Connect with us

Culture

How the US Provoked the Ukraine Crisis

Friends, 

In the midst of this latest “Ukrainian Crisis” (fanned by the frenzied Neocon/US State Department globalists), I am reminded of a very solid volume I read in 2015, during what was back then the latest Ukrainian Crisis: Frontline Ukraine, by Prof. Richard Sakwa (he’s son of a Polish WW II officer). Here (below) is a review of that volume by the distinguished author, columnist, and well-known traditional conservative, Peter Hitchens of The Daily Mail. I believe Hitchen’s review and Sakwa’s study continue to have relevance for us today.  

Hitchens highlights some of the major points of Sakwa’s very detailed and researched volume. And interestingly, many of the points addressed are still very current in this present crisis.  

The very simple conclusion that may be drawn from what is occurring is this: our foreign policy elites–Neoconservatives and their zealous followers in both the GOP and the Democratic Party–see Russia as a major obstacle in the continuing imposition of economic and also political control over countries which have heretofore not acceded to their hegemony (i.e., Russia and Hungary). Using NATO as a strategic shell and Ukraine as its frontline player, the neocon/globalist combine seeks to:  

(1) prevent an economic disaster for the US of a functioning Nordstream II pipeline, which would give Germany and potentially other European countries, a climb off ramp from economic domination by the US (specialist Mike Whitney has written conclusively on this topic);  

(2) eventually impose politically a pliant government in Moscow, which has become the chief stumbling block in preventing Neocon globalist hegemony as well as the realization of “the Great Reset” around the world. Russia, like Hungary, has expelled CIA-infested and Soros-sponsored NGOs which in many locations around the world have incited “color revolutions” to install favorable client governments;  

(3) lastly and more concretely, use the “false flag” projection disinformation strategy to accuse the Russians, or more specifically the pro-Russian secessionists in Lugansk and Donetsk republics, of violent attacks against Ukraine (on civilians, schools, all the usual claimed targets), while in fact it is elements of the Ukrainian forces, with American encouragement and technical “advisors” embedded, who are responsible for the shelling and the attacks across the cease-fire line.  

Just listen to the braindead Biden essentially mouthing this propaganda line. If warfare breaks out it will be because the US State Department and our agents have impelled the Ukrainians to launch such “false flag” actions, literally forcing the Russians to react and thus producing a conflict, into which the US and NATO can pour support and take various measures, economic and financial and, eventually, military against Russia.  

Recall that early in the John F. Kennedy administration there were solemn promises that “American combat forces will not go to Vietnam.” Then came the false flag Gulf of Tonkin incident, and US forces did go in in force…and we know what happened. Back then we were actually opposing a form of Communism, NOT a nationalist country that stands in the way of Great Reset globalist hegemony, as Russia is doing today. So, from that perspective we did have arguably a rationale for opposition to what was happening, even if badly reasoned and poorly executed.  

Let me be clear, I do not claim in these present comments that Vladimir Putin is some great conservative hero.  What I am saying is not a direct defense of him in that sense…that is not my object here. The question of Putin’s beliefs, his Christian faith (or lack of it), and whether he is defending traditional Christianity, is for another discussion. Rather, my present concern—which should be the concern of all patriotic Americans–is essentially what Russia represents in the context of global geopolitics, as it, in fact, is in opposition to the plans and devices of proponents of the universal Great Reset and the continuing, and perhaps final, success of the machinations of Western elites and the Neocons. That essentially is the crux of the matter and what is occurring in that region of Europe.  

What we are witnessing is what our foreign policy elites have always done for decades…think of the bogus “Iraq WMDs” and the now-proven-false reasons for intervening in the Balkans (with the result that we engineered a Muslim Islamist state—Kosovo—right in the middle of Europe). Can we actually trust the American foreign policy establishment to tell us the truth? — the same establishment that foisted off as an undebatable certainty that “Russia had sabotaged” our 2016 elections…that Trump was a “Russian stooge”…that the Russians were paying bounties to the Taliban to kill American boys in Afghanistan…that the Russians had sabotaged Vermont’s power grid…and on and on; all of which were blatantly false, total disinformation, in most cases to favor the elites and Neocons of the Deep State? With such an inglorious record, can we trust our Intelligence agencies, the CIA, and yes, the FBI?  

If so, then I have an oil well in my back yard, right beside a gold mine, that I will sell you cheap (sight unseen, of course) for just a measly one million dollars.  

As I write this the Bidenistas and the totally in-lock-step GOP elites (in some cases worse than the Left on foreign policy) are now confidently, with absolute certainty, telling us that the Russians will “invade Ukraine within a few days.” Of course, these are the same voices that informed us with appropriate seriousness that a Russian invasion would definitely take place this past Wednesday, February 16–remember Biden’s solemn assurance telling us that? If our clients in Kiev, prodded enough by us can provoke enough violence, shoot enough missiles, plant enough bombs then perhaps the Russians will indeed have to intervene…this is exactly what our State Department elites desperately desire.  

But bear in mind if this should occur who we are talking about and what the essential and fundamental issues actually are. If serious conflict does erupt the blood will be on our hands, that is, on the hands of our foreign policy establishment in Washington and its minions in Western Europe.  

Will the American public fall for this continuing Neocon disinformation and latest advance in implementing the Great Reset? How many disasters…how many lies and how much disinformation…how many dead American boys…how many billions of taxpayer dollars…must be expended on the altar of the powerful globalist elites, the Neocon/Big Business arms dealers and the frenzied Left who despise the growing anti-secularism and revival of a very traditional Christianity in Russia (as well as in Hungary) which stands athwart their road to domination?  

*************

Here is a summary passage from Sakwa’s volume, followed by Hitchen’s review:

 The unbalanced end of the Cold War generated a cycle of conflict that is far from over. An extended period of “cold peace” settled over Russo-Western relations, although punctuated by attempts by both sides to escape the logic of renewed confrontation. This is what I call mimetic cold war, which reproduces the practices of the Cold War without accepting the underlying competitive rationale. Structurally, a competitive dynamic was introduced into European international relations…. At worst, the revanchists in the post-Communist countries of Eastern Europe, encouraged by neoconservatives in Washington and their vision of global transformation on a global scale, fed concerns about Russia’s alleged inherent predisposition towards despotism and imperialism. The Trotskyite roots of US neocon thinking are well known: the fight now was not for revolutionary socialism but for capitalist democracy–to make the world safe for the US. This became a self-fulfilling prophecy: by treating Russia as the enemy, in the end it was in danger of becoming one. NATO thus found itself in a new role, which was remarkably similar to the one it had been set up to perform in the first place—to “contain” Russia.  (p. 5)

 ****************

THE DAILY MAIL.com (UK)

05 March 2015 4:11 PM

A Review of ‘Frontline Ukraine’ by Richard Sakwa

By Peter Hitchens

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2015/03/a-review-of-frontline-ukraine-by-richard-sakwa.html

You might have thought that a serious book on the Ukraine crisis, written by a distinguished academic in good clear English, and published by a reputable house, might have gained quite a bit of attention at a time when that country is at the centre of many people’s concerns. 

But some readers here now understand that publishing, and especially the reviewing of books, are not the simple marketplaces of ideas which we would all wish them to be.  

And so, as far as I can discover, this book‘Frontline Ukraine: Crisis in the Borderlands,’ by Richard Sakwa. Published by I.B.Tauris …though it came out some months ago, has only been reviewed in one place in Britain, the Guardian newspaper, by Jonathan Steele, the first-rate foreign correspondent whose rigour and enterprise (when we were both stationed in Moscow) quite persuaded me to overlook his former sympathy for the left-wing cause (most notably expressed in a 1977 book ‘Socialism with a German Face’ about the old East Germany, which seemed to me at the time to be, ah, excessively kind).   

Mr Steele’s review can be read here:  

http://www.theguardian.com/books/2015/feb/19/frontline-ukraine-crisis-in-borderlands-richard-sakwa-review-account

I have said elsewhere that I would myself be happier if the book were more hostile to my position on this conflict. Sometimes I feel that it is almost too good to be true, to have my own conclusions confirmed so powerfully, and I would certainly like to see the book reviewed by a knowledgeable proponent of the NATO neo-conservative position. Why hasn’t it been?  

But even so I recommend it to any reader of mine who is remotely interested in disentangling the reality from the knotted nets of propaganda in which it is currently shrouded.  

Like George Friedman’s interesting interview in the Moscow newspaper ‘Kommersant’ (you can read it here  http://russia-insider.com/en/2015/01/20/2561), the book has shifted my own view.

I have tended to see the *basic* dispute in Ukraine as being yet another outbreak of the old German push into the east, carried out under the new, nice flag of the EU, a liberal, federative empire in which the vassal states are tactfully allowed limited sovereignty as long as they don’t challenge the fundamental politico-economic dominance of Germany.  I still think this is a strong element in the EU’s thrust in this direction.  

But I have tended to neglect another feature of the new Europe, also set out in Adam Tooze’s brilliant ‘The Deluge’ – the firm determination of the USA to mould Europe in its own image (a determination these days expressed mainly through the EU and NATO).  

I should have paid more attention to the famous words ‘F*** the EU!’ spoken by the USA’s  Assistant Secretary of State, Victoria Nuland, in a phone call publicised to the world by Russian intelligence.  The EU isn’t half as enthusiastic about following the old eastern road as is the USA. Indeed, it’s a bit of a foot-dragger.  

The driving force in this crisis is the USA, with the EU being reluctantly tugged along behind. And if Mr Friedman is right (and I think he is), the roots of it lie in Russia’s decision to obstruct the West’s intervention in Syria [and its opposition to the Great Reset].  Perhaps the key to the whole thing (rather dispiriting in that it shows the USA really hasn’t learned anything important from the Iraq debacle) is the so-called ‘Wolfowitz Doctrine’ of 1992, named after the neo-con’s neo-con, Paul Wolfowitz, and summed up by Professor Sakwa (p.211) thus: ‘The doctrine asserted that the US should prevent “any country from dominating any region of the world that might be a springboard to threaten unipolar and exclusive US dominance”’.  

Note how neatly this meshes with what George Friedman says in his interview.  

Now, there are dozens of fascinating things in Professor Sakwa’s book, and my copy is scored with annotations and references. I could spend a week summarising it for you. (By the way, the Professor himself is very familiar with this complex region, and might be expected, thanks to his Polish ancestry, to take a different line. His father was in the Polish Army in 1939, escaped to Hungary in the chaos of defeat, and ended up serving in Anders’s Second Corps, fighting with the British Army at El Alamein, Benghazi, Tobruk and then through Italy via Monte Cassino. Then he was in exile during the years of Polish Communism. Like Vaclav Klaus, another critic of current western policy, Professor Sakwa can hardly be dismissed as a naif who doesn’t understand about Russia, or accused of being a ‘fellow-traveler’ or ‘useful idiot’.  

He is now concerned at ‘how we created yet another crisis’ (p xiii).  

But I would much prefer that you read it for yourself, and so will have to limit my references quite sternly.  

There are good explanations of the undoubted anti-Semitism and Nazi sympathies of some strands in Ukrainian politics. Similar nastiness, by the way, is to be found loose in some of the Baltic States. I mention this because it justified classifying the whole movement as ‘Neo-Nazi’, which is obviously false, but because it tells us something very interesting about the nature of nationalism and Russophobia in this part of the world.  No serious or fair description of the crisis can ignore it. Yet, in the portrayal of Russia as Mordor, and the Ukraine as Utopia, Western media simply leave out almost everything about Ukraine that doesn’t appeal to their audiences, the economic near collapse, the Judophobia and Russophobia (the derogatory word ‘Moskal’, for instance, in common use),  the worship of the dubious (this word is very generous, I think)  Stepan Bandera by many of the Western ultra-nationalists, the violence against dissenters from the Maidan view ( see  http://rt.com/news/ukraine-presidential-candidates-attacked-516/). The survival and continued power of Ukraine’s oligarchs after a revolution supposedly aimed at cleaning up the country is also never mentioned. We all know about Viktor Yanukovych’s tasteless mansion, but the book provides some interesting details on President Poroshenko’s residence (it looks rather like the White House), which I have not seen elsewhere.

The detailed description of how and why the Association Agreement led to such trouble is excellent. I had not realised that, since the Lisbon Treaty, alignment with NATO is an essential part of EU membership (and association) – hence the unavoidable political and military clauses in the agreement.  

So is the filleting of the excuse-making and apologetics of those who still pretend that Yanukovych was lawfully removed from office:  the explicit threat of violence from the Maidan, the failure to muster the requisite vote, the presence of armed men during the vote,  the failure to follow the constitutional rules (set beside the available lawful deal, overridden by the Maidan, under which Yanukovych would have faced early elections and been forced to make constitutional changes). 

Then here we have Ms Nuland again, boasting of the $5 billion (eat your heart out, the EU, with your paltry £300 million http://www.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2013/dec/218804.htm)  

which the USA has ‘invested in Ukraine. Since Ukraine’s independence in 1991, the United States has supported Ukrainians as they build democratic skills and institutions, as they promote civic participation and good governance, all of which are preconditions for Ukraine to achieve its European aspirations. We’ve invested over $5 billion to assist Ukraine in these and other goals that will ensure a secure and prosperous and democratic Ukraine.’

It’s worth noting that in this speech, in December 2013, she still envisages the supposedly intolerable Yanukovych as a possible partner.

Other points well-made are the strange effect of NATO expansion into Eastern Europe, which has created the very tension against which it now seeks to reassure border nations, by encouraging them, too, to join, the non-binding nature of the much-trumpeted Budapest memorandum, the lack of coverage of the ghastly events in Odessa, the continuing lack of a proper independent investigation into the Kiev mass shootings in February 2014.  

Also examined is the Russian fear of losing Sevastopol, an entirely justified fear given that President Yushchenko had chosen to say during the war of August 2008,  that Russia’s basing rights in the city would end in 2017. The ‘disappearance’; of the ‘Right Sector’ and ‘Svoboda’ vote in recent elections is explained by their transfer to the radical Party led by Oleh Lyashko.  

Professor Sakwa also explores Russia’s behaviour in other border disputes, with Norway and China, in which it has been far from aggressive. And he points out that Ukraine’s nationalists have made their country’s life far more difficult by their rigid nationalist approach to the many citizens of that country who, while viewing themselves as Ukrainian, do not share the history or passions of the ultra-nationalists in the west of the country.  [….]

He points out that Russia has not, as it did in Crimea, intervened decisively in Eastern Ukraine to ensure secession. And he suggests that those Russian nationalists are acting in many cases independently of Moscow in the Donetsk and Lugansk areas.  Putin seeks to control them and limit them, but fears them as well.  

In general, the book is an intelligent, well-researched and thoughtful attempt to explain the major crisis of our time. Anybody, whatever he or she might think of the issue, would benefit from reading it.  It is shocking that it is not better known, and I can only assume that its obscurity, so far is caused by the fact that it does not fit the crude propaganda narrative of the ‘Putin is Hitler’ viewpoint [of the Neoconservatives and McCain and Lindsey Graham].  

How odd that we should all have learned so little from the Iraq debacle. This time the ‘WMD’ are the non-existent Russian plans to expand and/or attack the Baltic States.  And of course the misrepresentation of both sides in the Ukrainian controversy is necessary for the portrayal of Putin as Hitler and his supporters as Nazis, and opponents of belligerence as Nazi fellow-travellers. The inconvenient fact, that if there are Nazis in this story, they tend to be on the ‘good’ side must be ignored. Let us hope the hysteria subsides before it carries us into another stupid war

Source link

Culture

When the Navajos fooled John Ford | Culture

At the end of his career, John Ford wanted to use Cheyenne Autumn to apologize to Native Americans for the way he had treated them in his films. Shot in 1964, it was his last western. “There are two sides to every story, but for once I wanted to show their point of view. I’ve killed more Indians than Custer, Beecher and Chivington put together,” the master explained to Peter Bogdanovich in the interview book John Ford. “Let’s face it, we’ve treated them very badly — it’s a blot on our shield. We’ve cheated and robbed, killed, murdered, massacred and everything else, but they kill one white man and, God, out come the troops.”

Cheyenne Autumn recounts a historical episode in which a group of Cheyennes flee to their ancestral lands from the squalid reservation where they are confined and end up being massacred, after being tricked time and again by U.S. authorities. The problem is that Ford shot in Monument Valley, the setting for his great Westerns, which belongs to a Navajo reservation. Members of this tribe acted massively in the film, in which Mexican actors also play Native Americans. It is something that would be impossible to explain to the public today, but Ford had no choice if he wanted to shoot the film.

Of course, the Navajos who were playing Cheyennes took their revenge on the white men. Since no one but them understood Navajo on the set — a language so difficult that it was used as a secret code during World War II — instead of reading the script they decided to say whatever they wanted. They made all sorts of comments about the small size of the white officers’ penises and other nonsense during the film’s most tragic scenes. At least, that’s what an old Hollywood legend says, but John Ford made the doctrine clear at the end of The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance: “This is the West: when the legend becomes a fact, print the legend.”

Osage Indians
A historical photograph of a group of Osage natives.ilbusca (Getty Images)

Author Tony Hillerman wrote a series of noir novels set on the same Navajo reservation where Ford filmed Cheyenne Autumn, and his books serve as the basis for the terrific series Dark Winds (the two seasons can currently be seen on AMC+). In one of them, Sacred Clowns, he describes a drive-in movie theater in Gallup where Navajos used to see the film again and again. Jim Chee, one of the policemen who stars in the show, recounts that at the screening “they would honk their car horns and laugh their heads off” at what were, in theory, the most dramatic moments. And he recalls what he felt when he attended a session with a Cheyenne who didn’t understand Navajo: “In the exact same scene, he was watching the destruction of his culture. We were watching as our people laughed at the whites.”

None of this could have happened to Martin Scorsese, another director at the height of his creative powers, who tried his hand at westerns at age 81 with Killers of the Flower Moon (available on Apple TV). The Osage tribe plays an essential role in the film, which has garnered 10 Oscar nominations. Set in the 1920s, the film tells the story of how dozens of Osage were murdered with impunity to steal the property rights to their oil wells. Scorsese not only relied on numerous Native advisors to lend credibility to the film, but he also worked directly with tribal representatives. Of the 63 Native American actors in the film, 49 are Osage.

Leonardo DiCaprio and Lily Gladstone in 'Killers of the Flower Moon.'
Leonardo DiCaprio and Lily Gladstone in ‘Killers of the Flower Moon.’ Melinda Sue Gordon

Both Ford and Scorsese wanted to remember a forgotten history, buried by a vision of the past in which the roles are totally reversed — the invaders became the invaded, and vice versa. In fact, David Grann, the New Yorker journalist on whose book, Killers of the Flower Moon, Scorsese’s film is based, notes that it was precisely the will to remember something that should never have been forgotten that led him to investigate the crimes against the Osage for years. “One day in the summer of 2012, fresh from New York, where I live and work as a journalist, I visited Pawhuska for the first time hoping to find information about the murders that had occurred almost a century ago. Like most Americans, when I was in school I never read any books about these crimes; it was as if they had been erased from history. So, I started researching when I stumbled upon a reference to those events. From then on, I was consumed with the urge to solve the unanswered questions, to tie up the loose ends that the FBI investigation didn’t.”

The star of the film, Lily Gladstone, has a good chance of becoming the first Native American actress to win an Oscar. For the movie, she took lessons in Osage culture, which included the stories that ground the group’s traditions as well as the language. “There are elements in this film that just scream Osage,” Jim Gray, one of the tribal members who helped make the film, told The Harvard Gazette. “Even though 99 percent of the audience will be non-Osage and are not going to know as much about this story as we do, Osage people sitting in the audience are going to get a lot of the observances that Scorsese incorporated into the film that could only have come from collaboration with the tribe.”

Decolonizing — museums, mentalities, the vision of the past — also represents the different way in which two masters of cinema, Ford and Scorsese, faced the same problem 60 years apart: telling the story of the United States from the perspective of those who were exterminated.

Sign up for our weekly newsletter to get more English-language news coverage from EL PAÍS USA Edition

Source link

Continue Reading

Culture

Conflicted History: ‘Oppenheimer’ And Its Impact On Los Alamos And New Mexico Downwinders

‘Oppenheimer’ And Its Impact On Los Alamos And New Mexico Downwinders

The Voice Of EU | In the highly anticipated blockbuster movie, “Oppenheimer,” the life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, the man behind the first atomic bomb, is portrayed as a riveting tale of triumph and tragedy.

As the film takes center stage, it also brings to light the often-overlooked impacts on a community living downwind from the top-secret Manhattan Project testing site in southern New Mexico.

A Forgotten Legacy

While the film industry and critics praise “Oppenheimer,” a sense of frustration prevails among the residents of New Mexico’s Tularosa Basin, who continue to grapple with the consequences of the Manhattan Project. Tina Cordova, a cancer survivor and founder of the Tularosa Basin Downwinders Consortium, expresses their feelings, stating, “They invaded our lives and our lands and then they left,” referring to the scientists and military personnel who conducted secret experiments over 200 miles away from their community.

The Consortium, alongside organizations like the Union of Concerned Scientists, has been striving to raise awareness about the impact of the Manhattan Project on New Mexico’s population. Advocates emphasize the necessity of acknowledging the human cost of the Trinity Test, the first atomic blast, and other nuclear weapons activities that have affected countless lives in the state.

The Ongoing Struggle for Recognition

As film enthusiasts celebrate the drama and brilliance of “Oppenheimer,” New Mexico downwinders feel overlooked by both the U.S. government and movie producers. The federal government’s compensation program for radiation exposure still does not include these affected individuals. The government’s selection of the remote and flat Trinity Test Site, without warning residents in the surrounding areas, further added to the controversy.

Living off the land, the rural population in the Tularosa Basin had no idea that the fine ash settling on their homes and fields was a result of the world’s first atomic explosion.

The government initially attempted to cover up the incident, attributing the bright light and rumble to an explosion at a munitions dump. It was only after the U.S. dropped atomic bombs on Japan weeks later that New Mexico residents realized the magnitude of what they had witnessed.

Tracing the Fallout

According to the Manhattan Project National Historical Park, large amounts of radiation were released into the atmosphere during the Trinity Test, with fallout descending over a vast area. Some of the fallout reached as far as the Atlantic Ocean, but the greatest concentration settled approximately 30 miles from the test site.

Now I Am Become Death, the Destroyer of Worlds.

J. Robert Oppenheimer

The consequences of this catastrophic event have affected generations of New Mexicans, who still await recognition and justice for the harm caused by nuclear weapons.

A Tale of Contrasts: Los Alamos and the Legacy of Oppenheimer

As the film’s spotlight shines on the life of J. Robert Oppenheimer, a contrasting narrative unfolds in Los Alamos, more than 200 miles north of the Tularosa Basin. Los Alamos stands as a symbol of Oppenheimer’s legacy, housing one of the nation’s premier national laboratories and boasting the highest percentage of people with doctorate degrees in the U.S.

Oppenheimer’s influence is evident throughout Los Alamos, with a street bearing his name and an IPA named in his honor at a local brewery. The city embraces its scientific legacy, showcasing his handwritten notes and ID card in a museum exhibit. Los Alamos National Laboratory employees played a significant role in the film, contributing as extras and engaging in enlightening discussions during breaks.

The “Oppenheimer” Movie

Director Christopher Nolan’s perspective on the Trinity Test and its profound impact is evident in his approach to “Oppenheimer.” He has described the event as an extraordinary moment in human history and expressed his desire to immerse the audience in the pivotal moment when the button was pushed. Nolan’s dedication to bringing historical accuracy and emotional depth to the screen is evident as he draws inspiration from Kai Bird and Martin J. Sherwin’s Pulitzer Prize-winning book, “American Prometheus: The Triumph and Tragedy of J. Robert Oppenheimer.

For Nolan, Oppenheimer’s story is a potent blend of dreams and nightmares, capturing the complexity and consequences of the Manhattan Project. As the film reaches global audiences, it also offers a unique opportunity to raise awareness about the downwinders in New Mexico, whose lives were forever altered by the legacy of nuclear weapons testing.

The Oppenheimer Festival and Beyond

Los Alamos is determined to use the Oppenheimer Festival as an opportunity to educate visitors about the true stories behind the film’s events. The county’s “Project Oppenheimer” initiative, launched in early 2023, encompasses forums, documentaries, art installations, and exhibits that delve into the scientific contributions of the laboratory and the social implications of the Manhattan Project.

A special area during the festival will facilitate discussions about the movie, fostering a deeper understanding of the community’s history. The county aims to continue revisiting and discussing the legacy of the Manhattan Project, ensuring that the impact of this pivotal moment in history is never forgotten.

As “Oppenheimer” takes audiences on an emotional journey, it serves as a reminder that every historical event carries with it complex and multifaceted implications. The movie may celebrate the scientific achievements of the past, but it also illuminates the urgent need to recognize and address the human cost that persists to this day.


We Can’t Thank You Enough For Your Support!

— By Team VoiceOfEU.com

— For Info.: info@VoiceOfEU.com

— Anonymous Submissions: press@VoiceOfEU.com


Continue Reading

Culture

The Complex World of Cyber Warfare & Digital Battlefield

The Cyber Warfare And Digital Era

By Raza Qadri

In digital age, the world has witnessed an unprecedented rise in cyber warfare – a new frontier where nations and threat actors engage in battles beyond traditional borders. The evolution of technology has brought with it the emergence of cyber weapons and tactics, leading to a complex web of cyber espionage, attacks on critical infrastructure, and nation-state cyber operations.

As technologists, it is imperative to comprehend this rapidly evolving landscape and the challenges it poses to our global security. Here, we will explore Cyber Warfare in detail.

. Understanding Cyber Warfare

. Cyber Weapons and Tactics

. Nation-State Cyber Operations

. Spying in the Digital Age with Cyber Espionage

. Cyber Attacks on Critical Infrastructure Including Power Grids, Water Systems, and More

. Cybersecurity Measures: Safeguarding Nations against Digital Threats

. Attribution Challenges: Unmasking the Culprits Behind Cyber Offensives

. Offensive Vs. Defensive Cyber Capabilities

. The Evolution of Cyber Warfare with Past, Present, and Future Trends

. The Global Impact of Cyber Warfare — Diplomatic, Economic, and Societal Ramifications


Understanding Cyber Warfare

Cyber warfare encompasses the use of digital tools and technologies to conduct offensive and defensive operations in the virtual realm. It involves exploiting vulnerabilities in computer systems, networks, and data to achieve military or strategic objectives.

Key components of cyber warfare include hacking, malware deployment, Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attacks, and cyber espionage. The cyber battlefield extends beyond government agencies to encompass private corporations, institutions, and individuals.

Cyber Weapons and Tactics

In the arsenal of cyber warfare, sophisticated tools are employed to infiltrate and compromise target systems. Malware, such as viruses, worms, and ransomware, is utilized to disrupt operations and steal sensitive information. Advanced Persistent Threats (APTs) are employed for long-term espionage, allowing attackers to remain undetected within a system for extended periods.

Additionally, social engineering techniques, such as phishing and spear-phishing, are commonly used to deceive users and gain unauthorized access.

Nation-State Cyber Operations

Nation-states have recognized the potential of cyber warfare to advance their strategic interests, leading to the proliferation of state-sponsored cyber operations. Countries invest heavily in developing cyber capabilities and often maintain specialized cyber units responsible for executing offensive operations.

Such operations can range from stealing intellectual property and sensitive information to launching disruptive attacks against adversary nations. However, attributing cyber attacks to specific countries remains a complex challenge.

Spying in the Digital Age with Cyber Espionage

One of the primary objectives of cyber warfare is espionage, where state and non-state actors seek to gather classified information and gain a competitive edge. Advanced cyber tools and techniques enable clandestine access to government, military, and corporate networks. Cyber spies operate stealthily, exfiltrating valuable data without leaving a trace. This form of espionage poses significant threats to national security and can lead to severe economic consequences.

Cyber Attacks on Critical Infrastructure Including Power Grids, Water Systems, and More

Critical infrastructure, including power grids, transportation systems, and healthcare facilities, has become prime targets for cyber attacks. Disrupting these systems can cause chaos and destabilize a nation.

Attackers exploit vulnerabilities in Industrial Control Systems (ICS) and Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) systems to gain control over infrastructure components. Securing critical infrastructure against cyber threats is crucial to safeguarding society’s basic functioning.

Cybersecurity Measures Safeguarding Nations against Digital Threats

As the cyber threat landscape intensifies, nations must strengthen their cybersecurity measures. Robust defense mechanisms, such as firewalls, intrusion detection systems, and encryption, are employed to protect networks and data from unauthorized access.

Additionally, regular security assessments, incident response plans, and cybersecurity awareness training play pivotal roles in mitigating cyber risks.

Unmasking the Culprits Behind Cyber Offensives

Identifying the perpetrators behind cyber attacks is fraught with challenges. Attackers often use sophisticated techniques to conceal their origins, employing proxy servers and compromised infrastructure. The absence of clear attribution can lead to misjudgment and further escalation of conflicts. Overcoming these challenges requires international cooperation, technical expertise, and intelligence sharing.

Offensive Vs. Defensive Cyber Capabilities

Nations must strike a delicate balance between developing offensive and defensive cyber capabilities. While offensive operations offer advantages in intelligence gathering and deterring adversaries, they can lead to retaliation and escalate tensions.

“Defensive capabilities are vital to protect national assets, infrastructure, and citizens from cyber threats. The reach of these threats is evolving at the same rate as the capabilities of not just computing, but science and even art.”

— John Elf

Striving for equilibrium is essential to avoid the perilous repercussions of unchecked cyber warfare.

The Evolution of Cyber Warfare with Past, Present, and Future Trends

Cyber warfare evolution, a critical facet of modern conflict, has seen profound evolution shaped by technological advancements and geopolitical shifts. Its origins trace back to the late 20th century with events like the Morris Worm incident in 1988, marking one of the first large-scale cyber attacks. As the internet gained prominence, cyber espionage and criminal activities burgeoned. By the late 1990s, nation-states recognized the strategic potential of cyber operations, exemplified by the Stuxnet worm in 2010, targeting Iran’s nuclear program. Presently, state-sponsored cyber operations are ubiquitous, with the SolarWinds hack of 2020 highlighting their sophistication. Ransomware attacks, typified by the Colonial Pipeline incident in 2021, pose substantial economic threats. The proliferation of advanced persistent threats (APTs) further complicates the cyber landscape, with groups like APT29 and APT28 linked to high-profile breaches.

Looking forward, the integration of artificial intelligence (AI) is poised to revolutionize cyber warfare. AI-powered attacks can adapt swiftly, evade detection, and exploit vulnerabilities with unprecedented precision. The rise of AI-driven defense mechanisms will be crucial in countering cyber threats. Quantum computing presents both promise and peril, with its computational power potentially revolutionizing cryptography, while simultaneously posing a threat to current encryption methods. Preparing for a quantum-secure cyber environment will be imperative. The evolution of cyber warfare reflects a trajectory of increasing complexity and sophistication. With geopolitical tensions and technological advancements driving this evolution, governments, organizations, and cybersecurity experts must remain vigilant. Understanding the past, present, and future trends of cyber warfare equips us to adapt to this ever-changing landscape. Embracing robust cybersecurity measures, fostering international cooperation, and investing in cutting-edge technologies will be paramount in securing our digital future.

The Global Impact of Cyber Warfare — Diplomatic, Economic, and Societal Ramifications

The ramifications of cyber warfare extend beyond the digital realm, influencing diplomatic relations, economies, and societal well-being. Nation-states engage in cyber espionage to gain geopolitical advantages, resulting in strained international relations.

Economies face significant losses due to cyber attacks on businesses and critical infrastructure. Furthermore, cyber warfare poses risks to individuals’ privacy, freedom of speech, and online safety.

Finally, we can conclude that cyber warfare has emerged as a powerful tool in the hands of state and non-state actors, with the potential to reshape global dynamics. As technologists, understanding the intricacies of cyber warfare is crucial to developing effective defenses and advocating responsible use of technology.

By collaboratively addressing the challenges posed by cyber warfare, we can safeguard the digital future and foster a secure and resilient world.


We Can’t Thank You Enough For Your Support!


By Raza Qadri | Business, science & technology contributor ‘THE VOICE OF EU’

— For more information: Info@VoiceOfEU.com

— Anonymous news submissions: Press@VoiceOfEU.com


Continue Reading

Trending

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our mailing list to receive the latest news and updates 
directly on your inbox.

You have Successfully Subscribed!