Kaping Ryanair toestel zorgt voor hypocriete hysterie: waar was de verontwaardiging toen het toestel van de Boliviaanse president werd gedwongen te landen in West-Europa

Ongelofelijk, de hysterie die is ontstaan na de door een Wit-Russische (Belarussische) straaljager afgedwongen landing van een Ryanair toestel. Uiteraard is e.e.a. te gek voor woorden en een schending van meerdere verdragen, echter men 'vergeet' voor het gemak even dat iets dergelijks eerder gebeurde....... In 2013 werd het toestel, waarmee de Boliviaanse president Morales werd vervoerd van Moskou naar zijn land, gedwongen te landen daar men het vermoeden had dat Edward Snowden, een man die volkomen terecht de klok luidde over het agressieve buitenlandbeleid dat de VS voerde..... (en nog steeds voert, een beleid dat zich kenemrkt door grootschalige terreur)

Let wel: het ging hier om toestel waarin zich een democratisch gekozen president bevond en het vermoeden dat klokkenluider Snowden aan boord was, volkomen onterecht zoals we al lang weten...... Eén ding is zeker: als Snowden aan boord was geweest had men hem op zeker gearresteerd en uitgeleverd aan de VS........ Men zegt wel dat Roman Protasevich, de persoon waar het om draait is gemarteld, maar de VS doet niet anders dan mensen martelen in geheime CIA gevangenissen over de wereld en op Guantanamo Bay, op zeker dat men dit ook met Snowden had gedaan........

Ronduit komisch te zien hoe de westerse media (en politiek) de zaak steeds verder hebben opgeblazen nadat duidelijk werd dat blogger Roman Protasevich en zijn vriendin, die zich aan boord bevonden van het Ryanair toestel en eruit werden gehaald toen het toestel in Minsk (Wit-Rusland) werd gecontroleerd op een bom, de smoes waarmee men het toestel tot landen dwong. Eerst werd inderdaad gesteld dat hij -blogger was, een paar uur later was hij -journalist, daarna -oppositie-journalist (ha! ha! ha!), vervolgens de -stem van de oppositie en tot slot is hij tot de belangrijkste -dissident van Wit-Rusland gebombardeerd....... Lullig dan ook te zien dat Glenn Greenwald, van wie het hieronder opgenomen artikel is, Protasevich al bijna even hoog ophemelt..... (hoe lullig de zaak ook is)

Luisterde na 12.00 u. naar een inbelprogramma op WDR 5, een zogenaamde deskundige maakte het helemaal bont, deze kwezel stelde dat Rusland en dan m.n. president Putin de grote kracht op de achtergrond was, ook stelde hij dat het waarschijnlijk is dat er leden van de Russische geheime dienst aan boord van het Ryanair toestel waren...... ha! ha! ha! ha! ha! Het viel me alles mee dat hij niet vertelde dat één of meer van Putins secretarissen (m/v) aan boord waren....... En daar ging het los in de uitzending van WDR 5: de ene inbeller na de andere eiste naast sancties tegen Wit-Rusland ook sancties tegen Rusland en bovendien werd bijna spugend toegevoegd dat het Nord Stream2 (NS2) project, een gaspijpleiding van Rusland via de Oostzee naar Duitsland, per direct moet worden gestopt.... (terwijl heel veel huizen in Duitsland nog met olie worden warm gestookt.....)

Letterlijk één inbeller maakte zich boos om deze belachelijke stemmingmakerij en gaf aan welk land de grote agressor is op onze kleine planeet: de VS en dat men moest stoppen met deze meer dan belachelijke demonisering van Rusland, jammer dat hij niet het meer dan schandelijke voorbeeld noemde van de gedwongen landing die het toestel van Morales moest maken en niet stelde dat de grootste westelijke schande op dit gebied wel de isolatiefolter is die de gelauwerde onderzoeksjournalist Julian Assange nu al meer dan een jaar moet doormaken, vastgehouden op valse gronden en ronduit leugens van de VS overheid (uitentreuren herhaald door de 'collega's' van Assange in de reguliere westerse media) als zou hij mensen in gevaar hebben gebracht....... De kritische inbeller, die ook terecht opmerkte dat er in de gevangenissen in de VS behoorlijk wat dissidenten zitten, werd snel afgekapt in zijn verhaal en mocht in tegenstelling tot andere inbellers niets meer zeggen nadat de 'deskundige' zijn woorden tevergeefs probeerde te weerleggen......

Nogmaals wat een smerig stel hypocrieten, de wereld had op haar kop moeten staan toen het toestel van Morales moest landen en dat alleen op een vermoeden, waar men nu zelfs het gore lef heeft Rusland te beschuldigen van medeplichtigheid, maar nee dat vond men blijkbaar wel normaal....... Zelfs als Snowden aan boord was geweest had men het toestel niet tot landen mogen dwingen, alle westerse staten beleiden met de mond dat transparantie en openheid in het belang is van de democratie, behalve als het hen niet uitkomt, zie wat dat betreft ook de meer dan onbeschofte behandeling van klokkenluiders als Fred Spijkers (gevaarlijke landmijnen*) en Ad Bos (bouwfraude/corruptie schandaal)

Dit is 2021 ten voeten uit, alsof we gvd terug zijn in de 30er jaren van de vorige eeuw, oh nee dom van mij, toen probeerde iedereen Hitler en andere fascistische dictators zoals Franco te vriend te houden, terwijl men nu landen demoniseert die niets met bepaalde zaken te maken hebben en men in het westen vooral niets doet tegen de enorme balk in eigen ogen...... 

Hier het artikel van Glenn Greenwald:

As Anger Toward Belarus Mounts, Recall the 2013 Forced Landing of Bolivia's Plane to Find Snowden

What Belarus did, while illegal, is not unprecedented. The dangerous tactic was pioneered by the same U.S. and E.U. officials now righteously condemning it.

Glenn Greenwald

 

Bolivian President Evo Morales holds a press conference at the Vienna International Airport on July 3, 2013, angrily denying any wrongdoing on Wednesday after his plane was diverted to Vienna over suspicion fugitive US intelligence leaker Edward Snowden was on board. (Photo: Patrick Domingo/AFP via Getty Images)

U.S. and E.U. governments are expressing outrage today over the forced landing by Belarus of a passenger jet flying over its airspace on its way to Lithuania. The Ryanair commercial jet, which took off from Athens and was carrying 171 passengers, was just a few miles from the Lithuanian border when a Belarusian MiG-29 fighter jet ordered the plane to make a U-turn and land in Minsk, the nation's capital.

On board that Ryanair flight was a leading Belarusian opposition figure, 26-year-old Roman Protasevich, who, fearing arrest, had fled his country in 2019 to live in exile in neighboring Lithuania. The opposition figure had traveled to Athens to attend a conference on economics with Belarus’ primary opposition leader Svetlana Tikhanovskaya and was attempting to return home to Lithuania when the plane was forcibly diverted.

Protasevich, when he was teenager, became a dissident opposed to Belarus’ long-time authoritarian leader Aleksandr Lukashenko, and has only intensified his opposition in recent years. When Lukashenko last year was "re-elected” to his sixth term as president in a sham election, the largest and most sustained anti-Lukashenko protests in years erupted. Protasevich, even while in exile, was a leading oppositional voice, using an anti-Lukashenko channel on Telegram — one of the few remaining outlets dissidents have — to voice criticisms of the regime. For those activities, he was formally charged with various national security crimes, and then, last November, was placed on the official “terrorist list” by Belarus’ intelligence service (still called the "KGB” from its days as a Soviet republic).

Lukashenko's own press service said the fighter jet was deployed on orders of the leader himself, telling the Ryanair pilot that they believed there was a bomb or other threat to the plane on board. When the plane landed in Minsk, an hours-long search was conducted and found no bomb or any other instrument that could endanger the plane's safety, and the plane was then permitted to take off and land thirty minutes later at its intended destination in Lithuania. But two passengers were missing. Protasevich was quickly detained after the plane was forced to land in Minsk and is now in a Belarusian jail, where he faces a possible death sentence as a "terrorist” and/or a lengthy prison term for his alleged national security crimes. His girlfriend, traveling with him, was also detained despite facing no charges. Passengers on the flight say Protasevich began panicking when the pilot announced that the plane would land in Minsk, knowing that his fate was sealed and telling other passengers that he faces a death sentence.

Anger over this incident from American and European governments came swiftly and vehemently. “We strongly condemn the Lukashenko regime's brazen and shocking act to divert a commercial flight and arrest a journalist,” U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken posted on Twitter on Sunday night, adding that U.S. officials “demand an international investigation and are coordinating with our partners on next steps.”

Secretary Antony Blinken @SecBlinken

We strongly condemn the Lukashenka regime's brazen and shocking act to divert a commercial flight and arrest a journalist. We demand an international investigation and are coordinating with our partners on next steps. The United States stands with the people of Belarus.

May 23rd 2021

3,547 Retweets13,761 Likes

Because the E.U. includes as member states both the departing country of the flight (Greece) and its intended destination (Lithuania), and because Ryanair is based in another E.U. country (Ireland), its officials are expressing similar condemnations. EU Commission head Ursula von der Leyen denounced the forced landing as "outrageous and illegal behavior” and warned it “will have consequences". The leaders of Lithuania and Ireland demanded serious retaliation and sanctions. It is unclear what retaliatory options are available given the strong international sanctions regime already imposed on Lukashenko and his allies.

There is little doubt that the forced landing of this plane by Belarus, with the clear intention to arrest Protasevich, is illegal under numerous conventions and treaties governing air space. Any forced landing of a jet carries dangers, and safe international air travel would be impossible if countries could force planes flying with permission over their air space to land in order to seize passengers who might be on board. This act by Belarus merits all the condemnation it is receiving.

Yet news accounts in the West which are depicting this incident as some sort of unprecedented assault on legal conventions governing air travel and basic decency observed by law-abiding nations are whitewashing history. Attempts from U.S. officials such as Blinken and E.U. bureaucrats in Brussels to cast the Belarusians’ behavior as some sort of rogue deviation unthinkable for any law-respecting democracy are particularly galling and deceitful.

---

In 2013, the U.S. and key E.U. states pioneered the tactic just used by Lukashenko. They did so as part of a failed scheme to detain and arrest the NSA whistleblower Edward Snowden. That incident at the time caused global shock and outrage precisely because, eight years ago, it was truly an unprecedented assault on the values and conventions they are now invoking to condemn Belarus.

In July of that year, the democratically elected President of Bolivia, Evo Morales, had traveled to Russia for a routine international conference attended by countries which export natural gas. At the time of Morales’ trip, Edward Snowden was in the middle of a bizarre five-week ordeal where he was stranded in the international transit zone of Sheremetyevo Airport in Moscow, unable to board a flight to leave Russia or exit the airport to enter Russia.

On June 23, Hong Kong officials rejected a demand from the U.S. Government that they arrest Snowden and hand him over to the U.S. Hong Kong was the city Snowden chose to meet the two journalists he had selected (one of whom was me) because of what he regarded as the city's noble history of fighting against repression and for independence and free expression. When announcing their refusal to hand over Snowden, Hong Kong officials issued a remarkably defiant, even mocking statement explaining that Snowden had been permitted to leave Hong Kong “on his own accord.” That statement also accused the U.S. of having issued a legally improper and inaccurate extradition demand which they were duty-bound to reject, and then pointedly noted that the real crime requiring investigation was U.S. spying on the populations of the rest of the world.

Snowden thus left Hong Kong that day with the intent to fly to Moscow, then immediately board a flight to Cuba, and then proceed to his ultimate destination in a Latin American country — Bolivia or Ecuador — in order to seek asylum there. But even after then-President Barack Obama denied that the U.S. Government would be "wheeling and dealing” in order to get Snowden into U.S. custody — “I'm not going to be scrambling jets to get a 29-year-old hacker,” he dismissively claimed during a June press conference — the U.S. Government was, in reality, doing everything in its power to prevent Snowden from evading the clutches of the U.S. Government.

Led by then-Vice President Joe Biden, U.S. officials warned every country in both Europe and South America said to be considering shelter for Snowden of grave consequences should they offer asylum to the whistleblower. Threats to Havana caused the Cuban government to rescind its commitment of safe passage they had issued to Snowden's lawyer. Under Biden's pressure, Ecuador also reversed itself by proclaiming the safe passage document issued to Snowden was a mistake.

And on the day that Snowden had left Hong Kong, the U.S. State Department unilaterally cancelled his passport, which is why, upon landing in Moscow, he was barred from boarding his next international flight, destined for Havana. With the Russian government unable to allow him to board a flight due to his invalidated passport and with Snowden's asylum requests pending both with Russia and close to two dozen other states, he was forced to remain in the airport until August 1, when Moscow finally granted him temporary asylum. He has lived there ever since. This has always been a staggering irony of the Snowden story: the primary attack on him by U.S. officials to impugn his motives and patriotism is that he lives in Russia and thus likely cooperated with Russian authorities (a claim for which no evidence has ever been presented), when the reality is that Snowden would have left Russia eight years ago after a 30-minute stay in its airport had U.S. officials not used a series of maneuvers that barred him from leaving.

(Obama's claim to not care much about Snowden was issued at roughly the same time that the U.S. and U.K. governments were engaged in other extreme acts, including sending law enforcement agents into The Guardian's London newsroom to force them to physically destroy their computers used to store their copy of the Snowden archive, as well as detaining my husband, David Miranda, under a terrorism law at Heathrow Airport, with the advanced knowledge of the Obama administration).

While in Moscow, President Morales — on July 1, the day before he was scheduled to return to Bolivia — gave an interview to a local Russian outlet in which he said Bolivia would be open to the possibility of granting asylum to Snowden. The next day, Morales boarded Bolivia's presidential jet to fly back to La Paz as scheduled, with a flight plan that including flying over several E.U. member states — including Austria, France, Spain, Italy and Portugal, as well as Poland and the Czech Republic — with a stop to refuel in Spain's Canary Islands.

The Bolivian plane flew through Poland and the Czech Republic without incident. But flight records show that while flying over Austria toward France the plane suddenly took a sharp turn to the east, back to the Austrian capital of Vienna, where it made an unscheduled landing. Morales and his entourage were stranded there for twelve hours before re-boarding the plane and flying back to Bolivia.

Bolivian officials immediately announced that in mid-flight, they were told by France, Spain and Italy that their permission to fly over those countries’ air space had been rescinded. Without enough fuel to fly an alternative route, the Bolivian pilot was forced to make a U-turn and land in Vienna. Bolivian officials were told that the reason for the mid-air refusal of these E.U. countries to allow use of their airspace was because of assurances they were given by an unspecified foreign government that Snowden was on the plane with Morales, and that he was traveling because Bolivia had granted him asylum.

After Morales’ plane was forced to land at the Vienna airport, Austrian officials quickly announced that they had searched the plane and determined that Snowden was not on it. While Bolivia denied that they consented to any such search of the presidential plane, Bolivian officials angrily mocked the notion that Snowden would be secretly smuggled by Morales from Russia to Bolivia. The whole time this was happening, Snowden was in Moscow. Needless to say, had Snowden been on Morales’ plane that was forced to land in Vienna, Austrian officials would have instantly detained him and turned him over to the U.S., which had by then issued an international arrest warrant. The only reason Snowden did not suffer the same fate that day as the one Protasevich suffered on Sunday is because he happened not to be on the targeted plane that was forced to make an unscheduled landing in Vienna.

The international outrage toward the E.U. and U.S. over the forced downing of the Bolivian presidential plane poured forth just as swiftly and intensely as the outrage now coming from those states to Belarus. Bolivia's U.N. Ambassador called it an attempted "kidnapping” — exactly the term which the states he so accused are now using for Belarus. Brazil's then-President Dilma Rousseff expressed “outrage and condemnation." Then-Argentine President Cristina Kirchner described the downing of Morales’ plane as the “vestiges of a colonialism that we thought were long over,” adding that it “constitutes not only the humiliation of a sister nation but of all South America.” Even the U.S.-dominated Organization of American States expressed its “deep displeasure with the decision of the aviation authorities of several European countries that denied the use of airspace,” adding that "nothing justifies an act of such lack of respect for the highest authority of a country."

As the controversy exploded, the key E.U. states tried at first to falsely deny that they played any role in the incident, insisting that they had not closed their airspace to Bolivia's plane. France had quickly claimed that while it had originally denied use of its airspace to the Bolivian plane while in mid-air, then-President Francois Hollande reversed that decision after he learned Morales was on board. Eventually, though, the French fully admitted the truth: “France has apologised to Bolivia after Paris admitted barring the Bolivian president's plane from entering French air space because of rumors Edward Snowden was on board.”

Meanwhile, Spain also ended up apologizing to Bolivia. Its then-Foreign Minister cryptically admitted: "They told us they were sure... that he was on board.” Though the Spanish official refused to specify who the "they” was — as if there were any doubts — he acknowledged that the assurances they got that Snowden was on board Morales’ plane was the only reason they took the actions they did to force the plane of the Bolivian leader to land. “The reaction of all the European countries that took measures - whether right or wrong - was because of the information that had been passed on. I couldn't check if it was true or not at that moment because it was necessary to act straight away,” he said. While denying Spanish authorities had fully "closed” its airspace to Morales, they acknowledged what they called "delays” in approving mid-flight air space rights forced Morales to land in Austria and apologized for this having been handled “inappropriately” by Madrid.

====================================

* Deze zaak begon met de dood van een mijnenexpert in 1984, daarvoor waren al 6 diensplichtigen omgekomen door eenzelfde type mijn, terwijl Defensie al vanaf 1970 op de hoogte was dat deze mijnen van het type AP-23 niet deugden, mijnen van het niet meer bestaande bedrijf Eurometaal (leuke naam hè voor een wapenfabrikant, een maker van oorlogstuig??)..... Duidelijk ook dat hier sprake van grote corruptie moet zijn geweest waarbij hoge militairen fiks steekgeld moeten hebben verdiend over de rug van dode militairen, in feite gaat het dan ook om moord met voorbedachte rade, die men jaren onder het tapijt heeft weten te houden......

Zie ook de volgende zeer hypocriete zaak: 'EU sprak over sancties tegen Wit-Rusland, terwijl men Brazilië en Saoedi-Arabië laat begaan met het uitvoeren van genocides' (en het westen propt de reli-fascistische staat Saoedi-Arabië nog steeds vol met wapens, óók Nederland; moet je nagaan.....) (en zie de links in dat bericht, bijvoorbeeld het bericht dat verwijst naar een artikel over nog steeds bestaande slavernij in de VS!!) 

'Snowden vindt het ongelofelijk dat de media VS politici niet aanspreken op totaal verschillende reacties n.a.v. 'klokkenluiden''

'Klokkenluidershuis zoals verwacht één grote mislukking.........' (en zie de links in dat bericht!!)

VS en Oekraïne spelen een smerig spel in Wit-Rusland

The Saker heeft een analyse geschreven over de situatie in Wit-Rusland (Belarus) n.a.v. de verkiezingen in dat land.

Volgens de Saker is het duidelijk dat de CIA, de Oekraïense geheime dienst SBU en de Wit-Russische geheime dienst KGB de boel manipuleren in Wit-Rusland. “Honderden Russen' zouden naar Wit-Rusland zijn gestuurd om de boel de destabiliseren, informatie die van de Oekraïense SBU kwam, deze mannen werden afgeschilderd als terroristen, opstandelingen en leden van de Russische Wagner PMC (Private Military Company)...... (het gaat overigens niet om 'honderden Russen' maar om een dertigtal)

Achteraf blijkt het dat deze Russen (veiligheidsagenten) werden ingehuurd door een veiligheidsbedrijf in Wit-Rusland en zouden op doorreis zijn geweest naar landen als Soedan en Venezuela. Echter 'ze mistten de aansluitende vlucht' en waren daarom genoodzaakt te overnachten in Minsk. Diezelfde nacht overviel een zwaar bewapend 'KGB' team het hotel en werden deze mannen gearresteerd, terwijl de Russen niet eens in het bezit waren van wapens....

Daarop werd Rusland beschuldigd chaos en geweld te willen uitlokken in Wit-Rusland, een vergelijking met het Maidan plein In de Oekraïense hoofdstad Kiev, al werd de opstand in Oekraïne georganiseerd en geregisseerd door de CIA...... Hillary Clinton destijds minister van BuZa onder 'vredesduif' Obama trok daar zelfs 4 miljard dollar voor uit en ook het geweld tegen demonstranten door sluipschutters, kwam rechtstreeks uit de koker van de CIA...... (zo meer daarover)

De claim dat Rusland de boel zou willen destabiliseren in Wit-Rusland is meer dan belachelijk, daar Rusland wel uitkijkt om geweld aan te wenden in Wit-Rusland. De informatie waarop deze leugen is gebaseerd kwam zoals gezegd van de 'uiterst betrouwbare' Oekraïense SBU....... Bovendien zo voert de Saker aan weet de Wit-Russische KGB alles wat er gebeurd in Wit-Rusland en daarmee bedoelt hij letterlijk alles, ofwel de claim dat deze Russen onrust wilden zaaien (en het bewind van Loekasjenko omver zouden willen werpen) is grote nonsens, waar de kennis van de KGB over alles wat zich afspeelt in Wit-Rusland alleen maar het gegeven versterkt dat Rusland geen geweld zou gebruiken tegen het bewind in Minsk......

Lees het uitvoerige relaas van de Saker en verbaas je (zoals ik) over de machinaties van alweer het westen in Oost-Europa en die er volledig op is gericht om van Wit-Rusland een zoveelste vazalstaat van de VS (en de door haar militair geleide NAVO) te maken, zeker als je nagaat dat dit land strategisch is gelegen..... Mocht het de VS lukken om van Wit-Rusland een vazalstaat als te maken, zoals Oekraïne, heeft Rusland weer een deel van haar grens waar de VS en haar NAVO-lidstaten met een leger op de drempel van haar voordeur staan, zoals dit al het geval is met de Baltische Staten, een deel van Oekraïne en ga nog maar even door....... 

Ben het overigens niet eens met de Saker wat betreft de voormalige Oekraïense president Janoekovitsj. Deze president was wel democratisch verkozen en dat in door internationale waarnemers goedgekeurde verkiezingen..... En ja, Janoekovytsj had vooral veel aanhang in het oosten van Oekraïne en op De Krim (inclusief de oorspronkelijke bevolking van dat schiereiland). Waarschijnlijk doelt de Saker op het geweld dat werd gebruikt op het Maidanplein tegen demonstranten, terwijl dat zoals gezegd het resultaat was van VS manipulatie, zoals ook 'de opstand' daar werd georganiseerd door de CIA..... Het feit dat Janoekovytsj 'pro-Russisch' was had alles te maken met een voor Oekraïne heel lucratief vrijhandelsverdrag dat hij sloot met Rusland, terwijl een verdrag met de EU uiterst onvoordelig was voor Oekraïne......(iets waar je de westerse reguliere media en politici nooit over hoort!!)

Onder het artikel kan je klikken voor een 'Dutch vertaling' dit neemt wel enige tijd in beslag. Het artikel van de Saker werd eerder gepubliceerd op The Unz Review en werd door mij overgenomen van Information Clearing House:

Putin and Russia are facing a very serious crisis in Belarus

By The Saker

August 12, 2020 "Information Clearing House" -  Some of my longtime readers might have noticed that I rarely (if ever!) wrote about Belarus or President Lukashenko.  As always with the blog, there always is a reason for why I do mention something and no less a reason why I do not mention something.  In the case of Belarus or Lukashenko, my reason for not writing about them was the exact same why I never wrote about the Ukraine before 2013: I was both uninspired and mostly disgusted with what I saw taking place there.  And I did not feel strongly enough to write about it.  That changed for the Ukraine with the Euromaidan.

Now the events in Belarus force me to address this very unpleasant topic: Belarus is facing a complex and dangerous crisis which might well result in a major crisis inside Belarus and even a loss of sovereignty.  But first, before we look into what just happened, let me begin by a quick “mini-primer” about Belarus.  Here is what I think everybody ought to know about this country:

• Belarus is a completely artificial creation, even more artificial than the Ukraine.  At least in the Ukraine there were “westerners” (Galicians) who truly were not Russians at all (you can think of them as the “real Ukrainians” if you want) and whose hatred for everything Russian was every bit as rabid as the one of the Interahamwe of Rwanda.  There is no meaningful equivalent to the Banderites in Belarus.
• Lukashnko was no more pro-Russian than Ianukovich.  This is crucial. Lukashenko was always pro-Lukashenko, not pro-Russia. Both the West and Lukashenko like to say that Belarus is the only real Russian ally. This is false.  Technically, Russia and Belarus are supranational union states.  However, it is true that Lukashenko tried to use the historical identity between the Russian and Belarusian people to demand that Russia help him out over and over and over again.  And until recently, Russia did.
• As a country, Belarus is a quasi perfect police state with an extremely competent and feared KGB (yes, in Belarus they kept the name) which controls everything and everybody.  This is also crucial for reasons I will explain below.
• As for the Kremlin, it always wanted to foster a reunification with Belarus but this process was never fully completed due to regular problems, and even crises, between Moscow and Minsk.  Russia poured immense sums of money to keep the Belarusian society from crashing.
• Finally, Belarus is really a poor country with very limited resources.  For Russia, however, Belarus is a crucial military ally, one which plays a central role in Russian defense plans.  If the US and NATO will be successful in taking control of the country, this will be a major strategic threat for the Russian security.
  

These are just a few pointers to compare and contrast Belarus with the Ukraine.

Now let me summarize what just happened.

The Belarusian authorities have declared that “hundreds” of men (supposedly Russians) have been sent to Belarus with nefarious intentions.  Lukashenko has since officially confirmed that he got this info from the Ukrainian SBU. The men themselves were described as terrorists, insurgents, members of the “Wagner” PMC, subversives, etc. and their goals were described as killing Lukashenko, triggering a new “maidan” in Belarus, create chaos, etc.

Frankly, the Belarusian authorities never got their story straight and, frankly again, this really makes no difference at all.  Here are two things which I consider as indisputable:

1. Russia would never even consider using force or illegal covert operations against Lukashenko and/or Belarus
2. The Belarusian KGB knows everything of any importance taking place in Belarus
   

I would even argue that argument #2 very much supports argument #1.

Whatever may be the case, it appeared that a group of Russian security guards had been recruited by a Belarusian firm to provide security in various countries (Sudan and Venezuela is often named). They traveled to Belarus and planned to fly out of Minsk for their final destinations. They were delayed, apparently deliberately, then they missed their flight and were told to go and rest at a hotel which happened to be located not far from the residence of Lukashenko. In the middle of the night, a KGB swat team moved in with flash-bang grenades and guns drawn and brutally arrested everybody in spite of the fact that none of the sleepy Russians offered any kind of resistance. No weapons of any kind were found, no evidence of any covert plans either, but the authorities declared that since these men were not drinking or harassing waitresses and since they kept to themselves, this was a clear proof that they were on a secret mission (I am not joking!).

All of the above is absolute and utter nonsense and we should not get distracted by the minutia of this clearly fabricated pretext.

Here is what really happened.

It now appears that the Ukrainian secret service SBU (which does nothing without Uncle Sam’s approval) mounted a complex covert operation to try to get Belarus and Russia into a confrontation.  The entire operation, including recruitment, purchase of airline tickets, etc was, in fact, run from the Ukraine.  This was also the biggest mistake the Ukies did: they did not hide their actions well enough and it took the Russians special services less than 24 hours to figure out the entire plan and leak it to the media (in Russian). The fine details are still being ascertained, but the bottom line is this: the Ukrainians pretended to be a security firm looking for men with proven combat experience, especially those who fought in the Donbass against the Ukronazi forces. Once recruited for some pretty typical guard duties, these men were to be flown to Minsk where they would miss their plane and be left waiting for the next opportunity to leave Belarus.  At this point, the SBU seems to have contacted the Belarusian KGB and “warned” them about Russian “mercenaries” sent by Russia to kill Lukashenko or, at least, overthrow him.

It is also obvious now that the SBU specially wanted Russians which had combat experience in the Donbass to then ask Belarus to hand them over to Kiev.  Such a demand was made almost immediately for most of the men in this group.

So far so “good” (not really, but you know what I mean), but here is when the Belarusians and Lukashenko himself started to act really strangely.

The first logical step for the Belarusian authorities should have been Lukashenko calling Putin and asking for an explanation.  Alternatively, the head of the Belarusian KGB could have called the head of the FSB and ask him for clarifications.  But, instead of doing that, the Belarusian KGB organized this ridiculous “seizure” of the Russian “mercenaries” while the latter were asleep in their hotel and had no idea whatsoever what was going on.

Next, instead of working with the Russians, Lukashenko just gave a long interview to one of the most talented and most morally repugnant Ukie journalist, Dmitrii Gordon (who proudly proclaims that he is an SBU agent).

But then it only got worse.

Lukashenko pounced on the opportunity to, yet again, engage in his typically long-winded rants against Russia.  He even went as far as to suggest that Belarus might extradite some of these Russian men to the Ukraine (which, as we now know, had provided a list of wanted men to the Belarusian KGB).  From these actions it became immediately clear to the Russians that Lukashenko was playing some kind of dirty game in the last days before the Presidential election which took place on Sunday.

So what could explain the outright bizarre behavior of the Belarusians?

Reason one: Simply put – Lukashenko’s popularity is declining as fast as the disposable income of the Belarusians.

Reason two: The US is clearly engaged in major strategic PSYOP to seize control of Belarus.

Reason three: The Belarusian state in its current condition is simply not viable and never was.

Let’s take these one by one.

While nobody doubts the outcome of any election in Belarus, it is also pretty uncontroversial that most Belarusians do support Lukashenko.  The point is not whether Lukashenko would win, but only by how much he would win?  The elections yesterday yielded the lowest possible and acceptable result for Lukashenko: 80%. This figure is really meaningless, all it shows is how good the Lukashenko regime is at winning elections. This time, however, there appear to be more protests than in the past and, unlike what happened in the past, the protests are not limited to Minsk and they have now spread to other cities. So while Lukashenko was never at risk of officially losing the election, a maidan-like protest remains a clear concern for him.


Pompeo in Belarus: only a coincidence, of course

But there is much more to this story.

Following a meeting between Lukashenko and Pompeo, the US will now open a (very big) embassy in Minsk.  For years the West has been calling Lukashenko all sorts of names, and now it is suddenly “all smiles”.

Is that really a coincidence?

I very much doubt it.

But it even gets much worse than that: the US is sending one of its most capable and dangerous officials to subvert Belarus: I am referring to Jeffrey Giauque, a State Department intelligence official with a long track of successive destabilization missions.
Listen to him introduce himself to the Belarusian people:

In fact, it is now pretty obvious that the entire provocation with the Russian “terrorists” was carefully crafted and implemented by a joint US-Ukrainian.  Had the Ukie SBU not been so sloppy with how they organized it all (it took the FSB less than 24 hours to get a full and accurate picture of what had happened) this plan might have succeeded.  In fact, it still might.

But blaming it all on the US, the SBU and Lukashenko really does not tell the full story.

The truth is that Belarus is a completely artificial state, much more artificial even than the Ukraine, and it is a state which simply cannot survive by itself.  Neither can it hope to survive forever on Russian aid.  And while looking at the roots of Ukrainian nationalism is important and interesting, such an exercise is useless in the case of Belarus since Belarusian nationalism is something truly a-historical and artificial and which really has no foundation outside western ideological dogmas.

While the Soviet Union’s Marxist and generally russophobic ideology regime always fostered the emergence of local nationalisms (and even created previously non-existing “nationalities”), Belarusian nationalism was something which never got much traction, which is hardly surprising since any distinction between a Russian and a Belarusian is much smaller than the differences amongst Russians who now live in a very diverse and truly multi-ethnic society. Still, from the point of view of the Party Nomenklatura and their western curators, not splitting away Belarus from Russia while such countries as the Ukraine or Kazakhstan declared their independence was unthinkable, thus a kind of weird compromise was reached which was supposed to reassure both the people of Russia and those of Belarus. Some agreements were made, others were endlessly negotiated about (especially any energy deals!) and what eventually resulted from this all is this weird and artificial statelet of only 10 million people. As for its leader, he declared that Belarus will follow a “multi-vector” foreign policy which I would summarize as follows: pump as much money out of Russia as possible, while at the same time seeking support from the AngloZionist Empire.

[Sidebar: yes, I know, Lukashenko is called the “last dictator of Europe” and he is not popular in the West.  My point is that his lack of popularity is to be credited to the West, and not to him. Over and over again, Lukashenko tried to get support (meaning “money”) from the West and now Pompeo & Co. have apparently decided to make “their” son of a bitch “our” son of a bitch. What I mean by that Lukashenko was the textbook case of the “our son of a bitch” phenomenon, but not for the West – for Russia.  I furthermore believe that like all “sons of bitches” (including “theirs” and “ours”) – Lukashenko has now turned into a liability for Russia.]

There is another very worrisome development taking place now: in this entire business the Belarusian KGB was either hopelessly incompetent (which it ain’t!) or penetrated by western agents.  I find the second explanation much more likely.

If we now assume that the Belarusian KGB has been penetrated and compromised, then this is very bad news for Lukashenko who might find himself in the same situation as, say, Nicolae Ceaușescu, who was betrayed by his own secret services (we can also remember how many US/Israeli agents were in high position around Bashar Assad until the war in Syria forced them to pick a side).

Frankly, while the CIA and the rest of them are not very good at some things, they are truly world-class masters in the art of corrupting officials and this might have already happened in Belarus.

Right now, there are riots in Minsk and in other cities and while in the capital the riot police has things mostly under control, there have already been cases of riot cops running for their lives to avoid being lynched by the mob. As of the time of writing this (Monday 21:50 UTC) the Belarusian KGB has declared that they are hunting down the worst agitators and rioters, but considering how easy it has been for the Ukrainian SBU to trick (or, worse, infiltrate) the Belarusian KGB, I am not feeling very reassured by this verbiage: special services are here to take care of dangerous problems, not to make big statements.

Right now, the latest we hear from the Belarusian KGB is that they prevented the assassination of the main opposition figure Svetlana Tikhanovskaya.  Heck, this might even be true, considering that the (clueless) Tikhanovskaya would make a perfect “sacrificial lamb” (and an terrible politician, should she ever be elected). But this also looks like some interests inside the Belarusian KGB are courting Tikhanovskaya. Both versions are equally bad, I think.

How serious is all this?

Very!

There are already (false) rumors spread by Polish media about Lukashenko having fled Belarus in his aircraft. This rumor is clearly designed to create the (wrong) impression that Lukashenko is the next Ianukovich: while I equally dislike both of these men, Lukashenko is a much tougher man than Ianukovich ever was.

Furthermore, the kind of media-campaign waged now by the western, Polish and Ukie media is unprecedented in its magnitude and it will be very hard for the regime to regain control of the country.

As for Lukashenko, he now seems to have reversed his tune somehow: after accusing Russia of treating Belarus not as a brother, but as a partner, now he says that he spoke to Putin and got a 5 page document explaining it all, and now he says that Russia and Belarus will be brothers after all.

Not very convincing, to say the least.

Quite logically, Lukashenko’s popularity in Russia, which was never that high to begin with, is now rapidly degrading and many analysts who, in the past, praised Lukashenko for his (supposedly) “firm” policy towards the West are now openly voicing their disgust.  An increasing number of Russians are now openly wondering with this entire “supranational union state” concept.  As for Lukashenko’s much vaunted “multi-vector policies” they look like a banal case of trying to sit between two chairs.

It now appears pretty obvious that the leaders of the Empire stopped hating Lukashenko only long enough to give a short lived and semi-credible appearance of benevolence; now they are already talking about reintroducing sanctions on Belarus and on Lukashenko personally.

This is all extremely dangerous for Russia for the following reasons:

1. Lukashenko is an absolutely terrible “our son of a bitch” (they always are!) to back and his latest antics have shown the Kremlin that Lukashenko is very much part of the problem, not of the solution.
2. If Lukashenko remains in power, it will be only thanks to his (mostly very effective) repressive apparatus which might be enough to silence the opposition, but not enough to make Lukashenko truly popular.
3. Lukashenko himself is clearly both dishonest and unprincipled.  He does not care one bit about Russia (or Belarus for that matter), he cares only about himself.  In other words, as long as he remains in power, Belarus will be a major concern for Russia.
4. If Lukashenko is overthrown, be it by a KGB plot or a Maidan-like violent insurrection, we can be pretty darn sure that whoever comes to power will be 1) vetted by the USA and 2) rabidly anti-Russian.
5. Belarus does not have much of an economic significance for Russia, but for security and, even more so, military reasons Belarus is absolutely vital to the Russian security
   

This last point needs to be further clarified. Not only is Belarus located in a strategically crucial location, the Belarussian armed forces are very well trained and equipped (no comparison to the Ukie forces) and they represent a major military asset for the Kremlin.  
There are also Russian forces deployed in Belarus*. Finally, the contacts between the Belarusian and Russian military are very friendly and very deep.To have NATO take over Belarus would truly be a major problem for Russia (one that she can deal with, but it would require a major re-thinking of the threat from the West).

So where do we go from here?

It seems to me that if Putin does “more of the same” Russia risks seriously losing Belarus which, at a time when the Ukrainian Banderastan is falling apart, would really be a crying shame.  Right now, Russia needs to contain the “Ukrainian infection” while, at the same time, preparing an after-Lukashenko (before it is too late). Obviously, Lukashenko will not gracefully resign, so Russia needs to find a tool in her toolkit to force him to do so.
Personally, I have always believed that fully reincorporating Belarus into Russia would not only solve the “Belarusian problem” but that it would also solve the “Lukashenko problem”.  I am confident that Russia has more than enough influence and resources in Belarus to force a change. Yes, that would be both difficult and dangerous, but not doing so could result in a much worse outcome.  Russia needs to act.  Quickly and resolutely.

The Saker - [this analysis was written for the Unz review]

Click for Spanish, German, Dutch, Danish, French, translation- Note- Translation may take a moment to load.

================================
* Waar de Saker dat vandaan haalt zou ik niet weten, immers dit zou ongetwijfeld zijn aangehaald door de demonstranten in Wit-Rusland, waar men vandaag nog schande sprak over het vrijlaten van de 30 ongewapnede Russische veiligheidsagenten, die de Saker eerder aanhaalt in zijn verhaal..... Hij geeft daar verder ook geen bewijs voor..... Uitermate vreemd...... Ongetwijfeld zal het Wit-Russische leger af en aan militaire oefeningen houden met de Russische strijdkrachten, echter daar is op dit moment, noch de laatste paar maanden sprake van (geweest).

Zie ook: 'Dear mister Putin pleas cut Russian ties with Belarus' (dom van mij, immers Wit-Rusland is van groot strategisch belang voor Rusland en de VS, ik had moeten inzetten op een breuk met Loekasjenko)

'Helga Salemon 'met zéééér wijze woorden' over Loekasjenko en de verkiezingen in Wit-Rusland, met de nadruk op Rusland' (zie ook de links in dat bericht voor meer anti-Russische propaganda leugens van Salemon)