Every European Eastward expansionist move had Russia as its target. All Western powers moved their armies in Russia’s direction.

At the beginning of the 19^th century, Napoleon invaded many European countries in his quest to reach Russia’s rich resources of coal, iron ore, oil, gas and gold. In World War II, Hitler followed suit, directing his vast armies towards Russia.

Nowadays, NATO is following in the footsteps of Napoleon and Hitler to reach Russia. NATO wishes to exploit the vacuum that resulted from the disintegration of the Soviet Union.  

The West declared victory in the Cold War against the Eastern Bloc under the leadership of the USSR.

It considered the Soviet defeat and disintegration an historic achievement.

After bringing most of the ex-Socialist countries, adjacent to Russia, into its membership, it has been striving to include the ex-Soviet republics from Central Asia to the Black Sea and the Baltic in order to fully surround Russia.

Russia saw this move as an act of dangerous provocation as it aimed to encircle it from all directions.

This is indeed the case.

The implosion and disintegration of Yugoslavia provided the missing link in NATO’s chain surrounding Russia.

However history, both distant and recent, abounds with proof that Russia is not a power that can easily be besieged, broken, or defeated.

Russia possesses the largest nuclear stockpile in the world numbering around 16,000 warheads. Those can be launched from land silos, submarines and strategic bombers that Russia alone possesses. The nuclear trio of ICBMs, strategic bombers and nuclear submarines makes up for any deficit in Russia’s military capability in terms of training, mobilization or logistics.

Proceeding from the keen interest we take in world peace, we call for the avoidance of any new adventures that, unlike the case with the two World Wars, might cause the destruction or even the annihilation of humanity.

The provocation of Russia and attempts to encircle it threaten with a new and unnecessary all-out nuclear conflagration.

The threat is all the more real in view of the fact that America has based its positions in many cases on fabricated information, naïve analyses and shortsighted and self-serving opinions.

When the West enthusiastically supported the independence of Kosovo, did it expect ripple effects to reach Abkhazia and South Ossetia leading them to call for independence?

Was it aware that the analyses that led to America’s dilemma in Iraq were based on fabricated and unconfirmed intelligence provided, in the hope of gaining favor with the CIA, by agents who fled their country?

The continued existence and expansion of NATO, after the disintegration of the USSR and the end of the Cold War, can have only one motive; occupying Russia then the rest of the world.

Like all countries in the world, America has the right to defend itself. Its distant geographic location between the Atlantic Ocean in the East, the Pacific in the West, the Arctic Ocean in the North and its weak neighbors to the south who cannot pose any threat to its security, all enable it to be a safe haven for immigrants and refugees away from the conflicts and ambitions of the continents of the Old World.

It is a universal power.

All peoples of the world have contributed to its formation and prosperity. With a return to this tradition, it will be worthy of hosting the UN and its Security Council.

However, it is a major threat for world peace, security and stability for America to continue to be, as it is today, a party to every act of aggression that takes place in the world.

America must return to the Monroe Doctrine, advocated by President James Monroe in 1823, which states that “The United States would not interfere with problems in Europe, and that European powers were no longer to or interfere with the affairs of the newly independent states of the Americas”.

It must enlarge the Doctrine to encompass non-interference in the affairs of the whole world.

Europe is entitled to become an independent and unified political economic and military entity. It is entitled to become a new pole in international politics.

Russia, as both a historical and emerging power, must be left free to develop its political, economic and military strength for the purposes of self-defense.

United Europe, if it is not linked to distant America, can act as a strategic buffer between Russia and America.

The Atlantic Ocean could also act as a buffer between Europe and America. Europe should continue to benefit from Russia’s abundant oil and gas supplies.

Russia, rather than the American continent, is the natural demographic partner of Europe.

If Europe were to be guided by a logical assessment of its own interests, rather than by racial motives or by a continuation of the fait accompli that resulted from the American occupation of Europe after World War II, it would establish friendly ties with Russia.

Stupidity and greed are going to drag humanity into a new catastrophe.

There will be no one left to reap the profits of that war which is going to be a war among parties that possess lethal and destructive nuclear weapons.

The world would be well advised to heed my warning that Russia is not the USSR.

The USSR was a vast, multi-national empire. It imposed itself upon many ancient nations. It was based on an ideological doctrine that the peoples of the USSR did not believe in. Actually, the leaders of the Kremlin themselves did not believe in that ideology.

By contrast, Russia now is not defending a philosophical belief or a political and economic ideology. It is defending the Russian nation itself. When the Marxist ideology of the USSR met its end, the Soviet peoples did not die with it. They continued to exist.

They even celebrated the fall of the USSR and its ideology.

What is at stake now is the very existence of the Russian nation.

It cannot be allowed to fall for that would mean the demise of the life, freedom and existence of the nation. Death would be preferable to such an eventuality.

The situation must not be misjudged.

The lessons learnt from the confrontation with the USSR must be taken fully into account. Failure to do so is tantamount to suicide.

It would be destructive for certain powers to repeat the maneuvers of the past against Russia today.

The imperialist policies followed in years past against the USSR would be devastating if used against today’s Russia.