AMERICAN FREE PRESS – MICHAEL WALSH: With Ukraine on the verge of suing for peace, the question is, will the NATO Alliance step in to finish what Kyiv couldn’t?  

If you are confused by government statements and media reports, the plan is working.

What we in Europe see is a game of cat and mouse, Russia being the mouse and NATO being the cat’s paw.

The theory is that, influenced by the excessive self-confidence of the NATO allies, Moscow will end the current war on terms favorable to Washington and Brussels.

What we are witnessing is brinkmanship exceeding that of the Cuban Missile Crisis in October 1962.

Currently, the signals being sent to Moscow are that NATO is preparing to actively take over where Kyiv leaves off.

Note the timing, as it is important; as I was writing, the negotiating teams of Moscow and Kyiv were packing their bags for a second round of talks in Istanbul with the aim of resolving the Ukraine vs. Russia crisis by diplomatic means. Moscow holds all the winning cards.

Is the threat of an all-out war strategy a feint that is likely to confuse Moscow?  If so, I doubt it will work.

After all, Russia’s head of state has been twice awarded the Black Belt in martial arts. Putin has forgotten more about feints than NATO heads will ever learn.

Sadly, the aficionados running the Deep State, the Pentagon and Euro-NATO aren’t the sharpest tools in the box.

A zealous foot-in-the-door salesman, Donald Trump is adept at controlling a situation by linguistic gymnastics.

Playing good cop and bad cop, he intends to leave his Muscovite rivals shaking their heads in confusion.

Germany’s luckless Chancellor Friedrich Merz, an ardent globalist and dealer-banker, is equally Machiavellian.

In a single afternoon, we are given several versions of the vexed debate over the German supply of 500 km plus range Taurus KEPD 350 missiles capable of striking Moscow.

Chancellor Merz says he will do so and then later retracts his statement. His counterparts in the Ministry of ​Defense deny the commitment.

Simultaneously, an official statement was made that Germany will do so, but the missiles will be built in Ukraine. This is in the hope that the German state will be spared the ordeal of repercussions.

It would make no difference. Kyiv cannot input the data, which comes from American and Western European satellites. 

Following what would be a first strike, Moscow would be perfectly entitled to strike Germany, which is a NATO member.

Article 5 of the North Atlantic Treaty: “If one NATO member is attacked, all members will consider it an attack on the entire alliance and take necessary actions to assist.”

REALITY CHECK: European NATO would face formidable challenges in trying to cobble together a single regiment made up of the dumbest of the dumb.

Well, can you think of anyone stupid enough to give their lives on a miserable Gulag existence foisted on them by the EU talking heads?

Then, from the chancellery, we are informed that no decision has been reached. If you are confused, so is Moscow, as is the intention.

In a classic gambit of opening a second front, NATO claims to be strengthening the bloc’s presence in the Arctic and Northern Europe.

London is collaborating with Nordic and Baltic NATO member states in what Russia views as a dangerous militarization of the region.

The intention is to establish a permanent military presence in the Arctic due to their claimed ‘threat’ from Russia

While NATO has been actively ramping up its military capabilities in the region, London has made a point of strengthening individual partnerships with Norway and Iceland.

Russia has repeatedly insisted that NATO’s continuing militarization of the Arctic, Scandinavia and the minuscule Baltic States is unwarranted, and that Moscow will have to mirror its moves to maintain the balance.

Good, here we have the aforementioned second front. The question is, who will blink first?

Seize the moment: Britain’s Telegraph newspaper quoted Ed Arnold from the Royal United Services Institute, a London-based think tank.

“With the Russian military currently busy in Ukraine, NATO should seize the opportunity now to ensure supremacy in the Arctic.”

In April, NATO Secretary-General (and self-styled emperor) Mark Rutte revealed that member states were working together in the Arctic to “defend this part of NATO territory.”

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov told the French weekly Le Point that Russia was taking measures to address the build-up of NATO forces in Northern Europe.

Finland abandoned its longstanding policy of neutrality and became a NATO member in April 2023, citing security concerns over the Ukraine conflict. Sweden followed suit in 2024.

In late March, Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged that Moscow is “concerned by the fact that NATO countries as a whole are more frequently designating the far north as a bridgehead for possible conflicts.”

“I would like to emphasize that Russia has never threatened anyone in the Arctic,” the Russian president clarified. He stressed, however, that Moscow would “reliably protect” its interests in the region.

In my view, an increased NATO build-up is an opportune ploy to exploit ongoing peace talks to finally limit the loss of face and the catastrophic losses to both Ukraine and the West.

Recall: This is the NATO that walked away from their miserable failures in Afghanistan, Libya, Yugoslavia, Iraq, and elsewhere, catastrophic military blunders. FACT: Every refugee, asylum seeker and migrant in the UK and Europe is fleeing from the consequences of NATO wars.

The strategy’s bonus would be to stretch the assets of the Russian armed forces. However, that works both ways, as do sanctions. That strategy didn’t work out either.

There will be no hot war between the NATO alliance and the Russian Federation: we can relax. TELL US WHAT YOU THINK

Mike Walsh books

in English and German

https://derschelm.com/andere-buecher/buecher-von-michael-walsh