Are security guarantees NATO expansion by another name.

 EUROPEAN SECURITY ARCHITECTURE SHOULD INCLUDE RUSSIA 

STILL STUCK IN US VS THEM

We now hear that Russia proposes that negotiations on security guarantees need to include Russian input.  This is considered by the European countries as outrageous and impossible. Any peace deal that does not address the long standing and divisive political situation will only insure more war in the future. And more war can inevitably lead to a catastrophic result for Europe and the world. 

In every discussion with the EU its always about maintaining and strengthening a military alliance in opposition to Russia. With the end of the Soviet Union in 1991 there was a opportunity for another arrangement to replace the cold war and the NATO/Soviet Union situation. There is much evidence thats what Russia wanted, but it seems there were many in the west who desired the cold war to continue. That fear of a permanent villain enabled continued military expenditures and covert intrigue for power to actually never end. There now may be second chance to pursue a new agreement that leesens this mentality and is the only real opportunity for lasting peace.

A peace deal to end the hostilities in Ukraine without a serious reevaluation of the political situation will only be temporary respite. It seems the EU wants a ceasefire or temporary pause to rearm and continue this confrontation with Russia. Sadly, many here in the U.S.  have the same desires. 

This Ukraine project, which was born in the U.S. intelligence and state department, has moved to divide the world. While they want to blame Russia, the result has been a Russian/China alliance and the escalation is now pushing India into a military alliance with Russia. It has encouraged a growing economic alliance that further divides the world. The western world has been weakened politically, economically and militarily, yet refuses to acknowledge that only decline and disaster will be the result.

While Russia proposed a new architecture before the breakout of the Ukraine conflict, even discussion was rejected, there is now another opportunity and it may be the last.

It would need to address covert political interference that seeks to deny any country to seeking a neutral status, The Bush policy of you are either with us or our enemy is a juvenile, divisive and destructive policy. The expansion of NATO to include the former Soviet countries is just one example. The same mentality is at work in southeast Asia, South America and Africa. Switzerland and Sweden were neutral countries for decades with great success and a stabilizing influence. 

We as Americans have witnessed the covert policies of the U.S. intelligence agencies, perfected around the world,  being employed right here at home for political advantage. Not only the world, but this country will not survive if a change of direction is not made, now.  Limiting the CIA to the collection of  accurate intelligence information would be good first step.

We have witnessed the demonization of many counties and political leaders by our media in cooperation with their intelligence community handlers and it is till going on. An independent media should have no connection to covert intelligence operators. 

While many will reject and deny any reevaluation, particularly if it is proposed by Russia, it is now an opportunity for a new era of cooperation and mutual prosperity. Why are they so afraid to engage in discussion and negotiation? What good can come of a policy that refuses to listen and hear and only demands submission and compliance? Are they afraid that possibly others may make valid points that they cannot refute?