We in social networks


Events Calendar


Oil or cannons?

05.04.2018 10:04

The "Skripal case" continues to be unrevealed. Despite the fact that official London instantly assigned all the responsibility for poisoning to Russia, specialists from the nearby Salisbury chemical laboratory in Porton Down failed to establish the country of origin of the substance.

In turn, the authorities of some European countries in solidarity with London joined the anti-Russian information campaign without waiting for the investigation to be completed. In addition, the incident in Salisbury was the occasion for a diplomatic scandal with the subsequent expulsion of Russian diplomats from these countries.

At this time, under the clamor of anti-Russian hysteria, the Secretary General of the North Atlantic Alliance, Jens Stoltenberg, said that NATO should increase its defense potential and increase its readiness for active action because of the growing aggression and unpredictability of Russia. It is noted that NATO Secretary General expects from the leaders of the member states of the alliance to reconsider their previous decisions already at the next summit, taking into account the possible growth of Russia's nuclear potential.

According to NATO's existing norms, alliance members should spend at least 2% of their budget on military expenditures. However, the US still spends the most for defense: in 2017, Washington spent 3.57% of GDP on these purposes, while the European NATO countries as a whole - only 1.45%. Thus, increasing the defense budgets of the countries of the North Atlantic Alliance will mean enormous additional costs, and for the justification of which a "big enemy" is needed.

This "enemy" for the West has once again become Russia. The poisoning in Britain of the double agent Sergeу Skripal and his daughter is a planned provocation, designed to further aggravate relations with Moscow. However, provided that the desired result of military spending is achieved in 2%, the total amount will be about 400 billion dollars (excluding the US and Canada), which is almost ten times larger than Russia's military budget. A logical question arises: who is the aggressor in this case?