The third week on end the Western media keep discussing subject of Russian ships’ trip to the areas of the North-East Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea.
First, the entire Internet was full of pictures of Russian aircraft cruiser – a part of aircraft carrier group – “Admiral Kuznetsov”, which, crossing the English Channel, smoked so terribly that English environmentalists immediately accused Russia of environmental pollution and disturbance of the balance of flora and fauna.
Then the epopee continued when the Russian warships were to stay in Port of Spain to refuel. On October 26, after a preliminary agreement with the Spanish authorities Russian fleet ships have been successfully moored at the port of Ceuta. And here a real panic started: Western partners unanimously cried out that it was unacceptable to let Russian ships in their harbour. NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg made an angry speech: “This decision should be made by allies on an individual basis – whether to carry out refuelling of Russian ships. I have expressed that very clearly about potential use of this battle group to increase Russia’s ability and to be a platform for airstrikes against Syria.”
European countries were very transparently advised not to let the Russian fleet in the ports and justified that decision with sanctions, while not particularly explaining how it violates international law. The fact that all EU countries are independent states and they have the right to choose, is as always forgotten, as, indeed, democracy, since it’s old-fashioned in the EU to have own opinion.
Reaction of Sergey Shoigu, the Russian Defence Minister to Spain’s public rejection of Russian air group refuelling is understandable: “It did not affect the schedule of their movements on a given route at all, because they (the Russian ships – Ed.) are provided with all necessary resources.” And all of the panic around is nothing more than the US fearing of losing its influence in the Middle East.
For NATO, there are certain plans, which obviously do not include the destruction of Islamist groups. So America really ‘worries’ that air group will strike the clusters of Islamists in the occupied Syrian cities. The United States has long been only pretending to fight terrorism. The results of this struggle are the armed terrorist groups of ISIS, permanent ‘incoming strikes’ on civilian objects by insurgents and ‘casual hits’ of NATO coalition’s aircraft on humanitarian convoys, government forces or hospitals of “Red Cross”. Sluggish apologies of State Department and inconclusive promises to investigate such cases cannot console people affected by such activities of the alliance. In this case, the purpose of NATO is clear – not to let Russian ships in the Mediterranean Sea, as they can actually destroy the terrorists.
And even if the US considers Assad tyrant and despot, murderer of democracy in Syria, he is still its president, who was elected by the citizens of this country. Solely Syrians must decide on his re-election, without any involvement of other states.
Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu was right when he advised Western partners to decide with whom they really are fighting – with terrorists or with Russia.
Perhaps the EU has forgotten who made all the recent attacks in European cities. As it has forgotten that it was the Soviet Army that liberated their country from the Nazis in 1945. So, during the fight with an imaginary threat, which in addition was imposed from the outside, we must understand that the real enemy will regularly administer his deadly blow at the time while government resources will be directed to the other side.
Miroslav Rudenko, the DPR People’s Council deputy