EN DEBATE

“RUSIA, GRAN BRETAÑA Y EL ATLÁNTICO SUR”

El incidente de Skripa en Gran Bretaña le ha dado a Londres las excusas para reabrir un frente conflictivo con Moscú con claras non sanctas intensiones

Por Javier B. Dal y Pepe Beru

A cuatro mese del incidente que causó la desaparición del submarino argentino “ARA San Juan” y sus 44 tripulantes, aún no hay noticias ni versiones oficiales ciertas que expliquen lo que pudo haber ocurrido, aunque es “vox populi” en el continente que los británicos y chilenos tuvieron algo que ver en el asunto.  El paso del tiempo sin que el gobierno argentino haya hecho nada inteligente para tratar de dar con la ubicación del submarino ha desatado todo tipo de reacciones entre los familiares como entre los sectores interesados en que esto se esclarezca.

El gobierno argentino está claramente condicionado a maniobrar con libertad y ello ha quedado en evidencia con la escandalosa situación del submarino malogrado. Ya ha dejado de ser un secreto que es Londres quien controla de hecho y tras bambalinas desde 1990, las actividades militares de la república Argentina –entre otras-, conforme así quedo revelado de lo que surge de los infames Tratados de Madrid firmados en 1990 por la cancillería del gobierno de Carlos Saúl Menem.

La paulatina desintegración de las Fuerzas Armadas no es una cuestión surgida por la presión de los grupos politizados de los Derechos Humanos o la influencia que estos han tenido sobre una opinión pública de continuada pendularidad. No nada de eso. Se trata más bien de una muy bien y aceitada cadena de obligaciones que sujetaron y siguen sujetando al país a una situación claudicante y silenciosa, que es apoyada desde dentro por los sectores influyentes de la economía y las finanzas. Como suele decir un viejo amigo, “sabes, no hay misterios, solo existe el encubrimiento”.

En el caso de los argentinos, ello se hace patente. Y en lo que hace al submarino “desaparecido”, aquel dicho nunca pudo haber encajado mejor. El gobierno ya había comenzado con sus tapaderas mucho antes de comenzar a investigar el hecho. Que nadie se engañe con aquel primer movimiento de la 4º flota estadounidense ni mucho menos con los efectivos británicos que llegaron presurosos desde la base en “Mount Pleasant” en Malvinas; solo fue una charada, una actuación ante los ojos de la opinión pública para desviar la atención, nada más. Hicieron la pantomima que debían hacer y se retiraron, pero antes se aseguraron de que sus indicaciones de búsqueda se mantuvieran inalterables.

Al día de hoy el único grupo de búsqueda extranjero es el ruso con el buque “Yantar” y su tripulación altamente capacitada para estos menesteres, que además de haber expuesto su desacuerdo con el área de búsqueda, ha sido objeto de acciones de entorpecimiento de sus tareas por parte del mismo gobierno que dice que está haciendo algo para encontrar al aparato perdido. No se necesita una maestría en política internacional ni mucho menos para advertir que Buenos Aires cumple con las directivas del Foreign Office británico, algo que a nadie ya debe escandalizar. Es por ello, que para estos funcionarios el submarino o cualquier pista de él no deben aparecer y mucho menos, debe ser hallado por mérito de los rusos.

Pero a quienes si molesta y mucho la presencia del equipo de búsqueda ruso es a los británicos, quienes habían lanzado todo tipo de acusaciones contra el buque “Yantar” alegando que en realidad es un buque espía que podía llegar a poner en peligro los tendidos de cables submarinos, preocupación que no concita cuando los buques de arrastre chinos y de otras nacionalidades barrenan la plataforma submarina. Claramente son excusas y nada más. Hay una seria preocupación en Londres por el posible éxito de los rusos en la búsqueda y encuentren al submarino, desatando un predicamento para el gobierno de Teresa May.

En las actuales circunstancias por el caso Skripal, una posibilidad como la planteada sería muy mala, pero muy mala prensa para Londres que ha acusado muy livianamente y sin pruebas a Moscú y al mismo presidente ruso Vladimir Putin de haber mandado a envenenar a un doble agente ruso que radicaba en Gran Bretaña. Y es algo cínicamente paradójico ver como el gobierno británico, sin pruebas o al menos  haberlas presentado ante un organismo imparcial como la Agencia para la Prohibición del uso de Armas Químicas, ya ha decidido que tiene a un culpable por este atentado, que dicho sea de paso, no ha sido perpetrado contra un ciudadano británico.

Hay muchas curiosidades en el caso. Los alegatos de que Skripal y su hija estarían contaminados con la cepa del agente nervioso “Novichok (A-230)”, que solo puede fabricarse en los laboratorios de la Federación rusa, no fue probada por Londres. Solo hay alegatos furibundos y sobreactuados por parte del gobierno que –como de costumbre- son amplificados por los medios occidentales. Es más, cuando el mismo Putin les invito a que demuestren si ello es cierto, la ira de Downing Street 10 y sus más destacados personeros no tardaron en responder con amenazas e improperios. Ahora bien, si hay tanta seguridad en lo acusado ¿Por qué no poner las pruebas del caso para demostrar la veracidad de sus argumentos? Las ambigüedades del gobierno británico hacen nacer serias sospechas de que se trate de una operación realizada por sus propios servicios  (MI-5 o el MI-6) inoculando una variante similar a ese agente químico, algo que con los tétricos antecedentes de la historia contemporánea (especialmente sobre Iraq), no resulta una novedad.

Además, se sabe que en Londres desde hace décadas se refugian varios científicos rusos con conocimientos en el desarrollo de este agente nervioso que desertaron en épocas de la URSS; pues entonces ¿Por qué no sería posible que una variante de aquel veneno, haya sido reproducido y hoy se halle en los arsenales británicos y haya sido empleado para esta posible jugarreta sucia?

Más allá de los alegatos del gobierno británico y de la supuesta afrenta por el uso de aquel agente neurotóxico que Boris Johnson califico como un intolerable ataque químico en suelo británico, la reacción es de una victimización exagerada.

Si miramos el caso argentino, ¿Qué hizo el gobierno de Macri respecto del destino de sus hombres ante las claras sospechas de la implicancia británica en el luctuoso suceso? Obviamente muchos dirán que el país no está en condiciones de lanzar amenazas o condenas a nadie, que está indefenso y que no tiene Fuerzas Armadas pero ¿Quiénes lo han colocado en esta situación, una que ha llegado a que 44 personas parecieran valer menos que la de un ex espía ruso? Son los síntomas de la improvisación de una nación manejada por anglófilos que obviamente no irán contra sus verdaderos intereses.

Ahora bien, en lo estrictamente geopolítico, la colaboración rusa en la búsqueda del “ARA San Juan” es un clavo en el zapato macrista y mucho más dentro de sus sectores más ultrareaccionarios en donde se alinean probritánicos, sionistas y partidarios de que el país sea “custodiado” por los EEUU (mediante bases militares). Las actuales circunstancias que rodean a la tensión creada por Londres con sus acusaciones sin pruebas y amenazas contra Rusia están empujando al mundo a un clima sombrío y peligroso.  Veremos cómo impacta eso en el Atlántico sur donde los británicos mantienen una guarnición militar de ocupación.

Las bravuconadas del sionista Boris Johnson y las  acusaciones de la misma primer ministro Teresa May en el Parlamento, solo buscan el choque diplomático y mayor prueba de estas intensiones son el inmediato alineamiento de los principales países de la OTAN (y con sus sillas en el Consejo de Seguridad) detrás de los argumentos británicos. Está muy claro que se está tratando de recrear una “nueva guerra fría” con la clara intensión por tratar de contener la revelada potencialidad militar rusa publicada el 1º de marzo y que desató las corridas en el Pentágono y en la sede atlantista en Bruselas, Bélgica.  Ante esto ¿De cuál o qué lado va a ponerse Argentina?

OPINION

"THAT LOOKS LIKE SOMETHING RUSSIAN"

Please, please tell me now is there something the British public should know?

By Sir Charlattam

It became very familiar to me that scene in which on a beautiful afternoon in the years we used those thick bags and caps several for the cold and go unnoticed, someone who walked quietly and without the slightest suspicion that the danger was haunting him suddenly gunman on foot or from a car, shot accurately about his humanity. Ah, those dangerous days of the days of the cold war.

I speak of hot times of the seventies and mid-eighties when the silent war between spies was very hot in Europe and where uncertainty surrounded us.

When I read in London newspapers about the attack on a former Russian agent, allegedly a dissident on a street sidewalk in Salisbury when he was with his 33-year-old daughter in a crowded place, monitored by cameras and all that As an anti-terrorist security assembly that controls us today, I felt that adrenaline that I had not felt for years when I retired from the service tired of the garbage that had to be swallowed so that the government could justify its dirty policies. I'm tired of being the dung pawn of his damn games.

The objective of this attack was a very particular subject. This is Sergei Skripal a former Colonel of Russian Military Intelligence known as GRU, a section of the armed forces that are fearsome and highly effective in the commission of operations in open wars, counterinsurgency and anti-terrorism. The guy is not a "nobody`s" precisely and is not clean, as I could check with my sources. He is a double agent who worked for the Russian government at times when he was in the army and more precisely in 1995 during the times of the inept Boris Yeltsin, was recruited by the British MI-6 and used his position to spy in favor of London and Washington that after being detected was arrested in 2004 by the FSB and after being sentenced in 2006 to 13 years in jail, only spent a few years in prison to be benefited by an amnesty decreed in 2010 by the government of Dimitri Medveved that freed him after an exchange of prisoners between Moscow and London.

Skripal captured by FSB in 2004

Skripal was a bird of accounts unimportant to Moscow. When the Russian army was sold, it was going through a time of economic calamity and corruption ravaged its cadres. It was the best time for the CIA and the MI-6 for a few envelopes of money to be bought to several wills and especially to a valuable resource within one of the most sensitive sections of the Russian Armed Forces. Skripal was tempted and perhaps thought that all that talent he had, was not useful for a Soviet Union that no longer existed. At that time, a source like Skripal was highly important in order to give a hand to the Chechen rebels who made life impossible for the Russians.

But his luck was short and the money paid for his betrayal did not succeed in escaping. When he was captured, he lost the courage to the West and let the judicial process and his imprisonment continue. By the time they exchanged their employers in London, they did not value it as they used to, but you had to be sure to know what you could have told.

It did not pose any potential threat to Russia's security since the possible contacts it still had with comrades within the Federation and sources of British intelligence operating inside Moscow are well contracted. Then I got to thinking why the Kremlin would order an attack like this, against a guy who is not worth what louts like Boris Johnson and the informants of MI-6 boss Alex Younger suggest and in broad daylight? The answer is impossible. Something dirty is hidden behind and there is much more involved related to the same sectors of the intelligence of house that boys with stereotypes of the old "KGB".

There have been speculations to try to connect several previous episodes (death of Boris Berezovsky and his associates, Alexander Litvinenko and others) to blame Vladimir Putin himself for these murders by order of state. Without having determined what was the motive and the chemical or biological agent that could have been used against Skripal and her daughter and even less to the alleged attackers, the accusations are snatched. The urgency of the same Prime Minister May seen on Monday before the Parliament is worrisome.

It is very suggestive that this attack occurred a few days after Vladimir Putin announced to the world that Russia with its potential military revelations occupies an important place in international geopolitics and that clearly has not been at all liked by the British political and financial Establishment. What to say about the commotion inside Downing Street 10 and the plotters of the Foreign Office who are clearly limited in their power of action, much more than their American partners who harder hit the news than go one step further against Moscow It would have catastrophic consequences. The possibility of rapid and devastating retaliation is now a reality against them that they cannot ignore.

To this, the threatening threats of Teresa May and her cabinet to Moscow can only lead to a loud laugh as London does not have to make a lesson as it tries to suggest and playing dirty can also cost you dearly.

To the worst and disgust of the representatives of the government of Teresa May, the sanctions against Russia only tickle and the attempts to muddy Putin's image as the evil and all powerful of a dictatorial government cause at least many laughter since the history of the kingdom leaves much to be desired in respect to the sovereignty of other countries and let's not talk about human rights. In this last sense, the charade fraud of the "White Helmets" sponsored by the MI-6 inside Syria country, is a sample of the dirty and criminal games of the British government that in spite of the propaganda, cannot elude.

Another misleading point presented by the government of May is to connect it with the previous Litvinenko, another double agent of Russian origin poisoned without realizing in 2006 with radioactive element "Plutonium 210" in a cafe crammed with occasional customers.

That's the way things are. With what we saw we can ask ourselves: Can you believe that the Russians need to perform such a reckless action and also so clumsy after what was announced on March 1? If you only use logic, you will conclude that this does not make sense.

EN DEBATE

"TWO STEPS ... TO THE ABYSS"

The road that Argentina is taking in its alliances can compromise its security and that of the entire Southern Hemisphere. A New policy of carnal relations?

By Sir Charlattam & Dany Smith

After the inauguration of the new legislative year in charge of the Argentine president Mauricio Macri and his speech before the legislative body of both houses of Congress, a political year began that will bring several novelties of which the president himself refrained from mentioning, clearly conditioned by strong external and internal pressure. It can be said that these developments are linked to the unexplained event of the submarine "ARA San Juan" that can lead to disastrous implications.

Although Macri dedicated a passage to the 44 crew members of the unexplained submarine, he did not contemplate an action plan or any policy to determine what had really happened; only a symbolic mention, as a way to shape the relatives who remain unconscionable in the face of so many incongruities and silences that have revealed that a part of their government tries to prevent the submarine from being found.

What can be behind all this? Dany asked me when we met at a café in Belfast, Ireland to check what would be the article of the month for geopolitical affairs of Great Britain in the South Atlantic. The first thing that occurred to me to say was, "everything that ordinary Argentines may never know". When the incident took place there was a lot of activity in the area and not only were the Navy of its Graceful Majesty operating with its Chilean allies (incidentally carrying out anti-submarine operations), there were also Americans, Chinese and intelligence ships with flags of others countries That was like a "field day".

Remember that the British had hired an Israeli company to install in the Falklands Islands, its famous and ineffective anti-missile system "Iron Dome" created by Tel Aviv to counteract the threat of the Palestinian homemade "missiles" Kassam, which Despite their rudimentary technology, they are not so easy to intercept. But the vendors of these systems are as good businessmen as suppliers of military technology. Maybe they are better businessmen than the second.

Think that the idea of ​​this system so sold by propaganda is to stop missiles and the Palestinian rockets are just that, rockets with very good shapes and design but nothing more. But taking advantage of the stage fright that the rich Israeli settlers from areas bordering the Gaza Strip such as Sderot, it was usufruct by the private security industry entrepreneurs who with the complicity of the military leaders and the corrupt right-wing politicians who control Israel, they make this a round business. Just calculate the following: If a homemade rocket costs "Hamas" 100 dollars the finished unit and you notice that each projectile interceptor of this reformed "Patriot" costs the Israeli state 50,000 dollars a unit, it is a clean gain of 1000 percent. Something not close in the logical equation of cost and risks to face, but of guaranteed profits for private manufacturers in did.

In the case of Great Britain and using the silly excuses that Argentina acquired mid-last year an endowment of a dozen old French planes "Super Etendard", London reached an agreement with the Israeli company "Rafael Advanced Defense Systems" which works with the firm "Mprest" for the assembly of its "Iron Dome" batteries on the islands as part of an NSCR modernization policy of its obsolete anti-aircraft systems. We know that Argentines not only do not have strategic missiles as they knew they had in the past (Condor II), but they do not even have rockets like the Palestinians, much less the will to fight them. Despite long discussions about military spending at the National Security Council (NSC), the Cabinet authorized the signing of this millionaire contract with the satisfaction of Chief of Staff Sir Nick Carter and Secretary of Defense Gavin Williamson.

But the business was not absent from clashes between private defense companies. According to sources within the Ministry and the secretary of Fallon, American firms such as "General Dynamics Land Systems" their offers were placed under the pile of paper to benefit Israeli companies, probably because of the incentives they advanced.

argentine security commitive in Tel Avic

The contract signed between London and the Israeli company is around 79 million British Pounds, demonstrating in addition to excessive spending, an unusual interest in "defending the islands." The irony of the case is that while the Israelis install this system for the British, Tel Aviv trains and is advising Argentine military and police forces with their advisors from the IDF and the Shin Bet in the occupied territories.

We know that the installed system did not respond to any Argentine threat. You can talk to any admiral or retired general to give you his opinion about it and I assure you that none of them endorses the Foreign Office's argument of a real threat from the continent. The reports of the Ministry of Defense of Fallon are pure garbage. It is a mountain of imbecilities, which are not believed even by kindergarten children; Maybe not`s, ours but if the Argentines, do not you think?

Maybe the Argentines if they were aware and with their poor resources tried to rummage beyond what they could and died in the attempt.

The mission of the "ARA San Juan" ran into an inconvenience and that was "saw what should not see" Do you think it is linked to the anti-missile system that would be mounted on the islands? Dany asked me, to which I replied in a clear voice "in part yes." At that time the Israeli specialists were already working on the islands and having confirmed this was something diplomatically embarrassing, you know, calls to the ambassador in Buenos Aires for explanations etcetcetc.

We know that the islands have a military base but behind that, there is one of the most important electronic intelligence and satellite tracking facilities in the hemisphere; if there is a threat to regional peace, it comes from the islands and not from the continent, although the Chinese in the province of Neuquén have a strategic role in all this.

Among the mills in Mount Pleasant is a high power antenna that, in addition to receiving communications from the NATO`s geostationary satellites that sweep the region, emit infrasound waves that produce alterations in living organisms, among them the Argentine unsuspecting and also in the Kelpers.

To the worse taste of the gentlemen in the Ministry of Defense and their lobbyists in the House of Commons, the arrival of the Russians in the waters of the South Atlantic with the ship "Yantar" can complicate everything.

It seems that to cover the mouths (very few indeed) of the most annoying claimants of the military institution of the Argentine Navy, the government of Buenos Aires accepted a proposal from Tel Aviv and commissioned a naval attaché to none other than Israel for allegedly, prepare a group of officers in naval intelligence doctrine and technical knowledge of naval engines to deliver soon. 

This coincides with the continued arrival in Israel of American contingents that is overheating the spirits of the Arabs and the Islamic world. But this smells like shit and some sources in Buenos Aires have confirmed that this is something more important and this would involve linking the country to the global geostrategy of Tel Aviv and Patagonia is its primary objective. For others this would only be to silence the search queries of the submarine. What do you think?