Russia-Ukraine conflict: a dog's point of view


As is well known, NATO was born (pass the tongue twister) in 1949 as a mutual defense organization between Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, Norway, Netherlands, Portugal, UK and USA. Twelve countries to which, with a progressive enlargement towards the east, Greece and Turkey were added in 52; in '55 Germany; in '82 Spain; in 99 Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary; in 2004 Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia; Montenegro in 2017 and North Macedonia in 2020. Thirty nations to which, made 30 we make 31, it seems Ukraine will be added and, finally, Sweden and Finland (provided that these two countries still on the waiting list hand over to Erdogan the Kurdish dissidents to whom in the past it was granted political asylum).

It is understandable that this relentless pressure from NATO against the western borders of the USSR / Russia was not welcomed by either Putin or his predecessors; It is significant that even the Vatican has stigmatized the barking of the NATO "dog" ever closer to the Russian borders. It is also well known that in 1992 six countries of the Old Continent, including Italy, gave birth to the European Union, to which today 27 states adhere among which Ukraine does not figure, even here.

Unlike NATO, the European Union has, however, developed forms of collaboration and commercial agreements with Russia, first of all the supply of vital petroleum products for many European industries. At this point, considering that Ukraine is not a member of either of the two international organizations mentioned, it could be the same "dog" Born to ask: “Why am I barking at Russia today? After all, I did not bark in 1956, when Hungary was invaded, nor later when Turkey raged against the Kurdish people and not even in 2014, when 14.000 pro-Russian Ukrainians were eliminated by their compatriots led by a Nazi-inspired party . From a certain point of view ", continues the dog in his reflection, "Putin is reacting to the provocative approach of NATO bases to the Russian borders just as Kennedy reacted in 1962, when Khrushchev tried to install a missile base in Cuba. But if then I barked at those who pressed against the borders of the United States, because today I am barking at those in turn, is it under similar pressure from the United States? "

It is undeniable that at the base of the so-called denazification of the pro-Russian provinces of Ukraine there are economic interests that Moscow intends to defend, but it is equally true that even behind the NATO reaction, hegemonized by the United States, there are similar American interests in the fields of trade. , research and above all the armaments industry.

Sic stantibus rebus for the average Italian it is not easy to find valid reasons in support of the Draghi government's choices in supporting the barking of the NATO dog and the EU sanctions against Russia. To give the first of these choices the disturbing dimension of Italy's entry into the war was the decision to send weapons to a non-born country (by an Italy which, mind you, "Repudiates war as an instrument ..." blah blah blah), an act that is equivalent to a real attack on our Constitution.

A similar attack on the Italian economy was the signing of EU sanctions against Russia. Exhausted for years by a controversial management of the pandemic, an economic policy centered on welfare and the privatization of public assets and an irresponsible management of illegal immigration, with these sanctions Italy is preparing to complete its metamorphosis from a nation once among the top ten economic powers on the planet in a poese populated by heads of households obsessed with electricity-gas bills to be paid and by owners of small and medium-sized businesses resigned to closing shops. What makes the Italian choices even more incomprehensible is the not having foreseen the most paradoxical of the side effects of the sanctions with which one was under the illusion of bringing Russia to its knees, that is the collaboration of the sanctioned person in putting in place the sanctions! In other words: while the sanctioners planned to stop buying Russian gas within a year or so, the Russian sanctioned it ipso facto ahead of its time, causing the European economy to tremble.

In light of these developments and the turmoil of the international chancelleries, not least the provocative visit of Nancy Pelosi to Taiwan, a further disturbing question arises for the dog NATO: in the event of a China-Taiwan crisis, Italy will ask itself back "in tow" of the barking of the United States? It would be extremely serious to ignore that since 1950 the US barking has resulted in 33 conflicts that have caused 800.000 deaths and 33 million refugees worldwide. These carnage, including that perpetrated in 1999 on the doorstep of our house with the bombing of Belgrade, have not, however, had as much echo in the Italian and international press as the current fighting in Ukraine.

In Washington and Brussels they know very well that Putin and Xi Jinping will never accept a defeat at the hands of the US, and if Moscow and Beijing find themselves with water in their throats they would evaluate the nuclear option without hesitation. Nothing apocalyptic, according to some analysts: only a few tactical nuclear devices of similar power to those already tested by the United States in Hiroshima and Nagasaki; bombs capable of hitting a hypothetical European battlefield full of NATO targets, from the Ukrainian borders to Aviano and Sigonella. One cannot help but notice that the export of democracy to the world by the US is based on the dissemination on the planet of a hundred military bases manned by an army of soldiers.

From this picture it emerges unequivocally that the interests of Italy not only do not coincide but are in contrast with those of both NATO and the EU. While the first in fact risks dragging Italy into a war in defense of US interests and, above all, its powerful armaments industry, the second aims to put the interests of the large international financial groups and the various pharmaceutical giants ahead of the interests of the individual nation states, the holding of whose governments is decided in Brussels and Strasbourg through operations that affect the spred of the individual states.

In addition to the indifference shown by the EU towards immigration that weighs on Italy, it is unacceptable that in terms of health policy Brussels has managed to impose on Italy, thanks to centralized contracts managed personally by the European Commissioner herself, the purchase of 321.349.808 vaccine doses (183.374.253 for 2021 and 137.974.808 for 2022). The fact that it was Ursula Van der Leyen herself who led the negotiations with Pfizer CEO Albert Bourla, under which Heiko von der Layen would work, wife of Ursula, gives the measure of the tangle of interests that revolves around the community health policy. To complete the picture, the data released by General Tommaso Petroni, successor of General Figliuolo, contribute: 53,5 million doses "donated" by Italy (in the meaning of "dispersed") in Tunisia, Libya, Rwanda, Cambodia, Zambia. In addition, the expiration of 3.117.000 doses is looming by the current month of August. If we consider that less than half of the 321 million doses have been inoculated in Italy, it is easy to deduce the extent of the river of public money thrown to the wind!

What are the ways out to avoid or at least mitigate these bleak prospects for Italy? In the first place, there is a need to follow the example of the United Kingdom and to call oneself outside the EU; thereafter it is essential to distance ourselves from NATO and from the US interests that this organization intends to defend to the detriment of European, Italian and German ones in particular. But these political guidelines will not be able to take off at least as long as leading figures from the international financial and industrial world are delegated to the leadership of the government, who are also unknown to the citizen / voter. In explaining this point of view to a journalist of a national newspaper, on January 12 of last year I focused on the bewilderment of an eighty-year-old retired soldier (this is the writer) in discovering that he tried, after a life spent running towards or chasing danger, a sense of fear: fear for my homeland, for my children, for my grandchildren. The target of that letter of mine was actually Mario Draghi, as I specified in a postscript that I report in excerpt.

PS I confess that for some time I have had a fear: his name is Mario Draghi. I have the distinct feeling that Draghi wants to make Italy do the same as he has already done to Greece. Despite the paeans that rose in Brussels and Washington, Draghi has already shown extraordinary skills in laying the foundations of his project, starting with the speed with which he managed to pit the Italians against each other (divide et impera), a reality that I touch with my hand in front of the pharmacies, where three times a week I accompany an invalid family member forced to undergo a blackmail swab, under penalty of losing his job and salary ... I believe however that Draghi will be capable of much more, judging by the fact that he surrounded himself with figures inadequate for the role but certainly very loyal, by the skill with which he pulled both the world of information, generously financed, and a political class committed to safeguarding the citizenship income, guarantee of votes, on his side. Even the Catholic Church, always interested in illegal immigration, has supported the government (the Vatican state has even minted a 20 euro coin depicting a young man offering his arm to the experimental vaccine). As far as the judiciary is concerned, the repeated disappointments reserved for the expectations of citizens are to be recorded, while the world of schools and the trade unions have confirmed their devotion as well as the military world has confirmed that it is customary to obey by keeping silent and doing everything, even if under the ennobling dual-use formula. I admit it: Draghi scares me.

All that remains is to hope for a surge of pride by the Italian voters and a sharp swerve in national politics, because the future of Italy cannot be identified with the NATO bases or with the diktats of Brussels and Strasbourg. Even the military are now aware that the threat of Soviet T55s ready to break through the mythical threshold of Gorizia and reach Milan in 48 hours is a thing of the past.

Today the dangers for Italy are the economic disaster and the risk of a tactical nuclear device on our territory ... wherever it comes from. And if the so-called great powers intend to exchange some nuclear warheads, free to do so ... but at home, and not in Europe, much less in Italy.

Nicolò Manca

Photo: US Army