of Russian nuclear weapons use. Some of these new tactical, low-yield nuclear weapons are already here, such as the new Submarine Launched Ballistic Missile, an adapted variant of the Trident II D5 missile, the nuclear-armed, air-launched cruise missile called the Long-Range Stand-Off weapon, and various kinds of air-dropped nuclear bombs.

The entire idea is based upon a contradiction or paradox … deploy massively destructive weapons for the specific purpose of never using them.

Kris Osborn is the defense editor for the National Interest. Osborn previously served at the Pentagon as a Highly Qualified Expert with the Office of the Assistant Secretary of the Army—Acquisition, Logistics & Technology. Osborn has also worked as an anchor and on-air military specialist at national TV networks. He has appeared as a guest military expert on Fox News, MSNBC, The Military Channel, and The History Channel. He also has a Master’s Degree in Comparative Literature from Columbia University.

Source: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/why-russian-nuclear-threats-worry-us-navy-197370

The post Why Russian Nuclear Threats Worry the U.S. Navy first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The visit is a sign of the US’s increasing focus on the region, where NATO forces are spending more time.

The increased military activity reflects the sea’s strategic value amid tensions between NATO and Russia.

On November 12, the flagship of the US Navy’s Sixth Fleet, USS Mount Whitney, and Arleigh Burke-class destroyer USS Porter arrived at the Black Sea port of Constanta in Romania after visiting Batumi, Georgia.

The US warships were operating with NATO allies and partners in the Black Sea, according to the US European Command, and their deployment followed soon after US Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin visited the region.

Russia was incensed by that activity.

In a meeting with Russian military leadership, President Vladimir Putin seemed to threaten the US warships, saying Russian forces “can catch a glimpse” of USS Mount Whitney “through binoculars or through the crosshairs of matching defense systems.”

Putin’s comments come amid heightened tensions between Russia and NATO. Seven years after Russia’s seizure of Crimea and with tensions simmering elsewhere in Eastern Europe, the Black Sea remains a hotspot — and it may heat up.

The Black Sea is in a strategic location, connecting the Caucasus with Europe along Russia’s southwestern flank. It contains some of Russia’s only warm-water ports and provides Russia access to the Mediterranean and the waters beyond.

The sea features prominently in Russian defense and security architecture because supremacy there is seen as vital for Russian security and for supporting power projection far from Russian shores. It also allows Moscow to challenge NATO.

The region “is the locus of the Kremlin’s tests against alliance credibility and resolve, which have escalated over the last two decades in the conventional and nonconventional domain,” Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis, a think-tank, said in October at a Senate hearing.

Those tests include close encounters with NATO forces at sea and in the air as well as attacks on Ukraine and Georgia, which are NATO partners seeking full membership.

NATO has stepped up its presence in the Black Sea — as shown by Austin’s visit and the Sixth Fleet’s exercises — but limitations of geography and international law mean countering Russia there is not a straightforward effort.

After the Soviet collapse, Russia’s Black Sea Fleet fell into obsolescence.

With Russia’s 2008 military reforms and its 2011-2020 State Armament Program, the Black Sea Fleet became a lighter, more agile force able to operate in near-shore areas and surrounding waters.

The fleet’s main elements are three Admiral Grigorovich-class guided-missile frigates built after the 2014 Crimean crisis, two Krivak-class guided-missile frigates, and its flagship, Slava-class guided-missile cruiser Moskva. It also includes six new Improved Kilo-class diesel-electric attack submarines and an older Kilo-class sub.

Those ships are supported by a host of smaller and auxiliary vessels, including six guided-missile corvettes and five missile boats, underlining the fleet’s littoral capabilities.

The fleet is complemented by the newly formed 22nd Army Corps, one air-defense and two aviation divisions based in Crimea, and one air-defense division based in Rostov-on-Don.

Moscow is also enhancing its anti-access/area-denial capabilities in the Black Sea, particularly around Crimea, to protect its warships and hold off rival forces. Adding to the fleet’s ability to strike at distance are 108 Kalibr sea-launched cruise missiles, which have a maximum range of approximately 1,200 miles.

NATO’s Black Sea members and partners are at a military disadvantage when compared to Russia.

Romania has a navy of three frigates, seven corvettes, a handful of auxiliary boats, and an old Kilo-class submarine. Bulgaria does not fare much better, with four frigates, three corvettes, and a few support ships, most of them minesweepers.

Turkey has a sizable and capable navy, but its warming relationship with Russia and its estrangement with NATO have raised doubts about its commitment to the alliance.

Ukraine is rebuilding its naval force after the loss of Crimea, and Georgia, the smallest Black Sea state, has only a coast guard.

In a clash with Russia, those countries would likely seek outside help, but there are limits on what outside countries can do.

The Montreux Convention of 1936 restricts what kind of ships and how many ships non-Black Sea countries can send into the sea. It also limits their stay to 21 days, and Turkey must be given advanced warning of any transit into or out of the sea.

Those limits benefit Russia and hinder what the US can do. Only three of the US Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers are allowed to be in the Black Sea at one time. But an Arleigh Burke is a powerful platform. Each can carry 56 Tomahawk missiles, which have roughly the same range as the Kalibr.

While two Arleigh Burkes could match the Black Sea Fleet’s Kalibr complement, Russia watches their movements closely.

Black Sea states, on their own and with NATO, are working to improve their ability to counter Russia, navigating the region’s geographic and political constraints to do so.

Romania already hosts a land-based Aegis ballistic-defense missile system, and it’s expanding other facilities to host more NATO troops. Bulgaria is working with the US to expand its military capabilities. Ukraine has taken a number of steps to modernize and expand its own military.

In the weeks since Austin’s visit, officials in the region and US lawmakers have urged the Biden administration to do more to support countries there, including additional weapons sales and troop deployments. Others have advocated developing a clearer strategy for the region as a deterrent.

USS Mount Whitney began sailing out of the Black Sea on November 15, and USS Porter followed it out on November 16. Such deployments often raise Russian ire, but the US shows no sign of backing off, saying its presence there demonstrates “continued commitment to collective defense of the European region and reinforces the strength of the NATO alliance.”

Constantine Atlamazoglou works on transatlantic and European security. He holds a master’s degree on security studies and European affairs from the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy.

Read the original article on Business Insider
https://www.businessinsider.com/us-navy-warships-in-black-sea-amid-nato-russia-tensions-2021-11

Source: https://uk.news.yahoo.com/us-warships-went-another-mission-232026661.html

The post US warships went on another mission to a European hotspot, and Putin says they’re in Russia’s ‘crosshairs’ first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

Russia and the United States on Thursday held the second round of their bilateral strategic stability dialogue in Geneva, some two months after their first such meeting in the Swiss city on July 28.

The dialogue was led by Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov and U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman.

In a joint statement issued after the meeting, the two sides said the discussions were “intensive and substantive.”

“The two delegations agreed to form two inter-agency expert working groups – the Working Group on Principles and Objectives for Future Arms Control and the Working Group on Capabilities and Actions with Strategic Effects,” the statement said.

It also said the delegations had agreed that the two working groups would commence their meetings, followed by a third plenary meeting.

In a joint statement issued following their Geneva summit on June 16, U.S. President Joe Biden and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin reaffirmed their commitment to arms control and risk reduction.

The two leaders also agreed that diplomats and military experts from both countries would meet for what was called a “strategic stability dialogue” to lay the groundwork for future arms control and risk reduction measures.

The post Russia, U.S. hold 2nd round of strategic stability talks first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.

The United States and Russia reached a last-minute compromise Friday to keep humanitarian aid flowing for another year from Turkey to millions of people in northwestern Syria.

In a unanimous vote, the U.N. Security Council approved a draft resolution extending the cross-border aid operation. In a rare twist, the U.S. and Russia came together to put forward the compromise resolution, supported by Ireland and Norway, which hold the file on Syria’s humanitarian situation in the council and have guided months of negotiations.

The resolution reauthorizes the use of the Bab al-Hawa crossing point for another six months. It had been due to expire Saturday. It will then automatically be renewed for six more months – until July 2022. The U.N. secretary-general also is instructed to report to the council on the aid operation in January.

FILE – The U.N. Security Council meets at United Nations headquarters in New York, Feb. 26, 2020.

“Thanks to this resolution, millions of Syrians can breathe a sigh of relief tonight, knowing that vital humanitarian aid will continue to flow into Idlib through the Bab al-Hawa border crossing after tomorrow,” U.S. Ambassador Linda Thomas-Greenfield told the council. “And parents can sleep tonight knowing that for the next 12 months their children will be fed. The humanitarian agreement we’ve reached here will literally save lives.”

More than 3.4 million people live in the area outside government control serviced by the 1,000 aid trucks that cross through Bab al-Hawa each month.

Western countries also had sought to reopen the al-Yarubiyah crossing from Iraq to Syria, which had been used to bring medical supplies to 1.4 million people in the northeast, but that was lost in negotiations.

“Of course, like every political agreement, we continue to believe we could have done more, that more should be done, and we will continue work to make sure that humanitarian needs in Syria remain in focus,” Ireland’s Ambassador Geraldine Byrne Nason told reporters after the vote.

FILE – People enter Iraq from Syria at a border checkpoint in the city of al-Yarubiyah, 600 kms northwest of Baghdad, March 16, 2004.

Al-Yarubiyah and two other crossing points have been closed over the past two years under pressure from Moscow, which would like to see the entire cross-border aid operation shut down and all supplies flow through Damascus across conflict frontlines. The United Nations and aid groups say crossline operations are plagued with problems and cannot meet the soaring demand.

Turning point? 

Syria’s decadelong war has deepened divisions among the Security Council’s five permanent powers. Russia and China have sought to protect the regime of Bashar al-Assad, while Britain, France, and the United States have tried to rally council action to hold the regime accountable for chemical weapons attacks on civilians, military sieges, and other atrocities.

Those divisions have spilled over into the humanitarian dossier, making it one of the council’s most contentious. The seven-year-old aid operation regularly faces nail-biting questions of whether the humanitarian lifeline will be severed by a veto. So, it was all the more surprising to see the U.S. and Russia come together Friday to hammer out a compromise minutes before the vote.

“It’s important that the United States and Russia were able to come together on a humanitarian initiative that serves the interests of the Syrian people,” Ambassador Thomas-Greenfield said. “And it’s an important moment for the U.N. and the Security Council – which today showed we can do more than just talk. We can work together to find solutions and deliver actions on the world’s most pressing challenges.”

FILE – A human chain is formed by workers from the civil society, humanitarian aid, and medical and rescue services in support of aid into Syria’s rebel-held province of Idlib through the Bab al-Hawa border crossing with Turkey, July 2, 2021.

Friday’s vote was the first time since 2016 that the council was able to unanimously reach a decision on extending the cross-border aid operation.

Russian Ambassador Vassily Nebenzia said he was grateful to his American colleagues, who he said: “worked in the spirit of the Geneva summit” between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden.

“Today, we are witnessing a historical moment,” Nebenzia said. “For the first time, Russia and the United States not only managed to find an agreement but to present a joint text supported by all our colleagues in the council. We expect that this kind of day would become a turning point, that not only Syria will win from this, but the whole Middle Eastern region and the world as a whole.”

The White House has said that Biden raised the issue of the cross-border aid operation with Putin when they met on June 16, and Biden told him he sees it as an important issue. The two leaders spoke Friday by telephone and the White House said they commended the joint work of their teams following the summit, which led to the unanimous renewal of the Syrian aid operation.

The U.N. secretary-general’s spokesman said Antonio Guterres welcomed the council’s extension but noted that “needs continue to outstrip the response,” and that with additional crossings and more funding, the United Nations could do more to assist the rising number of Syrians in need.

Source: https://www.voanews.com/middle-east/un-security-council-extends-cross-border-aid-syria-1-year

The post UN Security Council Extends Cross-border Aid to Syria for 1 Year first appeared on Garner Ted Armstrong Evangelistic Association.