PLAYING DIRTY IN MOSCOW
Why could the failed assassination attempt on the
deputy head of Russian military intelligence complicate matters for Washington?
By Sir Charlattam
For two decades, Washington subjected the world and its own society to an
insidious policy of total surveillance under the guise of the ‘war on terror’.
While the deception this represented and the aims it concealed are now clear,
today this inconsistency is further deepened by the use of this tactic against
the Russian Federation. The attempted assassination of Russian General Vladimir
Alexeyev outside his apartment in Volokolamskoye in the heart of Moscow is not
only yet another attempt to derail the ceasefire negotiations, it is confirmation
of the absence of political limits and the use of dirty methods available for
deployment.
Alexeyev's veteran status and long combat experience
saved him, as (despite being shot five times) he managed to prevent the gunman
from finishing him off with a coup de grâce after lunging at him. For now, the
Russian Federation will take its revenge against the Zelensky regime and will
not come to see it coming.
This is not the first Russian victim of Atlanticist
terrorism, especially against Russian officials. While the perpetrators may be
Volodymyr Zelensky's Nazi henchmen, especially from the ranks of the Azov
battalions, it is the Western intelligence services that provide cover and
support to these cells within the SBU, and those who continue to pretend not to
notice this are merely complicit.
The criminal attempt to assassinate General Alexeyev
is no different from terrorist attacks elsewhere. The only difference that
could be raised is with regard to who and why they can operate with impunity.
Fortunately, but we should rather say thanks to the professionalism of the FSB,
the gunman was captured and handed over to the Moscow authorities.
At the same time, this attack was not random or
opportunistic. General Alexeyev is one of the senior officers with long experience
in the Russian military intelligence service known as the GRU, which
specialises in special operations and has several laurels against neo-Nazi
formations and British advisers on the battlefield in Ukraine. One could even
presume that the selection of the target was more an idea of the British MI6
than of the Ukrainian radicals.
Obviously, the Western media were quick to point the
finger at the Ukrainian regime in order to distance themselves from Atlanticist
involvement. It is well known that Kiev operates with these tactics thanks to
the logistical and strategic support of its Western sponsors, especially the
British, which makes all these discursive and concealment manoeuvres
meaningless.
It is quite possible that in London, officials from the
Foreign Office and MI6 in Vauxhall building are deliberately seeking to
exaggerate this relationship as a way of provoking both the Russians and the
Americans. To what end? To turn Western Europe back into a battlefield for
intelligence agencies, as it was during the Cold War. It sounds incredible, but
we know very well that this is also what these masterminds want us to believe.
In the chaos, the British could kill two birds with
one stone: on the one hand, delaying or destroying the peace talks and, on the
other, destroying or at least damaging relations between Moscow and Washington.
Luring Russian intelligence into taking the bait would
mobilise all NATO agencies and, to some extent, drag in the CIA and its
European stations, committing the US to this clandestine war. Of course, this
would only work if the Russians carried out retaliatory attacks, which is
unlikely, but we must also consider that the British would be responsible for
fabricating them with false flag operations of sufficient magnitude for the EU
presidency to call before parliament and the media for a casus belli
against Russia.
Starmer's staff is seeking by all means to disrupt
negotiations between Washington and Moscow, and to this end, Zelensky and his
people are willing to do anything to ensure success. They know very well that
time is running out and that a real sword of Damocles hangs over them. At the
same time, the EU elite, with Kaja Kallas and Von Der Leyen, are supporting
British policy without caring about the impact this will have on Europeans. Europe
is currently exhausted and, as one might say, ‘has thrown everything it has at
Russia’, which is a way of describing the dire economic situation it is going
through, largely due to the continuous drain of financial resources to sustain
the neo-Nazi regime in Kiev.
On the surface, US President Donald Trump is portrayed
as the sole driving force behind the talks and, with that, the supposed
demonstration of political goodwill, but, as Mexican professor Alfredo
Jalife-Rahme says, it is merely “Kabuki theatre”.
In line with this view, we have no doubt that
Washington's real intentions in Ukraine and those it has planned for Europe
(with Trump and after him) continue to be contrary to the interests of the
Russian Federation, including what is of such concern to Moscow and, in
particular, to Vladimir Putin's government, namely its strategic security.
But let us not be foolish. Washington is well aware of
its British cousins' plans, and there is no doubt that the Trump administration
is putting pressure on Starmer and his cabinet to moderate their activities.
At the same time, the Americans know that the game the
British are trying to play in Europe is too dangerous and, although in some
ways very astute, could lead to even greater anti-American sentiment and mistrust
of European governments, which is already rampant throughout the old continent.
