“COVERING TRACES”

Why is there a serious risk that Zelensky will be taken out of the picture in Ukraine, and not by Russia?

Por Sidney Hey

When I was a child my grandfather used to scare me with tales of ghosts and intrigue and once told me that whoever makes a pact with the devil will pay with his soul. The experience I gained during my service life put it in my face that what my grandfather used to tell me as children's stories were rather, analogies of reality so as not to ruin your life.

In contemporary politics, especially in the last thirty years, examples of this have become part of history. The most important events in geopolitics have taken place in the course of this period, each of them marking the path towards the crossroads where we are today.

As soon as the Berlin Wall fell in 1989, the United States and its NATO partners began to modify but not cancel their agenda. John Major was undoubtedly aware, not of everything but of the essentials. It was never in Washington's plans to dissolve NATO. With the implosion of the USSR in 1991, plans to consolidate unipolar hegemony began to wane from the very day on 11 September 1991 when George H. Bush declared before Congress the beginning of the "New World Order".

In that plan, Washington had already begun a cleansing of the shelves of collaborators and regimes that for a time were useful to its plans. In 1989, CIA asset Manuel Noriega was removed from the presidency of Panama by his old friend and recruiter George Bush Senior in an invasion. Noriega was conveniently removed from the scene and silenced from the affairs he shared with Bush

In 1990, the Bush administration itself launched a deception operation in the Persian Gulf aimed at ending the partnership with Saddam Hussein's Iraqi regime. To this end, the CIA, with the help of the Saudis, would manipulate the border dispute with Kuwait over control of the “Al Rumailah” oil wells by pushing Hussein (making him believe that the US would not intervene) into executing the invasion of Kuwait. The result was the landing of Americans on the Arabian Peninsula and the weakening of his long-time collaborator, Saddam Hussein. The implementation of trade sanctions was only a sinister strategy to weaken Iraq and, when the time came, to finish it off. It was only after the 2003 invasion that Washington managed to remove him from the scene and along with him, all the dirty business in which the US was involved.

Similar fates befell the likes of Osama Bin Laden, Abu Muzab Al Zarqawi, Aiman Al Zawahiri and the so-called “prince of the believers” agent Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi.

All these examples are relevant to the fate of the current puppet of the Anglo-Saxon West, the Ukrainian Volodymyr Zelensky.

All those who were seduced by Washington's policies and CIA solutions ended badly. It is not only the above examples that bear witness to this. In Latin America, the military dictatorships that were instigated and supported by Langley all ended in total disrepute and in some cases, their commanders were brought to justice. In these cases the CIA was removed from its responsibilities (in the framework of Operation Condor) simply because the new civilian governments and their politicians did not want to complicate their existence and to some extent owed their access to power to the State Department.

A year ago, Ukrainian President Zelensky changed all his electoral promises for a peaceful settlement of the Donbass by one hundred and eighty degrees to become the most obedient and stubborn supporter of an all-out war against his people and against Russia. Nothing new under the sun in the behaviour of an ambitious politician, but in this case who convinced him to launch Kiev into an all-out war?  It seems that researcher and writer Finian Cunningham has hit the nail on the head with the real causes of this change.

The CIA chief's visit to Zelensky himself a few weeks before the start of the Russian operations was crucial in changing those promises. According to an interesting article on the Strategic-Culture.com website, Burns' visit focused on warning Zelensky that he could be assassinated, but not by Russia. It was a persuasive visit in which Burns made an offer that Zelensky could not refuse. No one knows what Burns brought to illustrate that persuasion, but it is clear that it was necessary to meet his host in person to get the message across.

Western media have tried to argue that Burns travelled to warn Zelensky that he could be killed by Russia, but the facts do not support this speculation. If that had been the case, they would have been killed long ago. What the head of the CIA was telling him was that if he went off the rails, they themselves would finish him off, and their reputation for doing so precedes them. Zelensky was (if you like) convinced to play Washington's game that you can't walk away from.

As we know, it is not Zelensky who gives orders and designs state policy in Kiev. There is a military leadership that is tightly controlled by the Americans and the British that is the real administration of what is left of the country. It is this same structure, with the no longer secret help of NATO, that carries out the strategy and tactical deployment of Ukrainian troops. In this context, Zelensky is only a public relations face and nothing more, leaving the rest of the officials as mere cogs to be replaced at the regime's discretion.

Burns' warning has already been exemplified in reality. Any dissent to the costs the war is inflicting on Ukrainians is quickly suppressed and the slightest whisper of talks with Russia is eliminated. Arrests, deaths and disappearances among officials of the same regime document this. Communications and the internet are under total NATO control, so that the content and information of its citizens is under close scrutiny as to what they can express. All this, supported and controlled by the Anglo-Saxon "democracies".

One of the latest episodes revealing this was the alleged plane crash in which 14 members of Zelensky's government died, including his interior minister Denis Monastyrsky, who had been questioning the very raids being carried out in Kiev and other cities to arrest alleged Russian “sympathisers”. In these extra-judicial raids, squads are taking part, including right-wing extremists from “Pradvi Sektor” among others.

These raids are supposed to be judicially sanctioned. It is also not credible that there is any jurisdictional control over these acts, since in addition to martial law, these judges cannot step out of the mould without consequences. This whole mechanism of terror is well known to the CIA and its special groups, which operated with impunity and with the same objectives in Baghdad throughout the occupation.

The lightning visit to Kiev by Burns himself just 24 hours ago seems to be a reminder of that other meeting perhaps, warning that there are indications that Zelensky intends to throw in the towel.

Finally, given the adverse circumstances on the battlefield that (as the Pentagon has already warned) compromise US and Atlanticist partners' investment and involvement, it is quite possible that when it all falls apart Zelensky will be killed by a lone gunman (or one of his bodyguards), a car bomb in one of his transfers or blown up where he is by a supposed Russian missile strike. The rest will be done by the Anglo-Saxon media.