Dear readers, we are changing our page layout to create a better use of page "real estate" therefore some changes will take place in page layout and links...this is all done to improve the readership experience in accessing what is of interest .... Please don't forget that you can request more emphasis on specific topics and our Correspondents' Pool will respond .. to make requests send an email to telling us what interests you or even what you think we are not covering well enough....''"". . . . Defend your freedom of choice and opinion by being better informed . . . . . are you concerned about being profiled by social media? Do you know that today the better known "social" media only let you see what they want you to see . . . . and they restrict who can see your posts . . . as a result we are bombarded with partial facts and biased assertions in an environment of censorship . . . . set yourself free by joining the CybaCity community . . . it is entirely virtual but more real than the media circus that surrounds us ...... freedom, it is so important... ........ ........

.... so that we may be free from corrupt representation, factional impositions and unjust settlements

Archive 1    Archive 2

11/08/2022: In today's pod cast anchored by John Harris on the Guardian's Politics Weekly UK involved a conversation with RMT general secretary Mick Lynch and Miatta Fahnbulleh, the chief executive of the New Economics Foundation, reviewing how to tackle this social emergency. At least some people are picking up on just dire the situation in this country is. Certainly the conversation was more interesting and relevant than what is coming out of government nowadays. The now tedious daily exposure of two very unimpressive candidates for the prime minstership of this country does not settle the rising anxiety of increasing numbers of constituents in this country. The drought and realization of all of the cross-related consequences of this example of an early taste of the impact of climate change is met with inadequate response by government.

Dr. Fahnbulleh seems to put some faith in Keir Starmer in coming up with something this summer but as long as he remains under the spell of Peter Mandelson, this is very unlikely. What is apparent at the moment is that both the government and the remoulding opposition are both fearful of the potential media reactions orchestrated by the City in response to any proposed changes to economic policies which the financial services sector and hedge funds do not like. Their general orientation is against unions so Starmer has made not supporting them on picket lines a way to keep on side. The other taboo is to question the independence of the Bank of England. Therefore a self-serving survival tactic is to keep repeating the mantra that the Bank of England should remain independent. Rather than acquiesce to this mantra it would be more productive to carry out a moratorium to assess the impact of Bank policies over the last 12 disastrous years raising the wealth of a minority and prejudicing increasing numbers of wage-earners with falling real incomes. The levels of income disparity in this country exceeds that of low income countries as a direct consequence of monetarism and the policies administered by the Bank of England (see previous posts). SAXO Bank have recently assessed the state of the UK economy as reverting back to that of a transition economy.

It is very evident to any serious analyst that the distribution of income in this country is unacceptable. This is why Mr. Lynch is talking about redistribution and food poverty becoming demands for action by increasing numbers of the constituents of this country.

The state of the economy, advancing stagflation and climate upheaval and apparent paralysis of an out-of-ideas government and lost leadership contestants, sees a rapid decline in the image of a government who do not appear to be on the job.

However, Mr. Lynch raised some interesting suggestions as well as intentions with which we would agree. Given the drastic economic circumstances facing increasing numbers of people, Lynch suggested that unions should be assisting people organize themselves in action groups so as to enliven our drab close to non-participatory democracy and bring about a wider public awareness of shared needs. This would fill a widening gap in public participation manufactured by a system that increasingly marginalizes the electorate. Indeed the recent policing legislation was oriented to prevent the type of public participation, which would be bound to involve protests, from taking place. As a result things could get ugly as a direct consequence of a government who does not engage with the issues of working people and, in spite of strikes, does not bother to participate in negotiations, at least to gain a better understanding of the issues.

Reading between the lines, as the current zombie government and party marionette show drags on for another three weeks and this alone is bringing many to the end of their tether. As Geoffrey Howe mumbled when attacking Mrs Thatcher in parliament, " .. the government is in office but not in power". It would seem that the only people hopeful of a miraculous delivery from all ills is the miniscule faction making up the membership of the Conservative party.

The common failure of conventional economic policies is their creation of winners, losers and some who remain in a policy neutral impact state. This is because conventional policies introduce a differentials in impact created by a zero-sum approach to policy assuming that if some gain, others have to lose. This assumption is rejected by the real incomes approach to economics, a contemporary extension of constitutional economics.

This article reports of the exchanges in the Saturday sessions in a recent weekend APEurope Correspondents' Pool Workshop (06/08/20022-07/08/2022) consisting of presentations prepared by SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab on "Positive Systems Consistency". These workshops are sponsored by the George Boole Foundation.

The Sunday sessions will be covered in Part 2 of this article.

A tenet of constitutional economics is that a country's constitution should serve the interests of the state, the community and the individual. A second tenet is that policies developed under the terms of the constitution, clearly need to meet the same test of satisfying the interests of the state, community and individuals. Because Britain does not have a written constitution the ability of policies to transgress the need to meet the needs of all constituents becomes problematic because of party politics. As a result, the real incomes approach to economics, as a branch of constitutional economics, has the tenet of "Positive Systemic Consistency" (PSC) i.e. policies should benefit all constituents. This is a major challenge in a partisan world. There is therefore a need for politics to be organized in a way that facilitates the achievement of PSC. Is this a criticism of the British constitutional settlement and resulting system of democracy? Yes it is.

Read Part 1.... Read Part 2....

07/08/2022: A favourite statement by the current leadership of this country is that Britain now has more people employed than ever before .... but they fail to mention the state of real wages.... the real wages of 40% of the constituency have been declining for 30 years. The evidence is apparent in the growing numbers of people who are in work and who cannot afford bare essentials.

The reality is that the term "full employment" has no meaning without due consideration of the levels and state of distribution of real wages.

06/08/2022: The leadership candidates Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss are having trouble handling topics concerning illegality by failing to understand the causes of the symptoms they wish to attack.

Rishi Sunak is attempting to establish just how effective he will be in handling "illegal immigration" while not explaining why this exists. Symptomatically it exists because the UK provides no legal routes for such people intentionally so that they can be classified as illegal immigrants. This in itself is not legal. More importantly this flow of people has been caused by Britain joining in illegal invasions of countries in the Middle East and elsewhere, helping to destroy the economies of these countries, murder close to a million people and destroy livelihoods. As a result we contributed directly to the flow of immigrants but do not wish to face up to our responsibility in creating this crisis.

Sunak's desire to look tough simply avoids reference to the fundamental illegality of the UK government's actions; this is a man who keeps declaring he is honest with the public!!.

Liz Truss is forthrightly defending a puppet regime in Ukraine created by an illegal violent coup in 2014. A government that has closed down independent TV stations and media, imprisoned opposition politicians, had some killed and maintains a kill list of journalists who have criticised the country, several of whom have since been murdered. Russia entered the ongoing war carried out by this dreadful regime, against the people of the Donbass after the deaths of some 14,000 people and a build up for a major invasion of the Donbass. The British government decided to impose sanctions on Russia and to carry out a series of illegal confiscations by looting the assets belonging to private Russian citizens. These sanctions, enthusiastically supported by Liz Truss as foreign secretary, have resulted in international gas and petroleum prices rising to such high levels that this has created a serious problems for British constituents who cannot afford to cook or heat their homes. Contrary to the government propaganda, Russia maintained its adherence to legal contracts for gas supplies so those countries who did not break contracts continued to receive gas at the original and far lower price. The continued series of incompetent decisions by EU countries and the UK have ended up with less Russian gas being delivered and prices rising to higher levels. It has not been Russia using gas as a weapon but rather the UK government imposing sanctions together with EU countries leading to constraints on this commodity trade.

Truss is struggling to invent economic policy solutions to an energy crisis which in good part has been created by our foreign policies which she managed bolstered by her over-sold assertion that she is the one who stood up to Putin. This woman needs to realize that sanctions are illegal and just because the USA revels in the use of this weapon, does not mean we need to follow like sheep and prejudice our own constituents, and then attempt to blame Russia for the boomerang blow-back on British voters. To claim that this hardship is the price of defending democracy is simply a way to maintain the corruption surrounding the billions of dollars that have flowed into Ukraine with no effective oversight under a regime that has absolutely no democratic credentials.

06/08/2022: The Bank of England's quantitative easing between 2008 and beginning of this year, diverted funds into assets away from vital investment for rises in productivity in the supply side production sectors. The Cameron Conservative government doubled down on this lunacy with Chancellor George Osborne imposing austerity in order to accelerate their desire to reduce the public sector leading to around 75,000 firemen, police and nurses departing so as to place the NHS in an impossible position when Covid-19 turned up. This process was enthusiastically supported by Bank of England excessive tranches of quantitative easing boosting asset prices under the governorship of Mark Carney.

Covid-19 only further exacerbated the state of affairs creating supply chain issues from which we are slowly recovering now. Now the Bank of England has decided, in its inexplicable wisdom, to further depress the economy by raising the cost of investment, mortgages and supply side production.

In a recent interview, the Bank's governor said the reason the Bank is raising interest rates is to suppress inflation mootimg that "we could be heading for a depression" and perhaps 13% inflation. As usual the Bank has taken the wrong decision by speeding our entry into, and the degree of, depression and with inflation now likely to top 15%.

By analyzing mechanisms involved in inflation and money movements the real incomes approach established in several analyses and papers such as, "Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis", that the Bank of England's guide in the form of the Quantity Theory of Money is wrong and incapable of establishing the effects of money volumes or interest rates on price inflation in goods and services. So why does the Bank continue to attempt to apply disproved solutions to the country's detriment?

It is very apparent that there are significant gaps in the practical economics knowledge of the functionaries and management of the Bank of England that calls into question its "independence", mandate and behaviour. First of all its policy instruments are not fit for purpose in the context of inflation control. It is notable that after over 12 years of relative chaos and a declining real economy that neither of the leading political parties have raised the question of "What is the Bank of England for?" and "Who does it serve?". Based on the track record of the last 12 years is seems to be there to serve the interests of asset holders and traders, banks, hedge funds and the rentier economy.

This weekend the APEurope Correspondents' Pool Workshop entitled "Positive Systemic Consistency" is reviewing how policies can ensure that all constituents benefit as a result of good policy design. The current problem has been that conventional policies have no such objective but invariably result in the creation of winners, losers and some who somehow remain in a neutral policy impact state. The result, therefore, is, invariably, a rising income and wealth disparity amongst constituents. This Workshop is using the behaviour of the Bank of England as a case study in how wealth distribution can be influenced by policy through the creation and support of a tiny group of constituents who deal in assets. At the same time, this same policy has undermined the real wealth and income of the majority of wage-earners. The irrefutable evidence created by quantitative easing demonstrates that this serious constitutional structural problem was created by the inherent bias in monetary policy. In reality, this effect was identified and commented on by Mervyn King, the former Bank governor, in 2013 when he was retiring. However, the media gave very little attention to what was and is a constitutional scandal. Mark Carney did nothing to use his "indepedent brief" to correct this unacceptable trend. Of course, the government whose main benefactors are to be found in the financial assets community, looked the other way and continued to devastate the wellbeing of growing numbers of constituents. In the meantime, Carney simply overplayed the role of the Bank in expanding its "prudential regulations" into and oversight of consumer interests in relation to private banks and other financial intermediaries. This, of course, only served to direct attention away from the fact that the Bank's policies continued to impoverish a large proportion of constituents. There have been discussions on whether the Bank maintained an independent brief under the Osborne tenancy of the Chancellorship. It would seem that in reality, it acted in a fashion to assist the government deliver on its objectives beyond the constraints of its mandate.

One of the revealing documents in the information pack for this Workshop explains this shocking result of the Conservative government's "management" of the economy. It is entitled, "The constitutional crisis created by monetary policy".

06/08/2022: Brian Bereltic and Mark Sleboda are two ex-military Americans who provide a realistic analysis of the situation in Ukraine. In the latest edition of The New Atlas they review the current situation which confirms Ukraine has lost this campaign. Notably they consider NATO member-supplied arms to have made no difference to the direction of this conflict. UK arms supplies are only symbolic and waste of money and the training is considered to be immoral, or even cruel, since most of the trainees will return to a known situation where they will not have enough tactical support, strategic oversight or field support to avoid death. We are convinced that this level of incompetence on the part of the UK government and the inevitable outcome will prove toxic for the Conservative government and especially those promoting this useless support. Jingoism, flag flying and the Battle of Britain spirit have a feel good dimension but they are to no avail and represent an irresponsible and suicidal approach for those facing a modern superior forces. This attempt to appear valiant, given that it is poorly trained Ukrainians in the battle is exceptionally craven and serves no other purpose other than virtue signalling.

An important observation is that the Russian front line troops are on a constant rotation so remain rested, fresh and alert while Ukrainian front line have hardly slept for 5 months, are out of ammo and in a desperate state.

There are convincing arguments put forward as to why Ukraine liquidated some 50 Azov battalion POWs; their own people. It seems that they were spilling the beans on Zelensky and the government and military corruption and incompetence. This risks destroying the gravy train cash flow enjoyed by armaments companies and politicians in Ukraine and in the West, while Ukrainians continue to die willy-nilly. Zelensky's life was always in danger but now potentially more so at the hands of Ukrainian ranks. This attack was via a system for which all targets and actions are vetted by the USA military, and thereby hangs a tail.

04/08/2022: The last leader has turned out to be somewhat controversial causing some discussion amongst the economics correspondents in the APEurope Correspondents' Pool. There is agreement with the general statement that much of economics taught at university is too close to politics, philosophy and ideology as opposed to the objective mechanics of economic relations. By relations, we refer to those between factors of production including management and work forces. This is why the last two candidates in the Conservative party race for leadership have been able to propose diametrically opposed proposals as solutions to the cost of living crisis. This, it is also agreed, is not confusion in the Conservative party as such, but rather reflects the lamentable state of economics and as a result, its teaching.

This weekend's APEurope Workshop will therefore delve into this topic under the general title of "Positive Systemic Consistency", a phrase coined by the real incomes approach to economics. This is a datum line, benchmark or test of the quality of a policy and the underlying theory to be imposed on analyses and models. Positive systems consistency is the condition where all constituents benefit from a policy. Many famous economists have asserted that such a condition is not feasible and, as a result, the last 50 years has witnessed zero-sum game policies generating winners, losers and those who remain in a policy neutral impact state. The last 12 years in particular, under Conservative rule, has seen a minority of constituents who are asset holders and traders multiplying their wealth, in some cases multiple times, while increasing numbers of wage-earners have been driven into poverty.

As a result of partisan positions and ideological objectives, there is for many constituents, an overly cynical approach to the notion of attempting to serve the whole community. This is because political parties respond to their financial benefactors and, as a result, in spite of the wonderful sounding rhetoric about democracy and serving the people, our economic models never achieve anything near to a state of positive systems consistency. The only time we came close to this ideal was during the period 1945 through 1965. This period was notable for rising real wages across the board, declining income disparity, rising productivity and full employment. Of note is the fact that policies were deflationary, there was little financialization and Keynesian policies were not applied because there was full employment.

We don't know how the Workshop will cover the related topic of how to improve university teaching of economics, no doubt for some a sensitive topic. There are some strongly held views on this subject so it will be interesting to see what emerges.

Conventional policies applying not-fit-for-purpose instruments remain intact. It is therefore feared that neither of the "solutions" advocated by our illustrious would-be-prime-ministers will change the underlying zero-sum game of monetary and fiscal policies associated with balanced budgets or tax reductions - these particular suggestions make no difference to the fact that inflation is out of control. We will report back on the Workshop proceedings.

04/08/2022: The continuous counter-claims of what they will do to improve the economy, by two people trained in economics at Oxford University is the most obvious indication of much of what they were taught has little practical application. This continued confusion transmitted by Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss in the leadership programme organized by SKY is not so much their fault because they know no better. Economics was taught at Oxford more or less as an ideological rhetoric so this is why we see two reasonably intelligent individuals making completely comntradictory propositions. This reflects negatively on the state of economics and, of course, the state of teaching of economics which evidently remains at some distance from a transparent practicality. Given the importance of sound economics to the wellbeing of the constituents of this country it is imperative that discussion needs to move away from frivolous "ideas" to "practical solutions".

The same can be seen in the Bank of England's humming an harring over interest rate rises without realizing any rise will be damaging. In his Reith Lecture, Mark Carney, the ex-governor of the Bank of England, referred to the lack of physical relationships in economics by referring to the concept of "Physics envy". This sort of statement could only come from someone with a similar economics educational background in Harvard and Oxford. Since the teaching of economics almost assumes economics to be a philosophy, what else can be expected?

The recent demolition of the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM) by the advent of the Real Money Theory (RMT) (see previous leaders) is an example of monetary policy having relied on a useless but revered identify that represented no more than supposition for centuries. With monetarism coming to dominate macroeconomic policy since the mid 1970s we have seen steadily declining real wages and rising income disparity. This also represents a failure of the economics profession to create deterministic quantitative policy models that work. For a long time the economy and companies have operated in spite of policy. However, corporate decision-making relies of quantitative decision analysis and not rhetoric or philosophy.

The approach to economic theory and policy design needs to be founded on microeconomic principles since it is companies that, in the end, establish output, product quality, prices, wages and investment for productivity. Similarly the cost of living, or prices, are set by companies and not be central banks. Starting from the ground up i.e. work groups and companies it is easier to identify practical solutions. On the other hand the conditions of each work group or company are all completely different and this is why grandiose top down notions by poorly trained economists can never work.

With these caveats in mind, on the basis of many "...What I will do...." type unqualified assertions, Truss became repetitive and running on empty whereas Sunak branched out a little more this time, folding in "innovation" to the conversation, perhaps something he picked up at Stanford. However, he still doesn't quite explain the role of innovation. Indeed, both candidates make a fuzzy reference to "growing the economy" but so far, neither has actually explained how. In reality the explanation is simple and it sould help clinch the issue. It is notable that neither has done this, so far.

04/08/2022: The notions of the effect of interest rates on inflation were disproved in the stagflation crisis of 1970s-1990s. Raising interest rates simply exacerbated the crisis. The Bank of England (BoE) is considering raising interest rates by around 20% (i.e. 0.25% over the existing 1.25%) or 40% (i.e. 0.5% over the existing 1.25%) over a low base, a legacy of quantitative easing. No matter which level is selected the impact will be to exacerbate the state of th economy by raising mortgage rates, outstanding loan premiums and killing off investment in needed productivity. As a result we will seen business failures, families losing their homes and productivity stalling.

Ever since the appearance of the substitute for the Quantity Theory of Money, in the form of the Real Money Theory in 2020, it has become apparent that a critical logic of monetarism has been proven to be wrong. In spite of this, the BoE remains wedded to completely out-dated and prejudicial policy instruments. The BoE's mandate and policy toolkit are simply unfit for a competitive world where the nation's survival depends upon rising productivity based on increasingly sustainable climatic-responsive economic production and service activities at competitive prices.

Contrary to intuition, this has nothing to do with monetary policy. Prices, productivity and wages are all matters under the control of private companies or the public sectors, and not central banks. In order to assist these sectors move the economy in the right direction there is a need for completely different policy instruments.

Beneficial Economics have released their Benecon Review 2021-2022 which identifies the most promising developments in economic theory and practice. There is also a summary of the Review available.
Companies and the public sector need to be compensated for decisions that lead to moderate, or even reduced prices, maintained through incentives to promote productivity. This can only be managed within fiscal space not by blindly going for balanced budgets or lowering taxation but gearing taxation to delivered productivity results in the form of lower unit prices. In this way purchasing power of wages will rise across the nation and this will generate real economic growth. At the moment there is a negative real growth, very much apparent in inflation heading for 10% and the BoE is about to exacerbate the state of affairs plunging more people into a state of poverty. If in doubt, readers can review the copious material establishing what has been stated in this leader by visiting the "British Strategic Review" website and the follow up Notes section where they will find a Note entitled: "Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis"

31/07/2022: The rising cost of living and inflation have no connection to balanced budgets, the Sunak tack, or lower tax rates, the Truss tack. This is because inflation is caused by an inability of companies to respond to rising input costs through adjustments through input substitution or rising productivity fast enough to maintain prices at accessible levels. This issue is therefore totally dependent on corporate price-setting in response to rising costs and levels of productivity and the prospects for raising productivity. Inflation arising from imported petroleum, gas and derivatives such as fertilizers become an issue to the degree the country relies on imports. The fact that the UK might not import a large amounts of such products from Russia is immaterial since the UK foreign policy has joined forces with several major gas and petroleum importers to sanction these Russian products. This has created international shortages and as a result, the international prices paid by the UK for these products from alterative sources, have increased steeply. Therefore, across the board, our inflation is cost push inflation generated by rising input costs.

This cost push inflation is the main cause of the cost of living crisis. However, this cost of living crisis is exacerbated by the results of quantitative easing (QE) which led to a significant rise in house prices as a speculative asset, as well as some commodities on which banks and others take speculative positions. As a result some commodities are more expensive as a direct result of QE and house prices and rents have moved beyond the ability of an increasing proportion of the UK constituency to be able to afford to purchase a home or even pay rent on family-sized houses. Therefore the cost of living crisis is a direct result of a poorly thought out foreign policy causing international price inflation and disastrous Bank of England monetary policy flushing excessive amount of money into speculative markets to cause domestic inflation.

Although there is an assumption that the Covid-19 supply chain disruptions also caused inflation, these effects were more related to supply disruptions, these are not the same as the structural issues cause by our own government. These supply chain issues are working themselves out.

Balancing the national budget has no effect on cost push inflation or the cost of living. All of the attempts to solve inflation by lowering marginal taxes, did not work, This was experimented with in the last international petroleum price crisis under the name of "supply side economics". The result was that corporate shareholders, owners and executives became more wealthy and income disparity rose.

The solutions advocated by Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss have absolutely no connection to corporate level price setting and productivity. Their proposals are purely conjectural because there is no historic or current evidence to support their propositions.

This somewhat, extraordinary state of affairs has something to do with their educational backgrounds. Both Sunak and Truss studied Philosophy, Politics and Economics (PPE) at Oxford University which rather than teach the mechanisms of how the economy works places emphasis on economics as a political administrative resource. This causes the whole topic become a victim of rhetoric and non-quantitative and non-deterministic unsubstantiated arguments which are more ideological than linked to any comprehensive and transparent tested economic model. This lack of deterministic rigour is what gives rise to the possibility of two individuals who have followed the same economics course, at university level, ending up with different policy propositions to a problem which cannot be solved with either of their "solutions". There is, here, a demonstraion of a sloppy approach to policy and a definite lack of rigour and analysis on their part arising from gaps in their fundamental economics knowledge. In spite of the fact that the real incomes approach to economics surfaced as a solution to inflation and stagflation in 1976, Oxford University PPE courses have, to this date, not included this branch of economics in their courses. Amongst other important developments, this approach has shown the Quantity Theory of Money to be flawed while supporting coherent and tranparent propositions on how to reduce prices in the short term while and sustaining productivity development. This could tackle our cost of living crisis now.

30/07/2022: In the woke world of cancellation of people with whom one disagrees and the cancellation and sanctioning of whole nations, our leadership, so-called, is creating an increasingly unmanageable governance of this country. The willingness of the government not to become involved in such matters as the negotiations on railway workers' pay and their offering nurses a pittance we witness a denigration of constituents who are classified as labour. The problems facing labour are incompetent governments who have been unable to manage the nation's economic affairs in a way that respond to constituent's needs. While the media provide too much time covering court cases involving footballer's wives or even giving time to report the details some actor who had slapped an individual at some award ceremony, and stuffing their content with sport, there is far too little concern and coverage of how to correct the decadence in our standards of behaviour in dealing with people facing problems.

With a heading for 10% inflation and being offered 3% pay rise, train companies are expecting these workers to accept a cumulative 40% reduction in real pay over a 5 year period, as prices of basic essentials continue to rise. This is completely unacceptable. There is a need for government and companies to state the facts surrounding this undignified treatment of labour by admitting the extraordinarily precarious state of affairs for most working people. In taking this step of sustaining the recognition of the dignity of labour rather than attacking their unions or "union bosses", who happen to make sense, our mutual relations slide towards a murky place. Several media take an abusive and insulting stand reflecting a lack of responsibility on the part of the journalists concerned and their editors. Anything to produce a eye-catching headline and scrub the needed objectivity for informing the public of the facts.

This country is facing a far more serious socio-economic downturn than our political parties admit and it is more than evident that economic policies need to change on a radical basis before we face more contentious situations with increasing numbers needing the support of food banks. Although this is apparently absent from the Conservative and Labour leadership DNAs, there is a need for a forum where labour, industry and manufacturing, service and public sectors and government need to meet in order to better understand the fundamental issues as a basis for identifying sustainable policy solutions, rather than continue to promote confrontation. This could lead to a repressive state of affairs with political parties taking up more extreme positions to gain or remain in power.

A coherent and transparent economic theory cannot support opposing points of view on our predicament or the solution. The very fact that the leading contenders in the Conservative party leadership contest are advocating different "solutions" is the clearest confirmation that neither has a grasp of a coherent economic theory. If they did they would both be advocating the same policy. The reality is that neither Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss actually know what to do but both advance assumptions that have no theoretical or practical foundations. In such circumstances it is who is most effective in asserting a position who wins while not imparting any rational evidence-based justification for the position. The only economic theory that remains coherent, evidence-based and comprehensive is the real incomes approach to economics that concentrates on how to reduce prices in the short term while steadily raising productivity. However, both Truss and Sunak followed conventional university courses on economics which are too theoretical and advocate paradigms which the real incomes approach has demonstrated to be invalid.

Mrs. Thatcher's assertion that , "We are all working class!", rings hollow, it still remains a sham in our political domain. In constitutional terms with each being concerned for others, yes, reaffirming that there is a society, the baseline for mutually beneficial communication is to respect the dignity of the other. Not along the lines of "Respect agendas" laced with hierarchical constraints and imposed obligations, but rather on the basis that as members of a single community accepting that our mutual interest really does lie in seeking mutual solutions designed to benefit all, with no one left behind.

Too many in government see the successful economy as being one that operates on the basis of greed or avarice. This was a favourite Boris Johnson tack. But it is exactly this attitude at the heart of government that sees those unable to meet their basic needs, even although they are fully employed, as being lazy and in need of pulling their socks up and working additional hours. This dreadfully arrogant attitude reflects an ignorance of equal dimension which expresses itself in the lack of effective economic policies to resolve the nation's problems. These strange people are unable to see reality, they are in an irresponsible denial of the fact that our current policy toolkit is spent and offers no solutions to our current predicament. There is a need for alternative policies where the dignity of all constituents remains intact and in respecting the importance of this condition we begin to address the nation's needs.

29/07/2022: The British political scene is dominated by just two political parties, Conservative and Labour. The last, almost 50 years, has witnessed one party, Labour, taking bad decisions which were then upheld by the Conservatives to create a slid row politics. Skid row politics is one that undermines the economy and efficiency and generates run down areas and destitution for an increasing number of constituents. During that almost 50 years two policy switches did most of the damage. The first fateful decision was taken by Labour Chancellor Denis Healey a supremely confident intellectual bruiser, who switched to monetarism in 1975 and abandoned a wages policy. This was because stagflation had taken hold after the OPEC petroleum price hikes starting in 1973. A mistaken request for an IMF loan only meant even more stringent conditions imposed on the country than those Healey had already imposed. Rather than reject monetarism the Thatcher Conservative government relished monetarism as a way to roll back the state even further, while attempting to apply monetary policy to control inflation. This failed because the reduction in inflation took time and was based on depressing the economy as well as at the cost of thousands of families losing their homes through repossession. The outcome was a rise in offshore investment and a decline in UK industry and manufacturing, the de-skilling of the workforce, falling investment and productivity and declining real wages.

Parallel dedications to monetarism in the USA and several other "advanced" economies, riding on the excessive concentration of petrodollar recycling after 1973 and financial deregulation, led to a rapid expansion of hedge funds and computer-based options trading creating a Grey Market several times the size of national economies. The monetary policy "managers", the central banks, lost oversight and regulatory control over widespread corrupt dealing leading to the 2008 financial crisis. This coincided with the end of the Blair Labour administration and so the fateful decisions to take another policy direction coincided with a Labour administration again.

Power maps were developed by Anthony Sampson (1926–2004) to reflect where the power over decision making lies in Britain's constitutional complex. He used these in the later editions of his outstanding series of books on, "The Anatomy of Britain."
As his first act in 1997, Chancellor Gordon Brown had made the Bank of England "independent". He had witnessed how the previous Conservative government's handling of interest rates and the ensuing house repossession catastrophe had lost that government the election. Brown did not want this for Labour, and so it was prudent to make the BoE solely responsible for interest rate policy based on a string of mumbo-jumbo justifications. The main problem, however, was that this also moved monetary policy out of the hands of parliament and of course the voters and this augmented the influence of the financial services sector over the BoE. The BoE might be "independent" of government but it cannot remain independent of the what became its main constituents in the form of the financial services sector. In essence, Brown privatized the BoE. As a result, monetary policy vanished from party manifestos and public discussion.

In the wake of the 2008 financial crisis all of the decisions on the solution as quantitative easing (QE) were taken by the Chancellor Gordon Brown and the BoE under extreme pressure from its constituency of hedge funds, banks and the like. Such organizations do not like independent savers which they consider to compete with their business. Therefore an essential component of QE was close-to-zero interest rates and massive influxes of money through banks. In this way fixed income streams of pensioners from private savings were killed off. The banks began to pump cheap QE funds into the hands of the asset holders and traders by various means as well as using the fund on their own account to purchase assets and raise their own "shareholder value". At the same time they abandoned their traditional monetary policy function of supporting SME and supply side goods and service production sector loans. This resulted in supply side wage settlements almost stalling associated with falling investment, productivity and declining real wages. Again the Cameron administration under Chancellor George Osborne, once again took advantage of a bad decision by Labour to repeat of the first leg of monetarism between 1975 and 1997, a 22 year stretch, with a second 12 year stretch of a yet more intensive destruction under QE. While multi-billions flowed into assets holder and traders the government imposed austerity on the rest of the population and continued the Conservative drive to cut down on public services. This resulted in thousands of firemen, police and nurses being lost to their services only to create the current crises in these services.

The problem with British politics is that there is no opposition to rationalize policies. Labour cannot blame the Conservatives for applying their policies while the Conservative can thank Labour for setting agendas that have helped them destroy the economy while helping sustain the growing wealth of a minority who support the party.

This skid row politics continues and nothing will change under a Truss or Sunak premiership and as long as Starmer leads the Labour party nowhere.

The track record, especially during the last 12 years under an "independent" BoE, by far the main beneficiaries have been banks, hedge funds, asset holders and traders and these organizatons have most funds for supporting political parties and the media. It is therefore notable that all political representatives across the political spectrum from the so-called die hard left to rabid and extreme far right, all repeat the same mantra that they intend to, " ...maintain the independence of the Bank of England.". This is in spite of its impositions of policies that have resulted in economic prejudice on the majority of constituents in this country.

One has to ask, after all, just whose interests do these Labour and Conservative politicians think they represent?politicians think they represent?

Stella on DW

Stella on UnHerd

While Britain lectures other countries on the topic of human rights it continues to hold the world's most famous political prisoner in complete contravention to the very ideals the government pretends to uphold. This a matter of believe that I profess but ignore what I do. This only encourages those who carry out the types of arbitrary, murderous and criminal actions that Julian Assange exposed.

Julian Assange has been subjected to kangaroo fixed conclusion courts the same as those he would face in the USA if etradited.

There is no doubt that this case is turning out to be a potentially toxic topic for a government that hopes to maintain an image of fairness and justice. Fairness and justice are founded on the truth and the only person who has upheld the truth has been Julian Assange and his legal team while the USA has changed its pleas and brought pressure on several people to create false testimony. This case should hav ebeen thrown out some time ago.

Most British mainstream corporate media ignore the Assange case in an affront to Britain's once proud tradition of establishing the facts so that truth can remain the foundation of justice in this country.

This level of media cowardice in losing the ability to speak to power is testament to the failure of a so-called independent and free press. Our media is patently not independent or free but revels in self-censorship for fear of becoming conspicuous for rebelling against an obvious injustice. The media wish to remain silent while the government administer torture and the selective arbitrary exclusion from the universal protection of habeas corpus for Julian Assange whose only "error" was to report faithfully the truth.

Where do the people stand on this abusive treatment of an innocent person in our capital city?

Where is the proud tradition of the role of the community conscience in deciding someone's guilt or innocence? Julian Assange is innocent and should be freed forthwith.

Placed in support of "Don't Extradite Assange" campaign

Stella Assange's eloquent appeal for the release if Julian Assange

Stella Assange has made an eloquent appeal on behalf of her husband Julian Assange. She explains why it is in no one's interests to extradite Julian assange lated to a higher appeal to the importance of truth. We all suffer as a result of the distortion and hiding of truth which is an the essential ingredient of justice for all. To access click on the image of Stella below.

World's apart - Oksana Boyko interviews Greg Barns, Assange's Australian Lawyer

On Contact - Chris Hedges interviews Nils Melzer, UN special rapporteur on torture, concerning the treatment of Juian Assange

The abusive delays and slovenly treatment of Juian Assange is destroying the image of British justice in its palsied efforts to shore up his continued imprisonment following the open and shameful rendition of Assange from Ecuadorian territory to please the US administration, whose case has evidently fallen apart. In spite of the fact that they are being spied upon by paranoid government agencies, several investigative journalists are working on the already known facts behind the central witness' admission that his testimony against Julian Assange was false. A justice system with no independent agency or urgency to actively follow this up reflects very badly on "British Justice" which in reality, under this government, is becoming increasingly inept and a diminishing force in our constitution. Its past image of fairness, on the international stage, was dispelled long ago by the bungling, scripted behaviour of the management of proceedings. Such injustice is of no concern to an obsequious government too eager to serve the demands of an alien state.

The US and UK governments have worked together to ensure a conviction. Assange has faced systematic due process violations, judicial bias, collusion and manipulated evidence.

He has been the victim of constant surveillance, defamation and threats. Consolidated medical evidence proves that Assange has suffered prolonged psychological torture.

Justice, in the Julian Assange case, see purposely time-wasting prolongations of the imposition of stress-based torture. He should not be in prison. The drawn out consideration of the potential treatment of Assange in US prisons is an example. Justice should check the veracity of the US case against Assange, where the central assertions have lost all credibility.While imposing stress torture on Assange in London the judges accepted assurances that his treatment in a US prison would not result in a suicide risk; but the stress, as in London, could kill him at any moment. Judges are content that he be extradited and placed into the hands of the assassins who were exposed in their acts by Wikileaks with undeniable evidence produced by the assassins themselves, and who have repeatedly declared that Assange should be killed. It is alleged they considered carrying out such an act in London; a valid question is, "Was the Conservative government aware or party to this?" The CIA and US Military Industrial complex wish to make an example to Julian to intimidate and discourage those who wish to hold governments to account. There is always the convenient option of Julian being found lifeless as a result of an "unexplained" suicide, or more conveniently, having suffered from a stroke or fatal heart attack in a US prison. British Justice remains unconcerned with the murderous track record of those seeking his extradition. Since the actions exposing the USA have been extra-juidicial, the ploy of placing British Justice in the middle of a political case has only exposed the devious nature of our government. This requires a political decision, the responsibilty for which this Conservative government wishes to frame in a judicial decision context. As a political decision the Conservatives know that the all apparent truths surrounding this case are known to the electorate. The credibility of this government is plummeting and if Julian Assange is extradited, this government is unlikely to have a future as far as the constituency of the UK is concerned. But who in this government has the necessary commitment to the truth and courage to take the right decision?

Click on the image of Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson ("Siggi"), on the left, to listen to the recording of his statement that the "key FBI evidence" provided in the court by the FBI, in the case against the WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange, that Assange asked him to hack FBI computers, is in fact false. He also admits that he is "... not allowed" to state why the FBI evidence presented in court is different from what he has stated!! The recording is in the Icelandic language but an English text translation is provided.

In a SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab workshop on COP 26 a summary declaration reads,

"Climate change and rises in temperatures have a far more insidious impact than those discussed at COP 26. The most serious issue is that the human population is growing while the falling accessibility to water in the soil, due to temperature raising evaporation rates, means food crop yields, in most production zones, will fall and there will be more frequent intense droughts, food deficits and deaths from starvation."

"Already the "Green Revolution's" miracle rice (IR8) has faced a 15% drop in yield. Some crops cannot be produced in their current locations because there is no longer viable production. It is regrettable that COP 26 has dwelt too much on "technologies", "climate science", "finance" and "carbon trading" at the expense of the vital topic of food production practice.


24/02/2022 - 06/08/2022
Military hardware + control logic
Item class
Military vehicles
Field guns/mortars
Multiple rocket launchers
Surface to air missiles
Military personnel
Ukrainian troops held
* est: 6,000
Injured swapped
* est: 250
Individual troops killed
est: 68,000
Likely injured not captured
** est:85,000
Voluntary departure
est: 25,000
Cut off - likely captured
est: 3,500
Total out of action
est: 186,750
Sources: MOD RF;
RP: TASS; Spunik; RT and Pravda.
XC: ACP. ACP Field stringers.

Most casualty figures have become inexact because of randomized reporting but they are likely to exceed all the figures presents.
In general, we are not in a position to verify this data but past experience with the sources and in particular MOD RF they tend to be reasonably accurate.

We are unable to find reliable sources on destroyed Russian assets and personnel. Ukrainain and foreign intel sources have been found to be unreliable.

In this latest update the rate of destruction of Ukrainian hardware assets has declined slightly but personnel losses have risen. SASI (Southern Atlantic Strategic Intelligence) estimates that Ukraine has now effectively lost all original operational military assets.

The reality is that Ukraine lost the military contest about 12 weeks ago and currently has few capabilities West of the Donbass to continue fighting except for some missile batteries, rockets and artillery, which are being taken out methodologically. Based on the constant rate of attrition of around 100 major hardware items each day, now for over 150 days, SASI has changed its estimate on Donbass being fully liberated to 30 days. Frontline Ukrainian "troops" are increasingly untrained, poorly equipped and managed. Unverified but multiple reports indicate that contingents of nationalists are stationed behind the less well trained personnel to execute those attempting to surrender. Surrendering is only possible when Russian advance contingents outflank and out number the Ukrainian groups. Russian tactics in flanking operations appear to be increasingly successful. Ukrainian positions are dug-ins, poorly conceived and based on World War II, or even World War I, concepts. The expectation of a Russian advance was that it would come from the East. However, in practice, Russians advance from directions chosen by them, including from the South, West and North. In this way they are able to expose weak points. Increasingly captured Ukrainian troops are found to be without any remaining ammunition.

SASI has assessed that Ukraine no longer has a credible fighting force and the Western strategy of encouraging Ukraine to sacrifice its military personnel against impossible odds, now involving largely inexperienced personnel, to be unacceptable and this will lead to serious recriminations at some later date. SASI considers surrender and negotiation to be the only reasonable solution and does not expect Russia to take any exaggerated advantage of this because Russia's aims were always clear and their is a tendency for Russia to adhere to objectives and stated intentions.

The excessive amount of inoperable military assets in Ukraine at the start of the campaign was largely the result of corruption. Some of the funds supplied for military equipment maintenance were paid back as "political contributions" as well as into personal offshore accounts and used to purchase real estate in offshore locations such as London.

The endemic corruption within military units is alleged to have given rise to large amounts of the "equipment donations" finding their way into profitable black market transactions bolstering offshore accounts.
1 Especially tanks & all vehicle types

29/07/2022: In this week's "Summer double issue", the Economist newspaper posted an article on the declining image of the Bank of England (BoE), entitled, "Dreadneedle Street". The Economist was always hooked on monetarism, glorifying "financial engineering" as some sort of glamorous solution to the world's ills when in fact this has been the cause of most of our current problems.

The notion that interest rates can have any effect on externally generated inflation was disproved between 1973 and 1995.

Source: The Economist.
In 1971 when the Gold Standard was abandoned the International Monetary Fund (IMF) was expected to close down. However, Johannes Witteveen the new Managing Director and a Sufi Moslem, took advantage of the OPEC sanctions on petroleum importing countries imposed by the Arab members. Witteveen arranged for the rapidly accumulating petrodollars in OPEC countries to be recycled through the IMF to advance debt to low income countries destined to purchase petroleum at ever-increasing prices. Nothing was done to prevent OPEC from increasing its prices. This recycling of petrodollars soon included private operators and the development of sovereign wealth funds. As a result of this influx, the IMF was saved and with it the rise of the role of central banks in macroeconomic policies, which became increasingly financialised. An unnecessary IMF loan to the UK in 1976, was the largest loan every advanced by the IMF. This was negotiated by Witteveen alone and the UK government with Witteveen insisting a reduction in public expenditures. As a result of this experience, the IMF published a book, with a foreward by Witteveen dated April 8th, 1977 entitled, "The Monetary Approach to the Balance of Payments". This is a ludicrously theoretical text. However, having bagged the UK as an IMF loan recipient in the context of sorting out the UK's rising inflation and stalling balance of payments, this added some momentum to this new dimension of IMF policy. The UK loan did not in fact fix the UK balance of payments which has been in a slow free fall since that date until today. In fact the loan was not needed since it had arisen from a cock up in Treasury calculations that exaggerated the borrowing requirements. This is why, in reality, the UK only drew down part of this IMF loan facility although this was misrepresented as the UK having paid back the loan in full within 12 months. However, the hype surrounding this event as a "successful" IMF intervention went to Witteveen's head and the tiny minds to be found amongst senior staff; thus the book referred to. This launched a disastrous period of increasing financialization through central banks to this day and a massive rise in worldwide debt.

The confusing mumbo-jumbo contained in the BoE Governor's statements and the extraordinary gobbledy-gook interpretations published by the media, including The Economist, the emphasis remains on the singular totem pole of "interest rates".

According to the British Strategic Review detailed assessments of inflation, starting during the petroleum price crisis in the 1970s, gave rise to a what amounts to a new school of economic through, the Real Incomes Approach to Economics and its proposed policy, Real Incomes Policy (RIP). This development work has established several major facts that have exposed the futility of monetary policy. At the most simple level, most inflation is cost push and the underlying paradigm of the BoE, and other central banks, is that inflation is demand pull. This is why interest rates and all of the other policy instruments cannot tackle inflation and the cost of living crisis. The basic go to theory used to justify any BoE decision is the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM). This, it is asserted shows the relationship between money volumes injected into the economy and the prices of goods and services. The Real Incomes development work has completely disproved the utility of the QTM. It contains a massive error which even although a theoretical mistake, is very easy to understand. The QTM was unable to explain the results of quantitative easing (QE) because it is missing some 9 variables of assets markets, savings and offshore investment, where most QE funds ended up. This resulted in funds being drained from supply side production and wages under George Orborne's austerity running down public services. During the Lord's Economic Committee evidence-taking on QE, the BoE admitted that on QE they were still learning about its effects. This is after 12 years of QE imposed on the country. The title of the Economic Committee's report was, "Quantitative Easing: a dangerous addiction?", not exactly a vote of confidence. It would seem that reviewing the findings of the Real Incomes work, QE is a policy with no theory, in fact monetarism falls into the same category of prejudicial policies backed up by no rational economic or financial logic. The BoE's QE contributed to the creation of a serious constitutional crisis by increasing the wealth of asset holders and traders who make up no more than 5% of the UK constituency while prejudicing most wage-earners, making up the other 95%, including increasing numbers who can no longer purchase basic essentials.

The Real Incomes school places emphasis on price moderation based on productivity and completely different policy instruments which proactively encourage lower risk pricing strategies and effective unit costs reduction methods, through incentive policy instruments that maintain a sustainable rising productivity trajectory. As a result, prices begin to come down immediately while productivity continues to rise. In this way this idle article content and talk of where interest rates should go, becomes an irrelevance since this is very definitely barking up the wrong totem pole.

27/07/2022: Poland appears to be falling into an entrapment. It is procuring massive supplies of arms for its own defence consisting of second grade USA cast-offs all proven to be vulnerable against modern or asymmetrical warfare and definitely to current Russian evolving capabilities.

SASI has suggested that this appears to be in preparation for the inevitable collapse of Ukraine and loss, while preparing to manipulate events to maintain the violence and shift it Westwards into Europe. Poland seems to be destined to take over the principal function of the sacrificial lamb in NATO and the USA's quest to "weaken Russia".

Poland has got itself into this predicament as a result of an extreme and paranoid leadership, a perfect mindset for the US to sell scrap metal through high profile political deals, as opposed to a serious attempt to provide Poland with meaningful security.

NATO, in overseeing this second rate and exceptionally expensive armament of Poland, only draws our attention to the fact that its principal function is to act as shadowy souq, a multi-billion dollar bizarre arms bazaar enriching, mainly, US arms manufacturers and, as a result, extending the devastation of the lives of the people and the economies of Europe.

27/07/2022: Germany and Europe have enjoyed a steady flow of very cheap gas from Russia for almost 50 years. The only problem that occurred was when Ukraine began stealing gas from its main transit station. Otherwise Russia was a completely reliable source. Germany in particular, with what was the highest balance of payments in the world has relied on Russia to minimize its energy costs and to succeed economically. The USA's decline during the last 30 years has created a paranoid foreign policy which aims to undermine competing nations, including Germany and several European countries. For some time the USA kept lecturing the EU about their strategic reliance on Russia for gas. However, there was no evidence that this was an issue since Soviet times. Rather than organize their economy so as to compete in goods and services, the USA began to apply economic sanctions to spoil the economic advance of sound projects and countries they imagined to oppose the power of the USA. The attack on North Stream 2 directly affecting the future competitive status of Germany became a major target, as part of this spoiler foreign policy. In 2014 the USA organized a violent coup in Ukraine at the cost of around $6 billion, to create a puppet government and began to send considerable amounts of arms to Ukraine. The Donbass region of Ukraine populated mainly by Russian speakers, entered into panic and declared independence. The puppet Ukrainian government declared those involved to be terrorists. This started the war which Russia finally joined in 2022 on the side of the people of the Donbass.

The fact that this was a special technical military operation and not general warfare could be seen in the continual supply of Russian gas to European countries at low contract prices. In the meantime most countries in the EU under US and NATO goading applied sanctions on Russia. The typical technocratic EU Commission's response has been to establish plans for EU countries to begin to substitute Russian gas for noncompetitive alternatives thereby sacrificing future economic growth and competitive status of the EU. This is just what the USA wants. Russia, for a series of technical reasons related to problems with delays in the maintenance of turbines and related equipment, caused by the antics of countries applying sanctions, has had to reduce gas supplies on occasions. Those refusing to renew contracts do not receive gas from Russia anymore. The EU has entered into panic because gas supplies are declining as a direct result of their own actions of making energy a weapon through their sanctions and their expressed and agreed intent of their strategic energy plans.

Schizophrenia is a state where the intellectual state does not square with reality. This is the state of affairs here with EU imagining that they can continue to undermine Russia and yet expect Russia to keep supplying them with cheap gas. The paranoia, emanating from the USA and transmitted through NATO, is expressed in the somewhat idiotic fear and rising panic that Russia is about to cut off all supplies. So these high income countries want to sanction Russia, send arms to Ukraine and allow Ukrainians to die, it would seem, for no good reason at all, other than to "weaken Russia", and yet continue to enjoy the benefits of cheap Russian gas. They have actually expressed the opinion that Russia should only do this when the EU has had time to organize themselves to be able to use alternative sources of energy sometime in the future. The sheer gall of all of this is quite astounding and reflects a bizarre form of self-anointed exceptionalism of people who consider themselves to merit special consideration by Russia. Given the capitulation to State Department wishes and showing no appreciation of the contribution of Russian gas to European economic growth and stability for almost 50 years, Russia, it would seem, would be justified in cutting off gas supplies. However, this is what the USA State Department wants. This would lead to social instability and economic chaos which would help dessimate what are considered to be international competitors; all well and good. But, as is normally the case, the State Department has no follow up strategy. The aim worldwide has been to simply abandon theatres as simply geographic regions containing failed states and ruined economies. However, this could cascade into a major falling out of member states with the EU and the USA and a final realization that following NATO's strategic security mirage is leading to economic suicide and absolutely no security. With government's already failing, one wonders if any countries will react to safeguard the interests of the security and economic prospects of their constituents, before it is too late.

26/07/2022: The BBC Conservative candidate for leadership debate on BBC probably left most people none the wiser as to just what the two would do to change things. Both failed to link up growth in a transparent way to their economic plans. Neither candidate referred to real growth or more for less arising from increased productivity. What seemed to substitute for real growth was talk about regenerating town centres, which normally does not generate real growth, simply some nominal increase in cash flow and temporary employment on refurbishments or some construction, but no long term real growth arising from increased productivity. Truss made some sense in the line that lower corporation tax will attract foreign investment. But like Sunak there was a lack of qualification of what investment does.

Truss is also right in her taking aim at bean counting which is what gave rise to austerity starting with George Osrborne and ended up stripping down the police, fire and health services of personnel and which the government has since been trying to build up again. Simply securing more investment does not necessarily result in more productivity which is so necessary for the country to make its way in the world.

China has led the world in patent filings since 2011. The World Intellectual Property Indicators 2020 report from the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) reports, China filed 1.4 million patents, or 43.4 percent of the world’s total patent applications that year. That is more than twice the number of filings in the United States. China accounts for even larger portions of world total filings in utility models (96.9%), trademarks (51.7%) and industrial designs (52.3%). China passed the United States in 2019 to become the top country in international patent applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) administrated by WIPO.

Source: Centre for International Governance Innovation
Sunak made some statements concerning China which, in spite of this being a line followed by the intel people, is in fact completely wrong. He was misleading the public.

China, in terms of the registration of completely original patents, has led the world since 2011 (see box on the right) and in numbers of engineering and high tech graduates beats India and leave the USA and UK falling behind. The known learning curve relationships place China, as a direct function of the size of its internal market, without considering the international market, way down the unit costs curve in many vital areas in terms of continuing innovation to place the UK, USA and most of Europe playing catch up. A good example of where the UK government following intel bad advice, canceled Huawei 5G equipment contracts under pressure from the Mike Pompeo when CIA chief. Huawei is a mutual owned by its workers formed in the early 1980s. It is an outstanding example case study of the impact of the learning curve and continuous innovation over 40 years. The British government's actions meant that British engineers have lost the opportunity to work with exceptionally rapid and dense transactional systems putting us behind the advances in 6G currently being introduced in China and Russia. In terms of industrial and manufacturing process control systems, a growth area for Huawei based on 5 and 6G, we see our own capabilities falling behind. The paranoid perspective voiced by Sunak is not something an economist should be passing an opinion. This topic is an advanced systems engineering economics topic and experienced engineers willingly acknowledge China's rapid advances and innovation as world-beating. The strategic approach to this is to work with it so as to at least keep up with leading edge applications as well as participate in more advanced developments. The following of the USA's paranoid America first policy is what has led to our future gas prices being 35%-40% higher than those of China placing us at a very serious costs disadvantage. Following this paranoid US lead will only distance our engineers from where the action is. Indeed this is part of the USA strategy of spoiling opportunities for others. For example the sanctions on NorthStream 2 and Russia has already turned the German economy with the largest balance of payments in the world into one with a middling negative balance of payments. The USA has always moved to avoid Germany becoming too influential. Oddly enough, both Johnson and Truss both had promoted an approach to China that was correct but this was undermined by our intel leadership which lacks experience and is tending to follow the CIA's' lead on just about everything, to this country's detriment.

Liz Truss held her own better in this last debate while Sunak became extremely irritating in his constant interruption and talking, out of turn, over of what Truss was saying. She was usually unable to finish her answers before Sunak would butt in. The mediation on this score failed to manage this dreadful behaviour in an effective fashion.

On balance Sunak fell behind in this debate and Truss maintained her cool under what were difficult circumstances created by Sunak's bad manners. But in the end both failed to get their messages out in a structured and coherent fashion.

25/07/2022: A previous leader concerning the lack of standards of evidence linked to policy, mentioned the use of terms of reference to limit the scope of enquiries.

The Forde Report into the scandal surrounding the leak of a long report into corruption surrounding the events leading to the demise of Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, has just been released, it is a case in point. In terms of the context of the events leading up to the false accusations that Jeremy Corbyn is antisemitic, by far the most significant was the official policy of the Israeli government's international campaign to undermine Corbyn.

Therefore, through a very limited terms of reference (see box left), the Forde Inquiry was supposed to discover who leaked the said report. This was a "Don't get mad, just get them!" action that the Labour "right" who, under Keir Starmer, hoped would expose their opponents within the Labour party who had exposed the right's coordinated attempt to undermine Jeremy Corbyn. Clearly the intent was to expose them and punish them.

All of this was, in typical British style, disguised as an "independent enquiry". Having ignored the responsibility of the Israeli government's setting of the context for the demise of Corbyn, the 138 page Forde Report is of mild interest informing us of things whch have been circulating in the alternative media for some 2 years now.

Because of the encapsulation of the agendas and media content by our tiny private political parties whose membership in total does not surpass 1.25% of the electorate, a fundamental form of censorship persists. A more relevant enquiry would have been an investigation into the frank and virtually open interference in our national affairs and party politics by an alien regime in the form of the Israeli government. But neither of the leading parties would even venture so far as to expose the degrees of compromise that exists on their part on this quetion. It is better to minimise any access to the facts on the part of the electorate on this hot potato.

Terms of reference are used to "set the agenda" and in this context the current leadership contest for the Conservative party has purposely limited their agendas to extraordinarily narrow assertions focusing on limited policy solutions as opposed to reviewing the broader context of what is causing our problems; this way it would be possible to identify realistic solutions. Two items have emerged as priorities. One is tackling the cost of living and now, the other, illegal immigration. In this typical parochial and out of context discussion, no one is trying analyse why we have these serious cost of living and immigration crises. The reason is that the government seems to be incapable of joining up the dots between strategic economic and strategic security components in the domain of foreign policy. The immigration and "illegal asylum seeker" crisis was caused by the government's enthusiastic support and participation in particularly violent and destructive Middle Eastern military ventures which laid to waste whole economies and have slaughtered over 1 million people. Since there was no economic development follow up for the constituents of these countries, with no other options, millions have left these countries and many have attempted to enter Britain. This problem was, in good part, created by this government and previous governments. However, rather than learn the lesson, our foreign policy continues in its out of control manner.

An example is this government' military support for Ukraine. Since Johnson persuaded the Ukrainian not to negotiate, with Liz Truss' enthusiastic support, constructive diplomacy was abandoned. Into this dreadful void, Johnson, and now Truss, has claimed that Britain is "leading" the West's support for Ukraine. This has come at the horrednous cost of ans additional 120,000 Ukrainian personnel hving been put out of action since that fateful decision. This slaughter continues at the rate of aver 120 personnel per day or at least a further 1,200 up until the final leadership vote in 10 days time. But who cares? After all this can be ignored in order to gain the serious business of gaining support of around 100,000 people who happen to be Conservative party members.

This government has enthusiastically imposed sanctions on Russia which have back fired and directly contributed to the international energy, fertilizer, food and other essentials price crisis in the form of inflation. This has exacerbated the state of affairs of the lowest income constituents in this country. Both candidates are deploying a responsibility displacement ploy by stating that, "...oh...inflation is an international crisis, all countries are facing this problem!!", or that all of this has been caused by that wicked "Putin". In reality it is our incompetent foreign policy which has resulted in the blow-back from Russian sanctions causing such economic chaos in this country. Russia and Mr. Putin have stated simple facts that those under contract for Russian gas will continue to pay the very low prices. However, incompetent strategies have disrupted this energy flow through a range of bad decisions with the USA, EU and UK having destabilized the world markets. This has set the course for all of these countries to operate on a more expensive less competitive alternatively sourced energy base in the future, exacerbating our already disatrous balance of payments. US and other LPG substitutes for Russia gas are around 30% more expensive than Russian gas. Although our parochial politiians shout that Russia is using gas as a political weapon, the record shows that it is our government that is doing this with distastrous impacts on our economy. The cheap Russian gas has always been on offer under contract throughout the military action.

It is more than evident that both Liz Truss and Rishi Sunak simply cannot admit to this complete government incompetence in the handling of foreign and economic affairs and this is why they continue to attempt to focus our attention on irrelevancies such as balanced budgets or tax cuts rather than how to handle the collateral human suffering created by our irresponsible foreign policy by threatening to ship people to a country that has one of the lowest per capita incomes and has recently experienced a horrific genocide. This is a shabby solution to a problem created by MPs of both parties in parliament who voted to support unacceptable foreign ventures.

Liz Truss is beginning to become a bit repetitive in stating that in foreign policy she has been getting things done. The problem is that the issues of millions of displaced suffering people and the surging cost of living crisis, what was done has prejudiced everyone in this country and the thousands of mourning Ukrainian families in a collapsing economy.

It might be that to 0.35% of the electorate that make up the full memebsrhip of the Conservative party are taken in by partial information and will vote in one of these two as Prime Minister while the other 99.65% of the electorate looks on, having no say on this matter.

24/07/2022: We have withdrawn the last two posts because they contained misleading information arising from our interpretation of information given to us, some of which was incorrect.

Two and half months ago Charles Michel, the President of the European Council, stooped very low to make a disgraceful statement to the UN Security Council (Monday 06/05/2022) by voicing in a somewhat ridiculous pseudo-dramatic manner, an irrational and mendacious smear. He said several things about Russia that are patently not true. He stated that Russia was using food as a weapon against Africa. As the world's largest world wheat exporter Russian wheat has been on offer throughout the conflict but increasing numbers of countries were afraid of NATO sanctions if they permitted Russian ships to dock. Marine insurance companies were refusing services, fearful of NATO sanctions if they provided insurance on Russian ships or cargoes. For effect, Michel stated that Russian ships can dock in the EU while ignoring the reality and being intentionally misleading. The State Department rhetoric did not clarify matters. At that time, Odessa could not export Ukrainian grain by the sea route because Ukraine had mined the harbour. Already at that time negotiations between Russian president Putin and Ergodan of Turkey, almost three months ago, had proposed that Turkish navel experts clear Odessa harbour of mines and provide safe passage for Ukrainian wheat carrying vessels which would also be guaranteed by a Russian naval escort further down the chain. The Russian navy therefore was not preventing Ukraine export grain. As in the case of all such proposals Zelensky rejected the idea. Ukraine wanted to blame Russia for lack of exports and to prevent Russian grain exports at the same time. As a result the grain supply deficits facing Africa lie at the feet of Zelensky and NATO.

This impasse imposed by NATO was broken by the diplomacy of Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in the export agreement signed yesterday by the Russian Minister of Defence.

Whereas we stated that the Odessa event was a false flag event, it turns out that military assets had been placed close to the grain silos in Odessa port and Russia eliminated these. The assets in question were stored US-supplied Harpoon missiles, a naval repair facility and a naval ship. In a state of military action where Russia has declared its intention to hit military targets, it is clear that Ukraine needs to distance any military assets, personnel and facilities away from the grain export facilities and systems including silos and handling warehouses. In this way it will be possible not to provoke attacks that could disrupt grain exports. Ukrainians reported that the attack did not affect any grain infrastructures or silos. This attack also has not affected preparation for grain exports.

Given the repeated amateurish and promoted to be high profile false flag events, arranged by Kiev during the course of this military conflict, many informed observers had imagined this event was also a false flag. This was the erroneous conclusion contained in our retracted posts.

However, what has transpired is that the United Nations was quite prepared to resolve the Ukrainian grain export issue and leave the larger Russian grain exports to a later date. This would not have resolved the problems facing the South. Russian had to insist that the Russian exports be part of this agreement, for it to go ahead. Although the recent grain export deal agreed between Russia and Ukraine under Turkish mediatorship and UN backing is promoted to be all about Ukrainian grain exports "to feed the world", it ended up containing the vital provisions to terminate aspects of sanctions that were preventing the export of Russian grain and fertilizer. Although Ukraine is an important grain exporter, Russia is by far the world's largest grain exporter and Ukrainian exports alone cannot resolve the problems of the "South". Until this agreement, NATO and others were accusing Russia of using grain as a weapon while failing to admit their sanctions made transport insurance and servicing impossible. Therefore the grain export issue was caused by NATO sanctions and Ukrainian mining of their own port in Odessa.

Vladimir Putin explained this issue in face to face meetings with Recep Erdogan months ago (see box on the right) and they reviewed solutions via video link more recently. Erdogan therefore made sure that the agreement also removed the restrictions on Russian grain and fertilizer exports. Without this, the global grain shortage, caused by NATO and Ukrainian actions, would not have been solved. Now Russia and Ukraine can begin to export their grain.

The United Nations has admitted that by removing sanctions on these shipments from Russia and having mine sweeping crews remove the Ukrainian mines from Odessa harbour, will allow the dozens of foreign ships, impounded by the Ukrainian military, to set sail. The combination of Russian and Ukrainian exports will result in prices falling significantly on the world grain market and help countries in the South import their needs.

23/07/2022: In the previous leader (see below) Simon Jenkins stated that it is becoming easier to double check economic policy propositions made by politicians. Jenkins referred to the ability of journalists to keep things in check based on today's enhanced resources available on the net and through contacts. The problem with this is that a good deal of economics contains a considerable amount of ideological content so that if a politician's inclinations and assertions agree with a leading expert's inclinations and assertions then the journalist thinks he has done a good job by comparing the two.

During this weekend's workshop at APEurope Correspondent's Pool the British Strategic Review (BSR) group explained some very preliminary findings they have made in the preparation of a Note 7 entitled, "The Nolan Principles & economic policy administration." Michael Nolan (1928-2007) or Lord Nolan, was a judge who was the first chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life (1994/1997) which drew up the seven Nolan principles. On the event of Nolan’s death, the Guardian newspaper obituary referred to Lord Nolan as having " ... made a profound mark on national life by substantially cleansing the Augean stable of corrupt politics as founding chairman of the Committee on Standards in Public Life.". However, it is likely that given the experience of the whole BREXIT saga and latest events that most would assume that the Augean stable has filled up again to become overflowing with a sort of fetid dung.

The preliminary BSR findings are that whereas the Nolan principles might be applicable to civil servants they don't work in the case of politicians for several reasons. Politicians first and foremost operating on two, often mutually incompatible bases. One is attending to constituent concerns. The other is as a representative of a political party and the "selling" of ideologies of sorts, protecting collective government wisdom and the image of their party. This involves attempting to convince people and organizations to support their efforts in terms of finance or votes and the underlying sense of such support is that those offering support will benefit. Some individual politicians seem to consider themselves to be the embodiment of their parties and as a result consider the pay they receive for "consultancy" work is very much in the spirit of party support and the valuable contributions they make to the success of their clients. After all parties are made up of the members.

This whole transactional nexus inhabited by politicians is therefore somewhat complex involving self-promotion, aspiration, the ability to hold onto their seats, emotions and often visceral responses to anything threatening this pack of cards. This is why, for many people, politicians are such a put-off, although, of course, they are much admired and very much appreciated within their own bubbles. Charles Dickens who had been a parliamentary reporter never presented politicians in a positive light but rather as self-serving individuals who made promises they never intended to keep. They have the bad habit of making statements according to the particular circumstances surrounding the statement so as to maintain an acceptable image of being in control. The very wide interpretations within political parties or individual politicians of what are acceptable means of promoting all of these interests is why the Nolan principles are regularly ignored and considered not to be particularly relevant.

However, there is a concept out there that politicians are elected to serve the general public. In this context, it is evident that there is a need for basic standards of evidence to be applied as the foundation for any policy analysis, policy planning and statements of policy justification. This can be organized to strip away ideology, lies and misrepresentations by imposing on politicians and governments the requirement to provide testable models of policies including all feasible options before embarking on the usual non-delivery and policies that lack traction, usually based on clever but irresponsible rhetoric. Minimum standards of evidence, albeit, set at a high level, can make policy analysis, options and relative benefits transparent so that when it comes to voting, constituents have a better understanding of what is really on the table. It is not as if such standards of evidence need to be invented. They already exist within the discipline of decision analysis and systems engineering economics. There are even techniques, for the confused, to specify what data is required to build policy models. In the name of rigour and exactitude, these techniques, at the outset, can assess the "terms of reference" provided by politicians on any particular policy development, to detect imposed factual or procedural bias; a common trick. This is the usual technique deployed in the countless "independent" enquiries that go nowhere because governments know they can ignore the conclusions because the tendentious terms of reference will ensure that they will not be implicated and some poor sod/s lower down the hierarchy somewhere, anywhere, will be held accountable. This is often the case where political parties do not want specific types of evidence to be investigated or policy solutions considered in an act of self-preservation or for ideological reasons.

However, in systems engineering economics all options are reviewed since quite often what could be excluded as a result of presumptuous limitations on an enquiry can end up being a far better solution than those which might have been favoured by the "party". This more thorough, neutral and, in reality, more productive approach to policy is an essential requirement in support of the Nolan principle which states, "Holders of public office should act solely in terms of the public interest". To illustrate why Nolan principles map over political functions with some difficulty, this phrase refers to "Principle 1.1: Selflessness". Within the context of the systems engineering economics exercise in serving public interest, the quest is to find the best solution for constituents based on a complete analysis of gaps and needs and the identification of the different ways to address them. This exercise is dominated by the collection of information, knowledge of cause and effect relationships affecting outcomes and the probability of events influencing outcomes. In basic terms these exercises are a quest for facts which when brought together are testable. This has very little connection to selflessness.

We understand that Note Number 7 reporting on this interesting and topical issue has become quite extensive. Those working on it admit this review has been quite revealing. We understand it will be released at the end of this month in the Notes section of the BSR website.

22/07/202: Simon Jenkins, a journalist who tends to write sensible pieces, makes some important points in today's Guardian Newspaper under the heading "Being 'economical with the truth' has a long history in British politics – but enough is enough"

Jenkins writes,

"... Rishi Sunak believes fiscal caution, honesty and responsibility are the truthful way to appeal to the Tory members. Truss disagrees. She promises what a chorus of economic commentators declare to be fiscal nonsense. She assured the BBC that her tax cuts would reduce inflation. Asked to justify this statement, she could only cite Patrick Minford, economic architect of the Brexit disaster. I have combed the columns of the financial press and found not one supporter of her thesis." If Liz Truss’s big idea really is to remodel monetary policy, expect markets to take fright"

The point being, and we agree, that with Boris gone, the lying will continue in an attempt to dupe the constituents of the United Kingdom. Our own position is that this is not just a moral question in will also exacerbate our state of affairs from the cost of living crisis, foreign affairs and national security to climate change.

But moving away from economics, just to record a fact, this exaggerated assertion by Truss that she gets things done avoids mentioning that she does the wrong things. For example, her assertion that she "stands up to Putin" ignores the fact that by encouraging the Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian is immoral and a strategic mistake. Since Boris Johnson, with her avid support, encouraged Ukraine not to negotiate, Ukraine has lost more than 25,000 military personnel and around 75,000 injured resulting in around 100,000 personnel now out of action. This is a price paid by Ukrainian families and not by us. Truss’s encouragement of citizens to fight in Ukraine has no doubt resulted in additional deaths. Words matter. As a result of the Ukrainian debacle, novices now go to the front facing a professional army and they face a spiralling death rate. All of this talk of UK providing arms and training is wholly irresponsible virtue signalling. Not realistic at all. Russia's demands, at the end of the day, are intended to reduce the likelihood of war by making Ukraine neutral so that the mutual strategic security arrangement can be extended to Russians and thereby reduce future tensions and any likelihood of war in the European theatre. This is to our benefit. Liz Truss prefers to continue to peddle the Boris lie that we are helping Ukraine and defending our freedom. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Foreign policy, first and foremost needs to look to the interests of our country. This requires a good deal of Realpolitik and cold rational logic. Applying sanctions on Russia that predictably backfired to exacerbate our cost of living crisis is a sign of economic strategic illiteracy. This has provided Truss with the excuse to cancel green levies. In this vein there is an illusionary assumption that since Net-Zero is 50 years off so we can catch up later. This ridiculous point was made by Kemi Badenoch and is completely wrong. The current rate at which billions of tonnes of Carbon is being returned to the atmosphere in forest fires, all over Europe, involving biomass that has stored this Carbon over periods varying from 25 -100 years, is reducing the time frame available for climate action. In any case, Net-Zero does not reverse temperature rises because there is a need to reduce the absolute concentration of greenhouse gases (GHG) in order to reverse this temperature movement. Therefore Net-Zero has always been a fantasy. What is required is a Net-Negative state to begin to drain GHG from the atmosphere and bring temperatures back down to less destructive levels. Liz Truss insists on an irresponsible and inflexible stand based on ignorance and lack of understanding of the dynamics involved with respect to what is necessary on climate action.

Most alternative media reported on just how out depth Truss was in her meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov. She was lost on questions concerning named territories not being able to distinguish Russian from Ukrainian territories but, of course UK mainstream media did not report this. This of course is not a particularly serious point, but it reflects how the UK media participate in painting a misleading picture for UK constituents and, in particular, the 160,000 Conservative party members, of Truss capabilities and performance.

Jenkins writes,

"The art of political mendacity is to concentrate on what cannot immediately be tested – to lie about the future. The lies that led to Johnson’s downfall might have been relatively small but they were about the present and instantly falsifiable. They were Houdini lies, securing escape from one entrapment even if only leading to another. They eventually erode trust all round."

He adds,

"I believe that veracity in public life is actually on a rising curve. Political statements can be verified by the media with ever greater ease. The shroud of secrecy that has long hung over government – petty corruption, lack of audit, planning bribery – is proving vulnerable to ever more intensive digital penetration and monitoring. Craven falsities and pledges are easier to disentangle and test."

Jenkins seems to have altered a previous stand since one of his former criticisms of the jury system was less optimistic. Here Jenkins refers to a vital issue. This is the absence of adequate standards of evidence to be presented in making any case from a court of law to a policy justification. At the moment this topic is being analyzed by the British Strategic Review economists in response to numerous queries related to their last Note 6 entitled,"The constitutional crisis created by monetary policy"

It would seem that this analysis has realized that the seven principles presented in the Nolan Principles are simply too fuzzy and open to personal interpretation. This was often the Boris problem with his considering types of behaviour as normal. For a man who thinks the economic success relies on avarice, what else could we expect? So Nolan's Principles simply don't cut it; so they are usually ignored. More mileage could be gained from the 2007 proposal for the adoption of Decision-Analysis Briefs (DABs) proposed by Hector McNeill as a transparent analysis of proposals based on standards of evidence, in his book, "The Briton’s Quest for Freedom.. Our unfinished journey…".

The referred-to Note 6 describes the constitutional state of affairs and cost of living crisis that has resulted from run down industry, a deskilled workforce and horrendous balance of payments as a direct result of monetarism. All of this decadence had taken place before the advent of Covid-19. Monetarism was introduced by Denis Healey and intensified by Margaret Thatcher and coasted along by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown ending up with the financial crisis in 2008 and the insane "solution" called quantitative easing administered by the Bank of England. This resulted in a stark division in society of roughly 5% of constituents who hold and trade assets and who have benefited handsomely from monetary policy, and the rest who rely on wages and who have seen real wages fall for over 25 years with many having been driven into poverty. All of this was delivered over a period of 50 years bolstered and delivered on a sequence of misrepresentation and false promises by politicians, of both major parties, as a result of some very bad habits which Simon Jenkins justifiably criticizes.

Jenkins end his piece stating:

"If politicians were unable to promise the earth – or claim to have created it – democracy would be dull indeed. Yet there must be limits. When Rishi Sunak says two plus two equals four and Liz Truss says five, I have no option. I have to go for Sunak."

We have little faith in Sunak related to his seemingly lack of understanding of several important economic issues and he appears to be very much under the thumb of the very inflexible monetary policy through-and-through Treasury and BoE. However, Sunak comes out streets ahead of Truss as far as we are concerned. So on this occasion, Jenkins' conclusion, given the very stark options, is one we agree with.

In 2021 we covered some aspects of the problem of climate change. Letters sent to organizations never received adequate replies and the current weather confirms much of what was stated. The UK is not immune from the impacts of rising temperatures and they are set to rise even further based on the current projections. This will impact crop yields negatively in a country that can only produce 50% of food requirements. Based on World Bank data on its own project portfolio, already 45% of international agricultural projects fail and the population continues to grow. The generalized political inaction on climate action and human population planning is committing ecocide and human suicide.

Why not visit our coverage here: Declining carrying capacity brings population growth back into focus

Something had to be done about the behaviour and performance of Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss in these Conservative party debates. In fact they should have both been advised after the Channel 4 debate to avoid a repeat performance of their dreadful antics in the ITV debate. The men in grey suits, being of a parochial mentality, do not seem to be aware that the whole world is watching this soap opera. It is making a mockery of British democracy, so-called. If these "managers" were more on the ball, someone should have been tasked with giving instructions to all candidates before any of them entered a debate studio, to avoid the type of mess that ensued. Yes, this is a free election and candidates should be free to shape their own presentations. But the image of the party surely is of some significance following the fiascoes of the last year. Having said that, the calibre of these two is well below par when they assert that are ready to "lead" from day one but are incapable of enduring a few minutes in some pretty simple debates.

The Sunak-Truss tussles were a sort of battle between an overly optimistic marionette emulating a feather duster and a compact guided missile with no feedback in its control mechanism. As a result there were repetitive assaults causing the feather duster to run out of Treasury script and sound bites and be reduced to a slightly nervous confused blinking stick. It is more than evident that neither of these individuals are leadership material.

Calling off their participation for now, is the least that could be done to save to prospects of the Sunak and Truss camps. However, this is completely unfair to the other candidates and, indeed the British voters.

The Conservatives, following the typical Johnsonian instinct, when things affect any of their anointed, just change the rules. Watch this space

The second debate for candidates for the leadership of the Conservative party on ITV, has become increasingly unedifying. In an attempt to impress viewers or MPs some candidates have shown a particularly nasty streak and a good dose of egomania. As in the last Channel 4 debate Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss managed, yet again, to lower the whole tone of the occasion by arguing points of irrelevance but hoping to impress through their ability to repetitively assert banalities. The balanced-budget-lower-tax discussion is completely redundant and, in reality, has no connection securing needed growth and productivity. It is of particular concern that two people who would like to be the prime minister of this country have participated in an extraordinary display of ignorance and unnecessary forcefulness. Hardly leadership material.

Unfortunately Badenoch did herself no good at all this time and flashed similar visceral characteristics.

The only two not partcipating in this type of embarrassing exchange were Tugendhat and Mordaunt.

Tugendhat did not perform so well this time, but became rather repetitive failing to spell out his plans.

Mordaunt was clearly aware of the negative public spectacle being created by the Rishi-Punch and the Liz-Judy Show. Mordaunt has suffered at the hands of unfair and some untrue briefs largely generated by Truss's team. But she has shown maturity by rising above this without any catty counter attacks. Mordaunt made clear that no one in her team was doing this against the others. As she stated at the time of her launch, it is less about the leader and more about the ship. People with the egos of Sunak, Truss and Badenock don't seem to understand this. In this particular debate Mordaunt came out as someone emphasizing a sensible team approach, the need for better government service organization and more effort to facilitate the lives of constituents. All very sensible stuff as were her clear suggested proposals for assisting constituents in the current cost of living crisis. The Conservative party is on show here and Maudaunt seems to understand this more than the others. In terms of decorum, trust and credibility, on this showing, Mordaunt has moved way ahead of the others.

At this stage the voters are Conservative MPs and it will be revealing to see how the vote goes today. As it is, Sunak and Truss, and now Badenock, have paraded some behaviour where their egos have got in the way of decorum and they have promoted an unnecessary negativity, confusion over policy and the image of a still divided party.

Observation: CybaCity and APEurope have no connection with any of the candidates mentioned in this leader.

17/07/2022: The presentations of Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss, both of whom dominated the time in the Channel 4 debate, have been reviewed by Nevit Turk the lead economics correspondent of APEurope. He is of the opinion that rather than address the actual mechanisms of how to solve the cost of living crisis, both have made statements that referred to outdated and discredited theories and practice. Unfortunately these seem to have an apparent logic that appeals to the uninitiated; they are just populist statements.

Turk says that, "If the evidence of the last 50 years is analysed, both here in the UK and USA, the supply side economics "tax reduction" argument has always been based on exaggerated growth forecasts which have never been achieved. Over the last 50 years real growth has simply flatlined. On the apparent "other side of the argument", balanced budgets do not have any impact on growth either."

"Growth in not a monetary issue. It is linked to relative pricing and physical productivity. However, as a populist politician Sunak launched his so-called super-deductions to "get growth going" which are simply populist give-aways. These are tax reductions associated with specific capital investments. However, Sunak failed to insist that there be a linkage of such trax reductions to quantified rises in productivity and/or price moderation or reduction. Therefore his formula for "going for growth" is a sham, even on the basis of a review of the Treasury documentation on its intent and oversight. This has been just another populist concept that might get him elected but it will not solve the county's problems."

It would seem that Liz Truss rounded off this exhange of ignorance on all matters economic, by stating she would remove green levies.

Turk says that,"These arose from the monetarists' view that to create incentives you tax and raise costs to herd companies in the right direction. So once again, the policy formula largely shaped by the bean counters in the Treasury reflect an out-dated and passé understanding of the economics and growth."

The British Strategic Review (BSR) makes use of "power maps" to indicate where the weight of decisions lie on macroeconomic (monetary) policy. This technique was developed by the journalist Anthony Sampson (1926–2004) and used in his outstanding series of books on, "The Anatomy of Britain. The BSR is an annual and more of an "Economic Physiology of Britain"".
Nevit Turk says that the dominance of the Bank of England and Treasury in policy questions has become a serious problem because they work on the basis of a zero-sum national accounts basis where the movement of funds creates equivalent deficits and credits. Unfortunately this mentality constrains decisions because there is no thought on how to grow the real output as opposed to "demand led debt".

"Growth boils down to quite obvious and basic requirements. One is that market penetration under inflation requires a relatve moderation or even reduction in the prices of certain companies. The combination of lower prices generates natural growth arising from the price elasticity of demand. This is the degree of rises in demand or consumption associated with price reductions. Because we are dealing here with lower prices, this immediately augments the purchasing power of all. Of vital importance if that this automatically helps the lowest income segments. This growth in demand, and therefore revenue, compensates, to some extent, for the corporate unit price and margin drops. By subsidising the deficit in margin remaining, the risk to companies is reduced. The ongoing penetration of the market is normally associated with more efficient, lower unit cost production as a result of increasing capacity utilization and improving product quality.", he said. He added that, "This learning curve effect is not a whimsical notion but has been an effective means of projecting unit costs based on increasing throughput and deployed by process engineers and operations managers for almost a century. It is a reflection of economics courses and some of the best universities that today's politicians, who have such quanlifications, do not appear to understand these basic points or have any experience in applying them." Before this fundamental real growth relationship was formalised and established empirically in 1936 by Theodore Wright, most of the innovation and industrial growth in the UK had relied on this simple formula.

Turk stated that,"To actually develop the so-called high tech and green industries and employment this same formula needs to be applied."

In terms of the existing range of economic schools of Keynesianism, monetarism, supply side economics and modern monetary theory all of which rely on the instruments of interest rates, monetary injection based on debt, taxation, government borrowing and expenditure. Turk emphasied that, "If the main foundation texts of these schools of economic thought are reviewed, it becomes apparent that the needed growth referred to, based on learning, innovation and increasing productivity, feature nowhere in these documents. This is why they do not have the means of bringing about such growth to address the cost of living crisis, levelling up, the balance of payment crisis and climate change."

Nevit Turk has followed the development of the alternative real incomes approach which has come up with the proposition of Real Incomes Policy (RIP). The development work on this started out in 1975 as a development programme to address the then stagflation crisis. Learning, innovation and growth in physical productivity is the central plank of this policy along with what is referred to as price productivity. In his opinion, "This has become a general macroeconomic theory and seems to be the only policy proposition able to address our main challenges."

There is a dedicated website on the real incomes approach at:

The BSR-British Strategic Review 2022 provides a background to this policy and as a result of the current crisis a Special Edition entitled, "Montarism & The Cost of Living" will be released today or tomorrow. In the meantime, several BSR Notes are worth looking at and the respective links are provided below:

No.3 - 15th April, 2022 Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis

No.4 – 17th April, 2022 Technology, technique and real incomes

No.5 – 11 July,2022 Sustaining growth in real wages by investing in results

Nevit Turk has also called attention to what he considered to be one of the most important Notes which has been released today:

No.6 – 17 July,2022 The constitutional crisis created by monetary policy.

This spells out why monetarism has been so destructive to the degree of creating the serious socio-economic divisions that we now face including severe income disparity and rising poverty.

16/07/2022: The APE Correspondents' Pool completed a preliminary assessment of the Channel 4 debate of prospective Conservative party leaders. The conclusion was that it was quite revealing. The losers were Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss ""who in any case had been given too much time in comparison with the other candidates and therefore were able to expose their weaknesses. As we have always contended Sunak is quite naive about the relationship between policy and constituent interests and the practicality of some of his policies. During the debate he was constantly wavering. This is a result of his having absorbed his Univ Oxford and Stanford lessons without adequate questioning or understanding and assuming in politics one just repeates what professors stated. Tom Tugendhat's statement that Sunak admitted to him that be was doing what the "boss" wanted was quite revealing and devastating for Sunak. This arose when just a minute before Sunak had insisted that raising the National Insurance was his way to help the NHS. It turns out that Sunak was challenged on this by Tugendhat in a private conversation, who had asked why this had been necessary, Sunak had replied, "...because the boss wanted it!" It is also revealing that Sunak did not deny this. Tugendhat was clearly telling the truth.

Liz Truss seemed to be whacked and continued in an assertive monotone at just how effective she had been and is, in taking on the world and someone called Putin. However her image during the course of the debate shrank because of her prolonged seemingly inflexible repetitive monotone delivery.

The disagreements between Truss and Sunak on economic issues only served to undermine any credibility in the past government cohesion on economic strategy and showed that the rifts that existed during Johnson's administration persist.

The interesting contributions came from Tom Tugendhat, Kemi Badenoch and Penny Mordaunt. Of these three, Tugendhat and Mordaunt came closest to presenting an alternative and rational economic plan to tackle inflation but neither of them gave examples to help the audience understand. Badenoch is an effective communicator but frankly is not well known enough. Some of the statements she made about stripping things down from the engineering sense to "get to the problem" is correct but this needed to be unpacked with examples.

Our economic advisers concluded that the person who homed in on the essential solution was Penny Mordaunt in her reference to competition and growth. She avoided the sterile tax reduction-balanced budget discussion between Sunak and Truss which ended up as unqualified assertions as opposed to informative statements. These exchanges generally lowered the standard, tone and flow of the debate. Mordaunt needs to give examples of her solution to help audiences in the next debates understand why her approach is distintly different from all of the others, except perhaps Tugenhart. Certainly, by making incentive payments conditional on delivered improvements in competitive status, expressed in the form of unit price reductions, Mordaunt's approach could tackle inflation on a broader scale and help deliver real growth as a result of an enhanced purchasing power of all wage-earners.

On balance the ACP concluded that the momentum of Sunak and Truss is likely to decline, Mordaunt is likely to move up with Sunak still leading. Judging from Tugendhat's performance he is likely to gain considerable support. The ACP was unable to determine how far up Badenoch might move, but her performance was convincing so she will gain some additional support. It is thought that based on the current state of knowledge Sunak will still lead with Mordaunt closing in while Truss is likely to have stalled. Tugendhat is likely to surprise people with a good score.

15/07/2022: Voodoo economics is a popular and now widely-used phrase to dismiss ambitious economic pledges made by politicians. However, it is worth remembering where the phrase came from. This derogatory phrase was used by George H.W. Bush to criticize President Ronald Reagan's economic policies, referred to as "Reaganomics" in an attempt to control stagflation caused by rising energy costs. In 1980, Bush argued that the president’s supply-side reforms would not be enough to rejuvenate the economy and would greatly increase national debt. Bush's criticisms were shown to be correct. The Reaganomics theory was based on the new-fangled supply side economics developed by the Canadian economist Robert Mundell and contributed to by another economist, Arthur Laffer. The theory was that by reducing marginal income tax rates there would be more money to invest in "growth" and "productivity". This "trickle down" theory has never worked for over 50 years, but some economists and Conservative party candidates cling exactly this this strand of voodoo economics. The result has always been a futher rise in income disparity, the highest earners gaining more money and wage-earners falling behind.

The first Conservative to dabble in this nonsense was Margaret Thatcher leading to an erosion in the economy undermining industry and manufacturing, too much money invested abroad, de-skilling of the British work force and a regime of constant reductions in the real incomes of wage-earners. The only criticism of signifcance came from the economist Nicholas Kaldor who, remarkably, predicted our current predicament over 50 years ago.

The main problem is that there is a serious confusion between real growth achieved through price and physical productivity increases and "demand-led growth" generated by debt. Monetarism advances debt to generate demand and then recoups the debt via later taxation, because this approach does not achieve price and physical productivity rises, real growth is always emaemic and the country continues in a widening debt-taxation trap.

Under Johnson, Rishi Sunak introduced super-deductions which are simply tax reductions linked to certain types of capital investment. But like marginal tax rate reductions this has had almost no impact. Those supporting the Johnson administratin line on "tax cuts" or even "balanced budgets" could come unstuck because they dont't know how to achieve real growth. As a result promised growth will never be achieved as we continue with voodoo economics.

Many have been disappointed in Jeremy Hunt's declared support of Rishi Sunak when he was eliminated from the leadership elections.

Most remember Penny Mordaunt going out on a limb to support Jeremy Hunt in this attempt at leader against Boris Johnson. Her reward was, of course, Boris Johnson removing her from government for a while. She was later brought back because several realized she had a good level of competence as well as presentation to go with it. Of course, we do not know what Sunak promised Hunt but it is likely to have been a specfic minsterial role. Many saw a Hunt-Mordaunt as a winning combination but this is not how things turned out; Hunt probably made a miscalculation here.

David Frost, otherwise referred to as Lord Frost, made some disparaging remarks about Penny Mordaunt the other day. He referred to her time when she served under him with respect to Brexit negotiations. When overseeing delicate high profile negotiations, managers need to take care to know what people under them understand and some additional attention needs to be taken to understand their modes of expression and presentation. On this basis they can provide such people with a sound orientation so as to make it easier for them to follow essential instructions. Tied to these basic requirements, it then becomes an essential function to request feedback from staff concerning any doubts and to anticipate issues by knowing where they are and what they are doing on the job.

It therefore was quite revealing when this man who was head of Brexit negotiations had the affontery to state that Mordaunt, did not master the necessary detail in the negotiations, did not emphasize essential points enough and often he did not know where she was. These comments do not reflect negatively on Mordaunt but they do expose the fact that Frost seems to have been a poor and somewhat of a dilettante manager who had placed himself at the centre of negotiating a poor Brexit deal, including the Northern Ireland protocol. Frost oversaw it becoming part of a legally binding international treaty, and then following this high profile effort, realized, far too late in the process, what a mess he had made. In addition to this astounding level of incompetence he even went so far as to consider the only way to cover all of this up would be to attack the NI protocol by breaking the law, something Boris Johnson was, and now, Liz Truss is very keen to do.

It would seem that any dismissive comments coming from such an incompetent performer who finds himself in an embarrassing predicament with respect to his own image, might be taken as a complement for someone who perhaps realized that he was someone with no presence as a manager and preferably avoided at all costs. Such managers, yes they do exist, usually have the atrocious habit of blaming others when knowledge of their own incompetence catches up with them.

14/07/2022: The negative briefing and leaks against other candidates by managers of the Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss campaigns has become excessive and simply reconfirms the nature of the Conservative party MPs who are in need of a new approach and some party discipline. Of course Sunak and Truss play the roles of the innocents being above the fray of such dirty tricks but nothing goes out without their tacit approval

The Truss foreign secretaryship was not a success with her confusing Russian and Ukrainian territory in a sensitive meeting. She unforgivably stated she would suppot individuals from the UK volunteering to fight in Ukraine in a war is almost a certain death sentence to volunteers, misled enough by leaders who should exercise more caution in their pubic declarations. Words matter, and Liz Truss has a problem, somewhat like Boris Johnson of speaking before thinking.

As far as foreign policy under Johnson and Truss is concerned, this has been a resounding failure. It has resulted in a rapid decline in trust on the reliability of the word of the UK leading to a rapid expansion of BRICS. At the moment BRICS is considering the applications from significant new members including Iran, Argentina, Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt all moving away from the increasingly untrustworthy US-UK axis and integrating by far the largest and rapidly growing segment of the global economy by joining Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. Outside the EU, the UK has an increasingly diminished image and bargaining power in this new global structure. Today, at her campaign launch, Truss asserted how she has led on sanctions on Russia but failed to explain this is a significant factor in exacerbaing the cost of living crisis by raising energy prices. She did not explain just how increasing numbers of Ukrainian military are perishing manning British weapons following a campaign to actively discourge Zelensky from stopping the bloodshed by negotiating. This irresponsible and loose cannon foreign policy has certainly confirmed the abilty of Johnson and Truss to take decisions, unfortunately they were the wrong decisions. Each day of this Conservative party election around 150 Ukrainian personnel perish and around 750 are injured and put out of action. British media have of course painted things a jingoistic and different way, gloss over such realities and attempt to project Sunak and Truss as saviours. In reality they have delivered, togther with Johnson, a failing economy and precarious internationl economic scene leading to a dangerous depreciation in the image of this country.

The campaigns which do not appear to be associated with dirty tricks are those of Penny Mordaunt and Tom Tugenhart. Amongst Conservative party members, Mordaunt remains by far the most popular amongst all candidates. This is because she is considered to be the needed unifying candidate, not only of the party but also for a good deal of the British electorate who find Labour and the Social Democrats wanting. The next election, after all is of some importance.

13/07/2022: A YouGov poll on the Conservative party memberships' views on the candidates confirms the Agence Press Européenne Correspondents' Pool assessment posted 08/07/2022 (The unifying candidate?) - see below - that Penny Mordaunt would win against any other opponent, including Rishi Sunak or Liz Truss.

The question is to what extent Conservative MPs realize that their futures depend more of such a unifying candidate as Mordaunt because she also carries a certain admiration amongst some Social Democrats and even ex-Labour voters. With Sunak or Truss as leaders, most Red Wall areas are likely to switch to the Social Democrats. CybaCity and APEurope have no connection to Penny Mordaunt and these opinions are based on widespread sounding of opinion.

The parochial character of the priorities of candidates means really serious international issues have become muted and discussions circulate round irrelevancies such as balanced budgets versus tax cuts and the assertion that growth will save the day with no proposals on how that can be achieved. The more fundamental issues of levelling-up and the cost of living crisis await rational workable proposals. Amongst this word salad, Sunak and Truss have images that ride on an exaggerated mainstream media promotion of their abilities.

In reality Sunak has made a series of very naive decisions including his £200 prejudicial loan for energy bills to his wasteful "super-deduction" give-aways which have no impact on productivity or growth at all. These mis-steps appear to be the result of lack of government experience and because he remains firmly under the tutelage of the Treasury, from where most of his support comes. The Treasury has a particular liking for ministers who go native.

Liz Truss is bullish on most of Johnson's more doubtful ideas from tax cuts to support for Ukraine. However, Ukraine is becoming toxic for the Conservative party because of the excessive deaths of Ukrainian military personnel resulting from Johnson's meddling in this affair. These deaths increased to unacceptable numbers following Johnson discouraging Zelensky from any further negotiations following the Russian-Ukrainian Ankara meeting in March 2022. This meeting was the first one that held out the promise of progress in bringing the conflict to an end. The world had looked on in hope, only to be dashed by Johnson's interference.

Since Johnson's intervention took place, enthusiastically supported by Truss, something like 10,000 additional Ukrainian personnel have been killed and in excess of 35,000 injured. While the Conservative party decides who will be the next Prime Minister and installs him or her, at least a further 5,000-6,000 personnel will have perished and another 20,000 will be out of action because of injury. Those dying, include those manning British-supplied arms and who have received training under UK instructors. There are serious questions to be asked to what extent Truss would continue to support this insanity and how much more money Sunak would waste to prop up "Johnson's Ukrainian Folly"

11/07/2022: This weekend's ACP workshop covered some topics of relevance to the current Conservative party selection of a new leader. This is related to the issue of balanced budgets against low taxes being a complete red herring. This relates to government expenditures. One of the reasons for the relatively wasteful investments by government is the uncertainty of the actual outcomes in terms of economic and social benefits, for example, those accruing from the HS2 rail system whose costs continue to rise beyond the original estimates. Invariably government information technology contracts have overrun original budgets. In these cases investments were made on the basis of cost-benefit analyses that assume the state of knowledge used to take decisions is advanced enough to enable estimates that take into account possible changes in conditions. In other words, investments are made with no clear or reliable idea of the results. On the other hand, besides having to deal with changes in conditions, there is the question of the competence of those contracted to carry out the work.

In spite of leaps of faith by Labour and Conservative governments over the last 50 years, promising to grow the economy under monetarism, they have always failed to do so. This half century lack of coherence between the promise and the outcomes causes the current declarations of most Conservative party candidates for leadership of the party, to have a whiff of fantasy about them. The Conservatives have an ideological fixation with the concept of small government and tax cuts counter-balanced by the continued assertion that this can then "grow the economy". This is the 1970s supply side paradigm which has never worked out in practice. In any case the main issue facing the country is inflation and increasing income disparity with many being unable to buy basic essentials. The main attempts to apply the supply side, small government and low tax formula were the administrations of Ronald Reagan in the USA and Margaret Thatcher in the UK. In both cases this depressed the economy, led to widespread repossessions of homes and family farms and income disparity increased. The result of Reagan's experiment with supply side economics can be observed in the diagram on the right. Under Reagan income disparity rose with the highest income earners, the top 5%, seeing their incomes rise by 47% and those on lower incomes by just 2%. Under Bill Clinton, who terminated supply side economics, results were far more balanced with all income levels rising by around 20%.

The grave assertions by candidates that they can "grow the economy" under low taxation regimes is simply not supported by the evidence. On the other hand, a balanced budget does not advance the case because neither Labour or Conservatives have ever grown the economy in real terms even when they had more balanced budgets.

The only time the UK had unprecedented real growth marked by falling income disparity and rising real wages was in the period 1945-1965 when monetarism limited to interest rates and quite deflationary, the budget was in surplus and Keynesianism was not applied because unemployment was so low.

The reason this changed was the OPEC petroleum price crisis, stagflation and the recycling of petrodollars launched the world into monetarism driven by financial deregulation. Denis Healey was the very early adopter of monetarism in 1975. Ever since, the macroeconomic management of this country has remained in the clutches of monetarism. As a result politicians and economists confuse rises in the amount of money in the economy with growth when, in reality, real growth is what is important and this only takes place as a result of price moderation and continual rises in productivity. Under monetarism and supply side economics investment and productivity remain low. Therefore all of the predictions of what the results of policy will be invariably turn out wrong and create winners, losers and those who remain in a policy neutral impact state. These policies always lose effect and therefore traction.

The economist Hector McNeill, who has led the development of the real incomes approach, has observed that macroeconomists usually have some difficulty understanding the real incomes policy paradigm as a result of what appear to be preconceived fixed ideas which seem to have become embedded during their university training. He recalls that the least convincing aspects of his own university training was monetary policy and the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM) which he has since shown to be flawed in recently published papers.

On the other hand, process engineers, cost accountants and plant managers who have a more direct involvement with the practical issues have no difficulty in understanding the concepts involved in the real incomes approach.

It is therefore notable that the development of the real incomes approach to economics can turn this paradigm on its head by ensuring that government actions can secure exactly what is intended. It is possible to gain precise cost-benefit analyses of the actual benefits of government actions precisely. In other words, the real incomes approach is not based on investments based on notions of results in the future but rather it is based on providing benefits after the desired result has been achieved.

This procedure is set out in a very simple form in the latest "Note on Monetarism & The entitled, "Sustaining growth in real wages by investing in results". This explains in remarkably simple terms how the Real Incomes Policy (RIP) operates. Rather than provide a loan or grant on the basis of a "project" or "proposal" that promises to lower prices and raise productivity sometime in the future, RIP only provides the compensation of a reduction in tax against actual delivery of price reductions. Companies, to remain viable under competitive conditions, need to deliver on the subsequent required rise in productivity or receive no further benefits. RIP is very different from the normal systems of grants and loans designed to "encourage" investment, many of which have no eligibility criteria of financial criteria and no evidence that the monies will be invested in higher productivity actions. For example, the so-called “super-deductions” for the purchase of goods for companies provide a tax relief which is not checked against any progress in productivity. Indeed, like many development projects, those in receipt of funding quite often consider this as income as opposed to funding to bring about beneficial change. This has been the case with "super-deductions" which in reality are a naive initiative and significant waste of government resources since there is no guarantee of results. Indeed, this initiative with or without tax cuts or under a balance budget is an example of policy failure.

Even in those cases where investment projects are funded against detailed project proposals, the World Bank (WB) figures on their own project portfolio have registered a 35% failure rate and, in the case of agricultural projects around a 45% failure rate. This failure rate is the percentage of projects that were unable to deliver the promised benefits. The annual waste worldwide on WB development projects is around $79 billion. On the other hand, the WB has admitted that whereas in the mid-1960s around 85% of WB projects were subjected to Cost-Benefit Analysis (OQSI 2021) as a basis for approval, by 2010 this figure had fallen to 20% (Independent Evaluation Group of WB).

Therefore, RIP is unique in that rather than risk such failure and waste of funds, the delivery of actual results as the degree of unit price reduction achieved is what controls the degree of incentive funding received by companies in the form of a reduced levy to compensate the company for enhancing real incomes growth of the workforce and consumers. In this way, RIP sustains growth in real wages by investing in delivered results through the provision of an incentive to moderate or eliminate inflation in the short term while also sustaining medium to longer term increases in physical productivity through innovation. This provides an operational basis for a policy to sustain growth in real wages.

10/07/2022: The Conservative leadership contest has shifted from the contentious to the acrimonious; now including some particularly negative briefings. Maybe this type of behaviour is not just a Johnson trait. There is a binary divide between the balanced budget Sunak camp and the various candidates amassing around the trickle-down lower tax totem pole. 50 years of experience with monetarism and the detailed analysis of it impacts, tell us that neither approach works, and on balance, brings increasing income disparity as a result of declining real investment. It is difficult to deny that there are some intelligent candidates, but the problem is that those schooled in the leading academic institutions for PPE and economics, cling onto theories and policy propositions long shown to be flawed. The balanced budget is static and nothing improves and lower taxation, in the name of innovation and productivity, also does not work because most of the windfall gains go into the pockets of executives.

Solutions to this binary fission so far have not been advanced.

Today, Penny Mordaunt announced her candidacy. On the economic policy front she has a blank slate which is a definite advantage. It is important for all Conservative MPs that a proposal is made that appeals to the whole of this increasingly divided country and this does not include a balanced static budget or tax cuts but rather a dynamic and growing budget based on short term price reduction combined with medium to long term rises in productivity across all sectors of the economy. Such an approach can tackle income disparity, improve labour relations and support levelling up, in one go. Keynesianism, monetarism and supply side economics have not succeeded on this score but the real incomes approach to economics, a new alternative and more practical school of economics holds out the promise of offering policy frameworks to achieve such a comprehensive solution. Much of the background to this development can be found in the 2022 edition of the British Strategic Review, which carries the sub-title, "Monetarism & The Real Economy". We understand that a Special Edition of the British Strategic Review with the sub-title, "Monetarism & The Cost of Living", containing a more detailed explanation of real incomes policy, will be published next week.

09/07/2022: Since Boris Johnson resigned the likely contenders for taking his place has been fairly obvious. Agence Presse Européenne Correspondents' Pool completed a sounding to attempt to determine which potential candidate would be able to unify a seriously divided party and, indeed a seriously divided nation.

In this assessment the potential appeal of the unifying candidate to Labour voters was also taken into account. Many candidates are tainted by their close support of Johnson and although there were differences between Sunak and Johnson, his "accountancy" and "book balancing" approach reflected a lack of imagination. During the energy payment scheme discussions, Sunak reflected a naive lack of understanding of real incomes and inflation in denying that his scheme amounted to a loan. SDAC calculations showed that this scheme would have been prejudicial to low income families. Since then Sunak did a U-turn on this and converted the funds into a grant.

Strong advocates for the Johnson's' policy on Ukraine will become toxic when it is realized just how expensive and destructive of Ukrainian military personnels' lives this rapidly failing policy has been (see data on left). The next leader will need to manage a difficult transition to a modified policy of supporting a negotiated settlement. This has already ruled out James Heappey, Ben Wallace and Liz Truss as being people with inadequate foresight as a result of being hoplessly unrealistic about the reality in Ukraine. This process has been significantly complicated by the extent that UK media have tended to rely on Ukrainian-sourced information and have tended to ignore the reports from the more than 20 independent correspondents operating in the Donbass and whose accounts on the same events differ significantly from those sent from Ukraine.

Sajid Javid's approach to his job as Chancellor reflected a conversion to the Treasury school so it is unlikely that he would come up with anything original. Nadhim Zahawi appears to be serious but he remains an unknown quantity in terms of general appeal.

The candidate who came out top in terms of having the qualities of being a unifying candidate and who has sufficient Cabinet experience was Penny Mordaunt, with Jeremy Hunt coming a close second. In terms of being a person whose demeanor and lack of what might be considered to be "extreme" views, sufficient to attract many Labour voters is still Penny Mordaunt. Mordaunt is particularly popular with younger voters, something most other candidates lack.

The question then becomes how Mordaunt would address the single most important question of the state of the British economy. None of the candidates's track records show any hope on this score but Mordaunt's experience to date has been linked to trade deals but any overall approach to the recovery of the British economy remains undefined. It is here where she has an opportunity for some strategic thinking to come up with practical suggestions with respect to stagflation and levelling up. Certainly it is possible to replace the current "Leveling Up" policies inroduced by Michael Gove with something more appealing and practical. Part of the solution is very much tied up with entrepreneurialism and real growth and these were topics Jeremy Hunt referred to in his last bid to be Leader; maybe there is a potential partnership here.

08/07/2022: The economist Nicholas Kaldor's collected arguments criticizing monetarism were made into a collection and published as a booklet entitled, "The economic consequences of Mrs. Thatcher." Kaldor resigned from his position as adviser to the Labour government when the intellectual bruiser, Denis Healey, the then Labour Chancellor, switched to monetarism.
1973 OPEC sanctions
So the rot started then, as a panic reaction to a plummeting balance of payments and stagflation caused by the sharp rises in international petroleum prices imposed by the Islamic members of OPEC in 1973. This was to retaliate against countries who has supported Israel in the Palestinian-Israeli related conflicts.

The title to this piece might seem to be little unfair since this monetarist scandal was started by Labour but, during the subsequent 48 years, the Conservatives held power for 30 years and Labour for just 18. Maybe the title should be,"The economic consequences of Britain's leading political parties". The main point is that they have both been equally incompetent in managing the economy.

Since 1973 the leading economists and political parties have failed to improve macroeconomic theories and derived policies to be in a position to eliminate reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to reduce income disparity and tackle stagflation. The failure to control stagflation in 1973 resulted in it enduring more than 20 years. This was the result of the International Monetary Fund providing finance to low income countries to purchase petroleum at ever-rising prices and doing nothing at all to encourage OPEC to lower prices. As a result, global debt rocketed. The British Strategic Review explains that these pradoxical decisions by IMF were the result of the Managing Director being a Moslem of the Sufi sect. The recycling of petrodollars, also an IMF initiative by the same Managing Director, meant financialization took off in earnest without anyone analyzing the likely consequences.
NATO sanctions
The consequences were an accelerating globalization to shift excessive volumes of cash, and the UK entered a transition marked by de-industrialization the de-skilling of the workforce and the creation of a treadmill of ever declining real wages, tolerated by largely economically incompetent Conservative and Labour governments.

Beyond Covid, what has exacerbated the current rising stagflation is, of course, the rising international prices of petroleum and gas. However, the destruction this is dealing to the UK economy was not caused by any OPEC sanctions this time, but rather has been caused by sanctions imposed by NATO countries on Russia. The sheer incompetence of the collective NATO membership in not understanding the likely economic consequences of applying sanctions against Russia has undermined the credibility of the organization. NATO has shown itself to be unable to take strategic decisions in our collective defence but, rather, has taken decisions that have undermined our collective economic security. Both British political parties have always been stout defenders of NATO without considering the actual need for this organization beyond its function as an arms bazaar. Our politicians lamely shrug their shoulders and state, "Oh, stagflation is a world wide phenomenon!. This is true, but this worldwide phenomenon has been caused by the policies pursued on an international basis and supported by our government.

The Ukrainian crisis continues and as a result some of the Conservative candidates for the current leadership campaign will become toxic for the Conservatives in the near future. Any Conservative MPs who have been particularly active in supporting sanctions and the ongoing provision of arms and training to the Ukrainian military campaign will be found to have been creating the circumstances for additional tens of thousands of Ukrainian military losing their lives. Very soon, there will be a reckoning on this matter. This would have affected Boris Johnson, but he has now "departed" but this reality would have caught up with Ben Wallace marking him as someone pursing dubious and unachievable objectives and at great expense. This is because Ukraine has no chance at all and has very obviously lost this military action and should surrender as rapidly as possible and meet Russia's demands. These are simple and consist of allowing the populations of Lugansk and Donetsk to gain their independence from Ukraine, something they voted for in 2014. Crimea also separated on the basis of a vote in 2014 but also, in a separate vote, sought and received support to become annexed by Russia. Ukraine's demand that these territories be "returned" when Ukraine has been shelling the Donbass since 2014 or to expect Russian-speaking Crimeans to allow themselves to be pushed back into Ukraine is just ridiculous and beyond serious consideration.

So the Conservative MPs, and indeed, members of the opposition, who have been conspicuous in their support of Ukraine's suicide mission, based on an appeal to a Battle of Britain spirit, will be marked as being out of touch with reality and therefore unreliable decision makers.

The last item of global survival and therefore of vital economic interest to the global population was COP 26 largely considered by those involved, to be an outstanding success. But as a result of the irresponsible NATO sanctions, COP 26 has already failed because increasing numbers of countries have been forced to return to coal firing of power stations on an unprecedented scale. A notable mistake highlighted by COP 26 was the all round satisfaction that the assembled politicians, including members of the British government, had established a timetable to achieve Net-Zero, sometime in the distant future. The problem is that Net-Zero does not solve the issue at all since the CO2 concentrations will, at that point, then remain the same and temperatures will continue to climb. The strategic aim should always have been Net-Negative so as to continue to drain CO2 so as to reverse temperature rises. There have been, therefore, no sound strategic decisions made on this question of climate change; we are still in a deepening hole. Of course, the financialization lobby was active in the shape of the concept of Carbon Trading where light oversight, as in the case of those light financial regulations that led to the 2008 financial crisis, is a salient characteristic of this system.

The economic consequences of Conservative governments have been particularly destructive and it is difficult to imagine that the current bunch of leadership candidates will have any clue as to how to set this ship on the needed direction.

08/07/2022: The lack of Realpolitik has brought this nation to a low pass under the Conservative government, largely because of a lack of attention to real economic factors and holding onto ideological interpretations of economics and notions of freedom. This has resulted in support for an external political process that led directly to the Ukrainian crisis.

The lack of RealEconomik in these decisions can be recognized in the deepening cost of living crisis exacerbated by the international attempt to isolate Russia. The outcome has in fact been the isolation of the USA, Europe and the UK from the rest of the world whose level of trust in the "West" has been seriously diminished.

The removal of Boris Johnson from decisions affecting this country provides the opportunity for leadership candidates to map out a beneficial path for this country by recognizing that Ukraine has lost the battle and any continued military support will only result in serious accusations of incompetence or even lack of ethics and serious recriminations, later, related to the number of Ukrainian military people who have lost, and continue to lose, their lives at an unacceptable rate under impossible odds. A realistic candidate needs to get this message out to the people of this country as a preparation for supporting Ukraine in negotiations; any other proposal will fail and reflect on the candidate.

On the national front the problem remains, "It's the economy stupid!" but unlike Bill Clinton's economic follow up, this appeal should not lead to legislation and economic policies that further ravage the economy leading to the 2008 financial crisis. Just as there has been a lack of realism and RealPolitik any candidate serving the interests of this country needs to transition to a stark RealEconomik approach by admitting that past monetarist policies have ravaged this country trough deindustrialization, deskilling and creating a major decline in social and economic conditions as real wages have fallen. Policy has created a nation of shopkeepers and as a result the UK takes up the second worst balance of payments position in the world. There is a need to stop finding excuses but rather to identify the rational explanations as a basis to identify solutions. It is evident that this country needs a return to a one nation balanced approach to the opportunities of all. The useless Levelling-up agenda consisting of a series of minimalist ad hoc arbitrary interventions will have no durable impact of real growth. There is a need for a macroeconomic policy that significantly reduces the role of the Bank of England which does not have the appropriate mandate nor policy instruments to contribute to a solution. There is a need for policy to emphasize the role of price and physical productivity and applying incentives to impact prices in the short run to alleviate the suffering of the lowest paid and to ramp up productivity and innovation in methods to lower costs, over the medium to long term. The industrial revolution developed under this formula and it still can be applied to set the country on a recovery path for manufacturing and rises in real wages. Between the policies of Keynesianism, monetarism, supply side economics, modern monetary theory and the real incomes approach, the only policy to address our specific plight is Real Incomes Policy (RIP).

07/07/2022: The urgency of controlling inflation is that everyone is losing more of their purchasing power because their disposable incomes purchase less and less goods and services. For lower wage categories there is the issue of being unable to purchase basic essentials.

Net loss of income associated with
inflation rate durations

Inflation rate

5 years

10 years

- 23%
- 40%
- 32%
- 54%
- 41%
- 65%
- 49%
- 74%
- 66%
- 80%

Explanation: Inflation is the equivalent to an earning capacity compound discount, so that each year the amount that can be purchased declines by the inflation rate if wages remain fixed. Real incomes, what can be purchased using wages, declines each year under inflation.

SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab is an international centre dedicated to the development of counter-inflationary economic theory and policies. They have developed the real incomes approach and a policy proposition Real Incomes Policy (RIP). This work was initiated in the mid 1970s to identify policies to control the stagflation, the combination of inflation with rising unemployment. This had been caused by the OPEC sanctions imposed by raising the international price of petroleum.

The damage done by inflation can be measured in terms of wage-reduction-equivalents over 5 and 10 year periods, as shown in the table on the right. The higher the inflation, the longer it takes under conventional policies to correct the situation. However, under conventional policies inflation is not corrected systemically, but rather by depressing the economy. In real incomes terms, this simply makes matters worse before inflation resides and the systemic issues remain unsolved.

Britain is already experiencing an inflation rate of 10% and this is likely to reach 15% by year end. This is already an unacceptable state of affairs because the decline in real incomes are very high. Britain's prospects across the 10% to 15% inflation ranges are shown in the cells shaded in grades of red. At the minimum this signified equivalent falls in wages of 40-60% which is untenable. Generally speaking private firms and government cannot afford to raise wages by the amounts already lost because policy does nothing to correct the cause of inflation. The government needs to concentrate on policies to reduce inflation, that is, to solve the systemic defects in the economy which have been created by 50 years of monetarism. Subsidizing consumers to help them afford rising prices is no more than an unsustainable palliative. As far as we are aware, Real Incomes Policy (RIP) is the only policy in existence to control inflation with effects in the short term and promises to correct the systemic problems over the medium to long term.

06/07/2022: The sacking of Michael Gove has been suggested to have been a condition of Nadhim Zhahawi accepting the Chancellorship and wanting to sweep the decks clean to make a fresh start on the econmics front.

After all, Gove's Levelling-up document was an embarassing amateurish effort with little practical content. The Red Wall communities are still waiting 3 years after BREXIT for some action.

The spend factor associated with the Levelling-up "plans", for someone who might be bent on reducing taxes, would be something to avoid. This makes the anticipated economic plans, to be presented next week, something of interest. It looks as if the economic plan will be an electioneering blitz designed to attract funds to the Conservative party as a tax cutting "trickle down" policy. We hope this is not the case since this has never worked and it has always exacerbated income disparity. This not exactly what the Red Wall communities need.

It is to be hoped that Zhahawi will introduce practical solutions. He has experience in business but tackling a cost of living crisis, stagflation and poverty created by 50 years of de-industrialization, requires a completely new approach.

06/07/2022: One of the drawbacks of Wikipedia is that it only permits content linked to published information and "recognised" sources and this has created issues for individuals who have been advancing important theories and propositions and cannot get this information out. For example such as alternative economic theories and policies. The process of preparation, peer reviews and publications in this field is slow. As a result, important ideas that are emerging now, and largely out of sight and reach, might make it to Wikipedia's pages in five, ten or fifteen years time.

Cambridge Economics Network (CEN) is a new form of collaborative development dealing with leading edge economic theories and propositions. This process has been initiated with a run down on the emerging new economics school, the real incomes approach to economics theory and its main policy proposition, Real Incomes Policy (RIP). CEN has selected this as the chosen development topic because, currently, it is the only known alternative showing promise of possibly addressing the combination of issues facing the British economy. These include a cost of living crisis, inflation and stagflation and income disparity.

CEN has published a "Working Paper" entitled, "Contributions of the Real Incomes Approach to economic thought - A resumé" which provides a reference document for a collaborative review and further development. This provides an annotated list of the main differences between RIP and conventional policies and the policy advantages. Anyone can dowload this documents (PDF) and send in comments subject to the conditions set out on the "Network operations" page of the CEN website. Those providing useful comments that are used in future editions of the text will have their names added as contributors and those who provide substantial additional content (critical or supportive) and that is deemed an advance in the current levels of understanding, will have their names added as co-authors.

This process doubles up as a review process and the final paper will be published by HPC and posted in the publications section of the CEN website. A CEN spokespeson stated that, "This is an exciting initiative involving a truly international collaboration in advancing a promising alterative economic theory and policy. It will act as a stern test to see if more expert and lay opinions agree or disagre with the contents of the document.". Already suggestions have been provided and will be included in the forthcoming updates to the document. CEN hopes to complete this first "prototype test" with this document by the end of July 2022. The current working languages are English and Portuguese and efforts are being made to extend this range. To find out more click on the CEN image above right.

04/07/2022: This weekend's ACP Workshop reviewed some of the impacts of Western sanctions against Russia on Western economies. A few weeks ago SDAC reported that Germany would lose its leadership position in world balance of payments rankings and that Russia and China would take up prime positions. The state of affairs of Germany has worsened more rapidly than expected. Its balance of payments veering into the negative during the last reporting period. The declarations, policies and decisions of the German government concerning Ukraine have had a catastrophic impact on the Germany economy. It is as if the German political "elite" are bent on satisfying the US State Department's objective of keeping Germany down. Paradoxically the German Green party has been instrumental in sinking this economy as a result of an inclination to align its foreign policy decisions with those advocated, behind the scenes, by the USA cash diplomacy.

A recent paper by Cambridge Economics describing the UK's lack of economic resilience and predicament in being unable to pay decent salaries also reflects the situation in Europe and USA.

This paper can be accessed here:

The consequences of being a nation of shopkeepers
The rest of Europe, including the UK that carries the economic injuries arising from BREXIT, face rising inflation and a likely entry to a state of stagflation.

Economists during the last stagflation crisis of the 1970s were unable to manage this situation. Monetary policy tools simply exacerbated the state of the economy, precipitating a depression and rising unemployment. No lessons were learned, today policy makers are attempting to work with the very same policy tools. In fact since then, financialization and transfer of manufacturing to lower income countries has hollowed out manufacturing sectors of high income countries, except for Germany. As a result, Europe does not have sufficient resilience because of an over-dependency on imported manufactured goods as well as energy resources, which in turn means that these economies have no natural real economic growth sources. On the other hand, Russia, under President Putin has been increasing its economic resilience as a direct result of a major diversification into manufacturing. This is why sanctions cannot work because Russia is self-sufficient in energy and agriculture and petroleum derivatives and has an expanding manufacturing sector. In the meantime, the rest of the world's economies, most of whom have not sanctioned Russia, are expanding and taking up the market gaps created by sanctions, so Russia's balance of payment is rising rapidly. As a direct result of former sanctions, Russia has become on of the largest agricultural producers and grain exporters able to make up for any deficits in the world markets but, of course, only supplying countries that have not imposed sanctions.

The dependencies of the Western economies on vital imports and the slow speeed of any practical transitions to complete substitution does not permit Europe and the USA enough time to avoid an economic depression resulting from the very sanctions they impose on Russia.

03/07/2022: The New Atlas provides geopolitical analysis by Brian Berletic (aka Tony Cartalucci) and this has incuded a regular briefing on the Ukraine affair. He usually makes use of the Ukrainian territorial occupation balance maps produced by a Ukrainian moniitoring group. These maps record the progress of Russian efforts to assist the Donbass republics secure all of their territory following their declaration of independence from Ukraine in 2014 and having suffered attacks by the Ukrainian military in 2014 and sporadically during the last 8 years.

Berletic's focus however is more widespread covering Eurasia. His latest briefing is:

"Replacing Ukraine's Dwindling Air Defenses & Kiev's "Managed Retrogrades" in Donbass"

on YouTube, where he analyses the content of the latest Pentagon briefing on the situation in Ukraine. To access this video briefing click on the blue link or The New Atlas logo.

02/07/2022: Stringer mobile videos have emerged on alternative media showing the mall in Kremenchuk at the beginning of the fire. When the fire was essentially smouldering and building up there were no people running out of the mall but rather some curious people who had turned up to observe the event. There was no obvious panic and the car park was empty apart from the cars of those who had turned up to look at the fire. Zelensky's assertion that there were 1,000 people in the mall at the time, given that the videos show about 15 people observing the fire seems to be far fetched.

On a technical point, a so-called CCTV footage shown on UK media showed the outline of a rocket or missile super-imposed on a scene somewhere behind the mall. The velocity of the rocket or missile would not have permitted such as clear outline of the projectile but rather there would have been an indistinct blurred streak as has been seen in all other events where CCTV footage was captured. Someone has been busy creating a rather poorly put together false flag event, even more amateur than those White Helmets in Syria, Boris Johnson's favourites.

This propaganda effort is amateur and tedious sideshow and has no effect on the events on the ground. There is overwhelming evidence that our government should stop supporting actions that are resulting in the deaths of over 200 Ukrainian personnel each day. In our valiant efforts to "help" we are training people which makes nice TV footage of Salisbury plain. It spreads a feel-good atmosphere of Britain assisting a brave nation. However, the reality is that most of those we are training are destined to perish or be seriously injured or incapacitated for the rest of their lives. It really is beyond the time that we should demand that Ukraine seek a negotiated settlement.

01/07/2022: Fanciful assertion and propaganda influences public opinion but it does not alter things on the ground in Ukraine. When wishing to find out the truth it is best to take William Jame's advice that "Truth is what happens". However, the spin, inversions and distortions, the stuff of politics and, it would now seem, diplomacy and the media, obscures the truth from the public. Journalists "on site" are targeted by agents to ensure that they are misled into reporting distortion with respect to who did what to whom. And so this macabre movie continues.

However, what is happening is very different from the propaganda emanating from the G7, NATO and the US State Department. The data in the table on the left is basically from the records of the MOD RF which are updated regularly and although vehemently denied some weeks ago, the Ukrainian military are beginning to admit that this data is, if not accurate at least correct in terms of the order of magnitude. As a result it is evident that the majority of professional military personnel are out of action and untrained individuals are taking up positions that they cannot hold. The daily death toll of Ukrainian military personnel has risen from something around 50 per day six weeks ago to 100 per day two weeks ago to something around 200 per day now. The price of NATO's support to Ukraine can be seen in the amount of military equipment destroyed and the number of deaths and injured on the Ukrainian side. Ukrainians are suffering from too much friendly fire as a result of communications problems, increasing use of people with no experience and increasing tendencies of personnel to panic arising as a result of running out of ammunition and food. Too many Ukrainian troops are abandoned by their superiors during retreats and allowing logistics to break down. The Russians have succeeded in approaching fixed Ukrainian fortifications from unanticipated directions and methods. During the last month Ukrainian efforts were almost entirely dedicated to attacking civilians and housing in the Donbass and attempting to blame Russia for this damage and deaths. If Ukraine is supplied with longer range artillary and missiles they will use these to continue to attack civilians and civilian infrastructure so that NATO will become the willing supplier of equipment used to carry out wars crimes. This would not represent a change in the behaviour of NATO given their attacks and killing of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the Middle East and Afghanistan. All of this is done, of course, to support the " rules based order."

A good deal of local independent reporting on all of this is available but it is not shown in our media as a result of censorship. During the last week Russia has been able to neutralize most of the equipment and units responsible for the attacks on civilians but there remain some isolated sources of this type of attack.

In conclusion, the Ukrainian campaign has defaulted to a Kamikaze mission driven on by the UK, USA, Europe and NATO.

The Russians have been provided with an unprecedented practical laboratory within which they have been able to refine their tactics on how to find and destroy NATO supplied equipment and the attendant personnel. As a result SASI are of the opinion that they have perfected techniques to make most existing troop-based NATO equipment configurations completely redundant in any other military campaign NATO might venture into. Although new tactics have been developed to handle the NATO based systems. However, the more effective have not been deployed because their tactical actions are being observed and recorded by Ukrainian, US and UK personnel. Therefore Russia, for the moment, is continuing to use conventional methods while attempting to minimize their own personnel losses and this involves a slower but effective process. However, the repetitive success in taking over an increasing front within the Donetsk republic has caused enough panic amongst Ukrainians to create what is in reality a slow-moving rout. The Russians are in no hurry and they are achieving their original aims of liberating the Donbass as declared on the 24th February, 2022. Their only demands are that Ukraine become a neutral country, that they do not join NATO and they allow self-determination on the part of the people of the Donbass as expressed in their referenda in 2014. Compared with the price NATO has imposed on the Ukraine this is a more than reasonable option to bring this insanity to an end.

In terms of our national politics our MPs across the board and government needs to be questioned on why their actions and advicacy amounts to the sacrifice of so many Urainian lives (now 200 each day) by providing so much publicity to the fact that we are training those who are likely to perish and continue to supply armaments destined to be destroyed. This constitutes a criminal disregard of the truth.

28/06/2022: The timing of the mall incident where media and the Ukraine government are stating this was a direct attack by Russia leads to the question of who has most to gain from this event as can be seen from Zelensky's address to the heads of state meeting. Clearly for this to happen during a heads of government meeting raises suspicion that this event might have been taken advantage of to mount a false flag event. In a world where everyone knows the tale of the boy who called "Wolf!" too many times, it has to be stated that Ukraine now has a habit of attempting to use high profile false flags to appeal for increased help from the West. So far there have been five major false flags all of which turned out to have been "arranged" by the Ukrainians such as the three in Mariupol where subsequent interviews with the local populations and visits to sites were sufficient to dispell these as propaganda to generate Western support. The others have not been analysed independently because they were located where the Ukrainian government still controls the geographic space and narrative. Boris Johnson is in his element in such environments where public opinion of swayed and controlled through misrepresentation. He has been instrumental in using such events to bolster the British government line for some time. This was amply demonstrated by the government funding of the White Helmets (WH) in Syria when he was Foreign Secretary and who came up with a range of false flag videos used as an excuse to attack Syrian installations and personnel. It is understood that there was going to be an equivalent group in Ukraine referred to as the Nightingales, or a name to that effect. However, this was so obviously a UK concept that it was abandoned in favour of organizing false flags in other manners.

Our most recent update from a local stringer is that the mall was closed down some time ago because the rentals under the emerging economic situation were beyond unit earning power. Therefore Zelensky's claim that there were 1,000 people in the mall would therefore appear to be an intentional misrepresentation to impress impressionable heads of state. Because the mall was closed its location meant there were no cars using the car park. This can be observed from the video footage and this does not align with the claim that there were 1,000 people in the mall. Incident analysts have commented that the videos are very similar to WH productions involving a lot of activity designed to give the impression of confusion and effort but usually difficult to discern just what the people are doing and why. Also like WH productions the camera personnel appear to be in the centre of the people apparently tackling the situation rather than being asked to stand back for their own safety. The MOD RF have also stated that their risk assessment took into account that the mall had been closed and that it was not operational.

Along the same lines, the recently sacked Ukrainian ombudsman, Liudmila Denisova, admitted to having invented accusations concerning Russian troops raping Ukrainian women and children. She even justified this on the basis that it brought Italians round to supporting Ukraine with military support. However, the bizarre nature of these totally absurd accusations was even too much for the Ukrainian government because they became totally ridiculous and reflected on a somewhat bizarre imagination on her part. In addition, follow up investigations by Ukrainian investigators have not been able to secure credible evidence or testimonty to support her accusations.

A smilar story of an attack on an apartment block in Kiev is a repeat of the lack of coordination on the part of air defense systems operated by the Ukrainians. Russia attacked the Artyom rocket plant near Kiev activating S-300 and Buk defence systems. We understand that, as a result of a lack of coordination between the two systems the Ukrainians ended up creating cross trajectories of S-300 and Buk systems, a Buk system shot down one of the S-300 missiles that fell on the apartment block concerned. Similar incidents occured before in Kiev as well as in Mariupol.

Unfortunately our mainstream media, so-called, continue to disseminate the propaganda emanating from Ukrainian government to stoke up anger against Russia. They would be better advised to attempt to analyse data more closely and inform the British public in a more rational and honest fashion. They continue to misinform the public, acting as blind stenographers issuing content in support of a government led by Boris Johnson. He has become the world's most notorious supremo in misrepresentation. What amazes most is how he relishes this status because in a world promoting freedom democracy and the rule of law he has been able to circumvent normal procedures to base his power on misrepresention. He is enthusiastically supported by a decadent and wholly parochial Conservative party and its MPs who embarassingly and shockingly remain devoid of the moral courage to free Britain, and now the world, from his increasingly dangerous scourge.

26/06/2022: Boris Johnson appears to have found a foolproof way to prevent his needing to resign by declaring that the only thing that could cause him to resign would be the government's support for Ukraine being terminated. Since he persuaded Zelensky not to negotiate but to carry on fighting an estimated 7,000-10,000 Ukrainian troops have died. With each passing week this number increases by around 600-1,000 personnel. This is the price of Johnson's position on this question. On the other hand, his somewhat naive Chancellor Rishi Sunak continues his micro quantitative easing handing out of subsidies for people to pay their energy bills. On the other hand he does nothing to incentivize companies to reduce prices when policies exist to achieve this. As a result the government falls further into debt, a debt which the government will call upon the constituents to pay back in taxes downstream. Investment declines, real wages continue to fall and inflation is likely to rise to 15%.

In the alternative media people are commenting on the gung ho nature of the UK in its piling in of arms and training of personnel in support of a completely lost cause. Britain cannot afford the expense involved since in the end the British public will have to pay for all of this while Ukrainians continue to lose their lives at an accelerating rate. By terminating the fighting, thousands of lives will be saved. But Johnson's ridiculous Churchillian complex of shaking his fist Canute-wise at the inevitable loss is an extremely irresponsible and foolish attempt to foolproof his position. This fiasco has been ineptly encouraged by UK media, and irresponsible government members such as Ben Wallace and Liz Truss. Ukraine which has banned opposition, imprisoned and/or assassinated opposition politicians, has a kill list for journalists and others who criticize government and has been attacking Russian-speaking Ukrainians for 8 years, cannot be considered to be a democracy worth defending, ever since the bloody coup orchestrated by the CIA and financed by the USA State Department in 2014. This is why Johnson feels safe in attempting to outdo other countries in "supporting" Ukraine. But Ukraine should face up to its own responsibility for refusing to seek a peaceful resolution to their Donbass war before 2022, by declaring that they would not deliver on the Minsk agreement signed in 2014 and again in 2015. Subsequently it was admitted Minsk was agreed to by Ukraine as a smokescreen to give Ukraine time to prepare to invade Donbass and continue to kill former Ukraine citizens who wished to gain autonomy for their people, similar to Scotland or Wales.

All of this has nothing to do with democracy but rather the continuation of a US-inspired violence in the heart of Europe and which Europeans never refer to because they have capitulated to desires of US as opposed to Europe's needs. Ukraine was purposely selected by the US as the vehicle for this destruction of European peace as part of the overall USA NATO strategy of "..keeping Russia out, Germany down and the US in". The fact that Europeans die or suffer economically is of no concern of the US strategists. The fact that the UK government and European leaders magnify this violence when they should be working against it reflects the degree to which Europe has lost any autonomy in defending the people of Europe from political interference and regime change. Defending Ukraine has no connection with the defence of Europe, democracy or freedom but rather serves to uphold a horrendously corrupt regime bent on the elimination of their ethnic minority. Their mistake was that this minority has a Russian identity and as a reflection of "Europe's humanitarian values" there was no effort made by Europe to help them. This is why Russia had to initiate its actions to defend the people of the Donbass so they can attain their desired autonomy safe from any further Ukrainian aggression.

Therefore, Ukraine needs to be left to face up to its own responsibilities in bringing this current fiasco onto its own head and expecting others to help it advance its malign objectives with arms and training, that will only result in more deaths. Ukraine needs to request a termination of the fighting and to negotiate for a long lasting peace in a format of mutual interest to Europe and Russia. Russia, with considerable patience, has been asking for peace since 2007 and again in specific documents sent to the USA and NATO in December 2021. The response of the USA and NATO and Europe was to ignore these requests and continue to support a country bent on ethnic cleansing. Russia had no other option than to confront violence with violence.

Boris Johnson is very clearly out of his depth and, in reality, has no options. Continuing his current suicidal path in relation to "assisting" Ukraine will, in any case, represent yet further evidence of a defect in his character. With the Houses of Parliament tolerating such an out of control leadership and not being able to remove him reflects negatively on the value and credibility of democracy, so-called, in this country. In the meantime our government needs a new leader and someone who understands modern counter-inflationary economics and who can set about serving the interests of the people of this country. A leader who understands and is brave enough to act to maintain a state of conflict avoidance would be an enormous benefit since conflict resolution always comes too late at great expense in terms of lives and money.

25/06/2022: Yesterday the Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) declared that the USA and by implication, the rest of the world, will have to suffer pain to bring inflation under control. She stated that the "cure", through monetarism, could result in a depression.

This has been the pedantic lock, stock and barrel response of the IMF to inflation ever since the IMF realigned its orientation towards promoting the false logic that inflation is an entirely monetary phenomenon. This realignment occurred in 1973 when the IMF was about to be closed, having lost its role under the Bretton Woods accords because of the abandonment of the Gold Standard in 1971. In 1973 when OPEC Arab menders imposed the sanction of rapidly rising petroleum prices on petroleum importing countries. Johans Witteveen, the recently appointed Managing Director of the IMF, leapt at the chance to resuscitate the IMF. He did this by agreeing with OPEC Arab members to recirculate petrodollars through the IMF to finance the purchase of petroleum by low income countries. Although the US government had wanted Witteveen to work out a scheme to invert the rapid price rises by working against OPEC, Witteveen did quite the opposite and did nothing to reduce the rate of increase in petroleum prices that increased seven-fold within a decade. As a result of his "initiative" the recirculation of petrodollars spread to the private sector financial intermediaries initiating the almost half-century of financialization. His decisions resulted in a maintenance of inflation and stagflation involving rising unemployment and an IMF-facilitated worldwide depression that lasted over 20 years following the IMF's resuscitation in 1973.

Because of the financial sector lobbying and cash diplomacy, most governments and assorted politicians accepted this state of affairs, after all the economists proffering such irresponsible advice were "experts" and even Nobel Laureates, never to be questioned by mere mortals. However, this involvement of the political elites, so-called, resulted in a serious bout of corruption and massive non-transparent deals in the fields of armaments including within the UK in the Thatcher and Blair governments dealing with Saudi Arabia where Tony Blair ended up closing down an investigation by the Serious Fraud Quad. In the meantime funding of green petroleum substitution technological advances remained off the agenda for almost 25 years helping exacerbate the evolving climate crisis.

The serious mistake made in the 1970s was a failure not to pick up on the Real Incomes Policy (RIP) which had been developed to tackle the cost-push inflation caused by OPEC and facilitated by the IMF. RIP offered a rational alternative to financialization by taking advantage of the fact that 100% of real economic growth, that is, falling prices and rising real purchasing power of disposable wages, emanates from learning and innovation and the process of reconfiguring the advancing state of the art technologies into useful actions throughout all economic sectors. The effect is to slow down and reverse inflation and raise real wages. The font of real economic growth is therefore industry and manufacturing. However, the result of IMF and World Bank efforts has resulted in an imbalance between the service sectors and industry/manufacturing, not only in the USA and UK but in many developing countries resulting in an inability to generate real economic growth.

The notion of aggregate demand management through monetarism operates in economies that make little or metaphorically are "nations of shopkeepers" which have no means to secure sustained real economic growth but remain seriously exposed to global market turmoil. The latest publication of the Cambridge Economics Network, "The consequences of being a nation of shopkeepers" provides a rundown of the issues. The details of why Witteveen chose to help OPEC in their imposition of sanctions to generate a world wide depression is contained in the now free 2022 edition of the British Strategic Review.

24/06/2022: The progress of the Russian and Donbass units has illustrated the out-of-date NATO based strategy adopted by Ukraine during the military preparation they undertook under the cover of the Minsk accord. After 8 years of carefully honed preparation the underlying strategy has been shown to be of little value in terms of defence. Having fixed dug-in positions, a World War 2 concept, has proven to be a nightmare because these represent fixed, easily identifiable locations. Against mobile and airborne attacks they have proven to be fatal. The ease with which they have been splintered and then surrounded has resulted in around 3,750 Ukrainian troops currently surrounded and now it is a waiting game for them to give up or die. Counter-offensives are extremely risky because their routes are completely predictable. Indeed, many of the counter-offensives given wide coverage in the UK media, never took place but were simply public relations stunts to maintain an image of valiant Ukrainians to muster increasing Western support.

Of those who have surrendered, increasing numbers have no ammunition, inadequate kit and sometimes no weapons and most have not eaten for days. There is obviously a significant supply logistics problem. This, in part has been caused by logistics oversight and coordination having been withdrawn as senior commanders have abandoned those under their command.

In late March Boris Johnson discouraged Zelensky from negotiating and to fight on. As a result an additional estimated 7,500-10,000 Ukrainian personnel have been killed. Johnson has a gung ho and irresponsible approach to this conflict attempting to evoke a Battle of Britain spirit which does not apply to the reality on the ground. This is something the enthusiasts in the Houses of Parliament need to weigh up as opposed to calling for Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. This is a macabre and unacceptable cowardice on the part of members of the UK parliament whose grotesque virtue-signalling with blue and yellow lapel ribbons simply signify their willingness to impose more death and destruction.

Russian and Donbass personnel have not been "slowed down" in their rate of progress by any resistance from plucky Ukrainian troops but rather by a self-imposed discipline to avoid killing civilians whom the Ukrainian forces are using as human shields. Where Ukrainian personnel have withdrawn from Donbass sites they have then, from a distance, carried out a Blitzkrieg on civilian areas attempting to kill and injure members of the public and destroying considerable numbers of dwellings. They then state this to be the work of the Russian and Donbass troops. Of course our "free press" provides a widespread dissemination of such Ukrainian propaganda.

For everyone concerned, the UK government needs to encourage Ukraine to request a cease fire and pull back to the Donetsk border.

21/06/2022: The regents and Board of the George Boole Foundation, in agreement with Hambrook Publishing Company, have sponsored the free distribution of the 2022 British Strategic Review.

The free copies are available in EPUB and PDF formats.

Each formatted copy is in a ZIP file to facilitate the handling of downloads on some browsers. Files sizes are: PDF version 1.573 k and the EPUB version 1.830 k.

Readers wishing to download their free copy can do so by clicking on the appropriate buttons, indicating the formats, on the right.

18/06/2022: In an Agence Presse Européenne Correspondents' Pool workshop this weekend entitled, "Real Incomes Strategies", a paper on, "Globazlization mythology" explained why much of the theory of globalization is wanting. In practice the notions of sunrise industries and sunset industries as being the beginnings and ends of production cycles of goods adapted to the particular stage of development and wage levels of a country was shown to be false in many cases. The reason is that the tacit knowledge built up in refining a product line is often not transferable to the new sunrise industries. On the other hand the further refinement of tacit knowledge of an existing successful product line including the gradual integration of digitization or materials technologies of various types can extend the profitable production putting off the sunset until sometimes never. In most sunset industries of the 1990s and 2000s the further refinement has resulted in increasing ranges of inputs from then sunrise industries resulting in the production of highly competitive products today.

Sometimes, in a policy initiative similar to "infant industry protection clauses" it will become increasingly necessary to introduce "industrial transition support clauses" even in high income countries, in order to give time for companies to raise their competence in integrating essential technologies. In the case of Britain, recent discussions on ethics mentioned in passing a reference to subsidies for industries being contrary to the law and somehow the suggestion of entertaining this was unethical. On this particular question, these matters need to be reassessed in the context of Britain being in a position to level up and generate higher paying employment based on the expansion of successful manufacturing production lines. Attempting to leapfrog to high performance in the high tech sunrise activities involves greater risk. Existing products have better specified improvement requirements and as a result the high tech inputs have a higher likelihood of implementation and operational success. It is better to reassess products that have established markets and to work on expanding production and sales through enhance quality and worker accumulated tacit knowledge.

An interesting set of risk considerations relates to the dependency ratio of the economy on manufacturing and then on the mix of nationally produced and imported goods. This provides a general indication of the degree to which exposure of national economies to external conditions determines the rate of real growth arising from price and productivity advantages. The same measures also determines the degree to which national policies have any effective management control over the innovartion and real growth in the whole economy. Certainly the conventional policy instruments of interest rates, money injections, government borrowing, taxation and expenditure have very little impact on bringing about the necessary changes in the sector mix (structure) of the economy as well as innovation and associated real growth. On the other hand, Real Incomes Policy (RIP) can bring about the necessary structural changes to reduce dependency and improve the resilienceof the economy. A recent paper concerning RIP and its potenial contribution to solving the cost of living crisis can be accessed here

15/056/2022: The 25th St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) takes place this week. It involves over 1,500 companies and high ranking delegates from around 40 countries. SPIEF includes the signing of many business deals and always provides a good insight into Russian development and direction in the international context. This year President Putin's address on Friday is likely to be about the development and benefits of an emerging multi-polar world.

Almost 4,200 journalists have registered with this event. In this weekend's preparatory meetings within APE's Correspondent's Pool there has been a general agreement that SPIEF Valdi Club briefing papers are of an outstanding quality. However, in contrast to this upbeat assessment there is a general feeling that the self-imposed economic chaos, arising from inappropriate NATO and government decisions, will shift the West towards a state of hardship, social and political instability regressing into a Dark Age while Russia's increasingly resilient economy lays the foundation for a Russian Renaissance. This is based on simple and practical issues such as selective import-substitution by the development and local state-of-the-art production operations in critical industries and high tech manufacturing. Some learning is involved but this process has already an established track record in the Russian agricultural sector which, within just a decade, is now booming. This year's harvest predictions are for the highest wheat crop ever, raising the prospects for an increased availability for export.

Nevit Turk, the APE senior economics correspondent, observed that Russia appears to be applying a form of Real Incomes Policy (RIP) but without the refinements of targeted incentives that this policy contains. In spite of this, Russian ventures in this direction have turned out to be very successful. An important advantage for Russia is a significant, and in most cases absolute, industrial and manufacturing energy costs advantage over the petroleum and gas importing countries (PAGICs) including the USA, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. These countries have all permitted their manufacturing sectors to transition into rust belts and depressed areas and thereby into a relative uncompetitive manufacturing oblivion. Inappropriate sanctions are likely to generate a 20 year depression and thereby create extreme difficulties for these countries in expanding this sector if they continue to apply monetarism and ignore the significant opportunities offered by RIP.

14/06/2022: Religious leaders in the United Kingdom are questioning the United Kingdom's government agreement to send so-called "illegal asylum seekers" on a one way trip to Rwanda.

Most of those who arrive from Iraq, Libya, Syria and Afghanistan have been forced to flee unacceptable conditions in their countries as a result of mass killing and chaos created by the participation of this country in military actions combined with NATO and the USA. In all cases there was no thought given to a development follow up to the bombing and destruction to the economic conditions created by our military venture. This failure to initiate development resulted in an increase desperation and lack of hope leading to more families and individuals seeking asylum. Although many such people are labeled as economic migrants as opposed to asylum seekers, their reasons for leaving have a common root linked to our Foreign and Home Office policies and style of military and intel interventions. The Foreign Office has funded such dubious groups as the fraudulent "White Helmets" in Syria whose main job was to work alongside the terrorist group ISIS creating false flag events with which to tarnish the image of either the Syrian or Russian military. The Home Office is also listed as supporting "democracy groups" alongside the US "National Endowment for Democracy" which basically foments "colour revolutions" by training individuals to organize pseudo-spontaneous "revolutions" in Ukraine, Hong Kong, Syria, Belarus, Chetnya and Xinjiang in China. This general behaviour has created instability and, in some cases such as in Syria and Iraq, the USA and UK have worked alongside the terrorists such as ISIS to bring about regime change in a more violent fashion. If Russia had not stepped in to the Syrian conflict at the request of that government, it is likely that today Syria would have become the main ISIS Caliphate in the Middle East and we would have been flooded by millions more Syrian refugees.

It is perhaps fitting that the Home Office handles asylum seekers but this odious agreement struck between Priti Patel and the Rwandan government will see asylum seekers fleeing from countries with a per capita incomes which have been reduced from around £10,000 to around £2,700 as a result of our military interventions, to be sent to Rwanda with a per capita income of £1,200 where, in spite of the assurances of a Rwandan government official they have a safe future but frankly few prospects in a country with a history of horrendous ethnic violence. The the current global economic crisis also linked to NATO's and this government's sanctions against Russia will impact Rwandan stability under the strain. This government does not appear to be able to connect the dots between sanctions and this horrendous worldwide cost of living crisis. The limp assertion by ministers is that it is a global phenomenon. That it is, but created by inept foreign policy decisions. Not only has this government ruined the prospects of several countries and offers no development support, it has contributed to a more generalised global economic crisis. This same government is unwilling to provide such asylum seekers with safe routes and thereby can brand them as "illegal asylum seekers". In the end many will argue that this country cannot accept "so many" asylum seekers but there is an urgent need to recognize that this government has spent too much time upholding irresponsible militaristic foreign policy decisions that, incidentally never won anything but helped murder large numbers of civilians and create misery for the millions left, including those who seek asylum.

The Foreign Office does of course provide humanitarian aid to the Yemen in an extraordinary act of hypocrisy when we have supplied arms and military tactical support to Saudi Arabia in their destructive bombing and murder to Yemeni civilians.

12/06/2022: The apparent flow of arms to Ukraine will not even replace lost hardware. The average attrition rate of Ukrainian hardware has remained at around 100 items each day including all major classes of military equipment listed in the regularly updated tabulations on the left. Of late, drones and tanks have been the main items. This signifies that just to replace destroyed equipment, Ukraine requires 3,000 major items each month whereas the West is providing just odd handfuls of disparate items which are usually destroyed when they find their way to the lines of engagement. Unfortunately, the Ukrainian side concentrates on targeting civilians and their dwellings in the Donbass as a result of an almost fanatical desire to punish and liquidate former Ukrainians who are Russian speakers and Russian passport holders. Western assistance is helping keep this process alive and thereby supporting war crimes. This whole saga is a tragic mess and as a result of NATO's strategic illiteracy in not understanding the impact of their ill-thought-out "sanctions against Russia" decisions would create a serious economic crisis in NATO countries. NATO "planners" clearly had absolutely no idea of the degree to which sanctions would backfire on NATO country constituents.

Western governments need to ask Ukraine to stop sacrificing its troops and negotiate. Adopting a neutral status is not a significant cost to Ukraine since it would guarantee a long lasting peace and stability. However, the USA has other objectives and it does not wish to see a backwards step for US military hegemony. In this crucial decision it would seem that so far Europe does not have the freedom to defend the interests of its own citizens. Ukraine also needs to abandon any hopes of reintegrating the Donbass or Crimea into Ukraine. The Ukraine's horrendous treatment of the inhabitants of these regions and the fact that they voted overwhelmingly to leave Ukraine in 2014, and now with thousands dead over the last 8 years resulting from Ukrainian attacks and assassinations, they would never accept reintegration.

The longer this insanity continues, the more it becomes apparent that NATO, in reality, has no hardware, strategies or ideas to challenge the Donbass and Russian units who are advancing slowly. This slow advance is a result of Ukrainian units placing their equipment within residential areas, schools and even hospitals and preventing civilians from moving away from their weapon emplacements. However, Russia has considerable experience in overcoming such tactics which were used by ISIS terrorists in Syria and Russia succeeded in ridding Syria of these elements.

The longer this campaign lasts the more drastic will become the state of the economies of NATO members. Persisting in encouraging Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian is a cowardly crime in itself. The emotional state of Ukrainians is such that many are willing to risk sacrificing themselves but it makes more sense to discourage them by allowing facts on the ground to enter this equation. The facts are that Ukraine, with or without any NATO support, is losing badly and just a small amount of realpolitik-based analysis would conclude that this madness needs to be terminated because the losers so far have been Ukraine and NATO countries. Serious consideration needs to be given to Russia's demands made in diplomatic communications in December 2021 to NATO and the USA and which were typically ignored by NATO and the US State Department. When Ukraine declared their intent not to pursue the peaceful solution based on the Minsk agreement while cynically demonstrating their intent to continue to attack Russian-speaking civilians in the Donbass, in February 2022, a response by Russia was inevitable. However, this state of affairs was created by a trail of refusals of Europe, the UK, NATO and the USA to respond seriously to Russia's request to include the people of Russia within any mutual strategic security agreement. NATO's irresponsible response was to increase their arming of Ukraine since 2014, to assist them in pursuing a bloody military campaign targeting the civilians in the Donbass.

11/06/2022: The NATO of the cold war period is not the NATO of today. In the 1940s through 1960s there was a strategic balance between military and economic questions. The economic questions to a significant degree dovetailed into the Bretton Woods settlement. However, post 197l with the USA abandoning the Gold Standard there followed a long period of increasing financialization characterized by so-called globalization of offshore investment in lower wage economies. Following the 1989 collapse of the Soviet economy was greeted with satisfaction by many in the West. At the same time financialization was undermining manufacturing and jobs in manufacturing in the West. By 1990 there should have been a reset on both the Western as well as the Russian economies. However, the hawks resisted expanding the concept of the hoped-for "peace dividend", which in the 1990s included the concepts of Russia joining a replacement for NATO as an expanded mutual strategic security framework with joint projects on sustainable economic development.

Just as the European Community began to expand by accepting Central and East European countries so did NATO move eastwards. NATO became confused with what became the European Union, leading to a loss of an overall strategic overview of the European economic questions. Or rather, economic questions became mixed up with military strategies on questions where there were no particular risks. The Soviet Union and the Russian Federation proved to have been the most reliable suppliers of gas for Europe. In spite of this the USA/NATO began to pressure for Europe to replace Russian gas alleging that this was a question of security. The last US administration brought this to a head by sanctioning NorthStream 2, a project which had been requested by Germany. Another indirect attack on Germany was the notion of "paying" for NATO by raising contributions for defence to at least 2% of national income. The combined process of NATO advancing eastwards in spite of undertakings not to do so, if Germany was reunified, was combined with a direct attack on Germany's economic interests. This became more critical as a result of an illegal coup in Ukraine in 2014, overthrowing a democratically-elected government and promoted openly by the USA State Department was followed by the arming of Ukraine as this government began a military campaign against Russian-speakers in the Donbass.

Knowing the nature of the imposed government which included a close-to-fanatical hatred of Ukrainian Russian speakers and the tendency to not protect their own citizens who were Russian or just Russian-speakers who were attacked by nationalist elements, Crimea, Lugansk and Donetsk (Donbass) all declared themselves independent from Ukraine as a first step in protecting themselves. These acts were not instigated by Russia but by the people concerned in Ukraine. Miners and others set up militias to defend themselves against he Ukrainian military. The puppet government of Ukraine declared these zones as terrorist and initiated an "anti-terrorist" war against the Donbass. A large proportion of the Ukrainian regular forces refused to fight and as a result this military campaign was taken over by nationalist neo-Nazi brigades. The peace agreement propositions under th Minsk Agreement convinced Russia that this killing, which by this year had reached in excess of 15,000 people, that this conflict would be settled peacefully. With Ukraine abandoning Minsk in February 2022, Russia, at the request of the Donbass, joined this ongoing fighting on the side of the Donbass population.

It was at this point that NATO made its greatest mistake by becoming involved in the encouragement of NATO members and the EU to impose sanctions on Russia and to attempt to complete the removal of Europe's reliance on Russian gas and petroleum. Russia, in spite of this, continued to supply gas under the terms established under their supply contracts while the USA, European governments and the UK introduced a regime of piracy of impounding and confiscating assets belonging to Russians. Russia, to avoid the impact of dollar-related sanctions switched contract payment terms to roubles. Countries who NATO encouraged to refuse this basis had their gas supplies cut off. The result of NATO and European sanctions has been a significant rise in gas and petroleum prices on the open market and in several cases shortage of supply. Therefore NATO's lack of understanding of the economic circumstances has forced onto NATO members an accelerating stagflation which is likely to last several years (see previous article below). It is likely that NATO members who are supporting the underlying out-of-date European strategy of the USA as, "... keeping Russia out, Germany down and the USA in" will end up with serious economic, social and political instability as a result of the cost of living crisis leading to stagflation and the potential for rising unemployment.

President Biden has attempted to assign the blame for inflation to President Putin of Russia when the central cause has been ill-thought-out sanctions applied to Russia caused by the West following the dictats of NATO on economic questions.

Far from being a defensive alliance NATO has turned out to be an incompetent strategic organization because it has failed abysmally to ensure economic security as a result of following an out of date militaristic stance. It is not as if the weapons supplied by NATO are up to much in practice. Most of the weapons supplied by NATO members to Ukraine have been destroyed as proof enough of out of date notions of what is required. And yet the West continues to scrape around to find additional economic sanctions rather than place the wellbeing of their constituents as a priority. The West's ill-defined "mission" will ensure a significant economic collapse in the West and which will be longer lasting than most realize. Watch this space...

10/05/2022: Irrespective of the predictions that inflation will slow down early next year, ill-advised political decisions on the collective foreign policy front (USA, UK, EU), have set in motion a process that will cause a cascade of effects that will drive inflation to at least 15%. 15% inflation is equivalent to a drop in real incomes of over 80% in a decade. This was is the conclusion at a mid-week workshop at SEEL. SEEL is the leading international centre for the development of research into real incomes and Real Incomes Policy (RIP). RIP was developed specifically to reduce inflation. This work started in 1975 in the wake of the 1970s stagflation crisis caused by rises in the international price of petroleum imposed as a sanction by Arab members of OPEC.

It is instructive to understand that then the stagflation crisis and recovery took over 20 years. Rather than tackle the central issue of real incomes preservation through price and physical productivity incentives, resort was made to monetarism by raising interest rates which further depressed the economy and increased unemployment.

The inflationary cycle is characterized by a multi-layered cascade of price increases. Fiscal policy and Bank of England decisions can have no impact on this trend. Based on the 1970s-1990s experience, Hector McNeill explained that there were four general phases in inflation growth and the extent of its impacts on prices:

  • An immediate impact on the principal commodities subject to scarcity created by market imbalance imposed by sanctions, petroleum and petroleum derivatives;

  • A lagged broader dissemination of cost-push inflation throughout all sectors of the economy;

  • A realization that monetary policy and central banks cannot control inflation because real incomes is not the principal policy target and no conventional policy instruments were designed to target real incomes;

  • An attempt to compensate for the inability of policy to lower inflation occurs by businesses adopting a price-setting logic that is designed to maintain their real incomes; this can lead to hyperinflation.

Although several analysts have stated that inflation will come back down next year, this is very unlikely. Initially, as a result of under-estimates of inflation rises and over-estimations of policy's ability to reduce inflation by government, business holds off raising prices or minimizes price rises. As a result, the immediate impact of energy prices does not feed through into prices in the rest of the economy, it is most evident only in the sale of energy products (electricity, gas, lubricants and petrol).

Then later, depending upon the costs structure of different sectors the impact of higher cost logistics, transport and petroleum derivatives, such as fertilizer, begin to affect medium to longer term production cycle industries, such as agriculture, heralding much higher prices with a 12 month lead time to harvest. Following lower agricultural harvests, the different hemispheres enter their cold periods when the impact of energy price becomes critical. In the UK SEEL estimates that petrol and heating energy and food prices will impact the purchasing power of 40% of the population in a significant fashion.

At this stage most constituents will realize government cannot do anything by applying conventional policies by taking into account two important facts:

  1. Monetary policy and fiscal policy cannot do much to stem the inflation other than by creating more unemployment.

  2. The fall in currency value due to inflation and policy failure, means that businesses need to act in their own interests and accord by setting prices to compensate for this loss. This is achieved by anticipating next-period inflation by building into prices at least this expected rate of price increases.

In Brazil, in the late 1970s, these realizations and resulting business actions led to hyperinflation. This is because being the equivalent to an interest rate that is paid to no one, inflation reduces the purchasing power of the currency so that less can be purchased in real terms on fixed nominal incomes. As a result consumption and demand will decline. Therefore, there is a lower volume of output. Fixed overheads increase internal costs, in addition to input costs due to inflation. The business procedures applied to establish output prices become oriented to maintaining net real incomes and margins. This is achieved by anticipating expected inflation by raising prices more than the expected inflation in each subsequent trading period. As a result the driver of inflation is no longer cost-push but includes a psychological speculative element to price setting. This feeds back into the economy to drive inflation even higher. This results in an upwards price spiral or hyperinflation and an eventual monetary and economic collapse involving widespread to mass unemployment. However, the financial logic giving rise to this phenomenon is financially sound for each business but disastrous for the economy at large because overall purchasing power of consumers is destroyed. This fortifies the overhead costs spiral making short term price or physical productivty decisions to lower prices, virtually impossible.

On reviewing the limitations of the existing policy options deployed by government it is evident that inflation needs to be controlled through policies that align the interests of companies with consumers who make up the work force. This requires the creation of a macroeconomic environment within which companies are encouraged to adopt business rules that change the price-setting procedures. Price setting needs to maintain a balance between associated gains by shareholders and work forces based on a shared benefit from a combination of price productivity in the short term and made financially feasible by phyisical productivity improvements gained over the short to medium term. In this way it is possible to achieve immediate impacts on the upward movement of prices to alleviate the cost of living crisis faced by an increasing proportion of the constituency.

The only policy that deploys appropriate policy instruments to achieve this form of transition in the short term on a sustainable and profitable basis for companies, is Real Incomes Policy (RIP). Last week, a Cambridge Economics Network paper provided an outline of RIP: Options worth considering to solve the cost of living crisis

State Department's bootcamp for NATO members on the "Rules-Based Order"
Credit: Illustration from Francisco Goyas' "El Caprichos" 1799.

08/05/2022: There has always been controversy on whether or not Britain needed to sink the Argentinean ship the Belgrano with the loss of over 300 Argentinean sailors during the Falklands conflict. The arguments on this decision have since faded into the mists of time. However, today we see the results of Boris Johnson's maverick encouragement of Ukraine to fight on in the spirit of a ridiculous out of place Battle of Britain mentality. Since that decision was taken, the casualty rates and deaths amongst Ukrainian military have accelerated. Ukraine will become Johnson's Belgrano in the sense of becoming a basis for raging disagreements over the objectivity of Johnson's decision to encourage Ukraine not to negotiate. This decision has led to the deaths of thousands of Ukrainian troops in attempting to fight against overwhelming odds. This realization will come home in just a few weeks when the extent of Ukrainian casualties breaks through the ridiculous propaganda barrage designed to hide the true facts which are stating such things as Ukraine is winning and completing successful counter attacks; this is simply not true. This propaganda is designed to encourage the US and UK and others to supply more armaments all of which simply generate targets whose destruction kills more Ukrainians. This does, of course, make a lot of money for the over-priced US and UK armaments company products and who no doubt will feel obliged to make generous contributions to the Conservative party coffers in preparation for the next election.

Keeping public opinion on the side of government decisions has become the role of media by supporting a biased propaganda which lies through omission of critical information so as to greatly exaggerate the sagacity of government decisions and attempts to hide the full extent of their negative consequences.
"Shock and awe" content in media is a technique of exaggerating dangers to the public and thereby creating an apparent dependency on sound government decisions, is a common technique applied. This was developed by the Fascists in Japan and Italy as mind control and perfected under Goebbels in service of the Nazi regime. It is pertinent to ask how our constitution permits this form of media abuse targeting the constituents of this country.
Credit: Illustration by Francisco Goya
This is all the result of Johnson not resigning on the basis that he needs to ".. get on with the job"; what a job!!

The Russians have developed effective ways to handle dug-in field fortifications liquidating all troops in a wide areas in seconds using barometrics. The slower process is the handling of the situations where Ukrainian troops have placed their armaments in residential areas. If Russia had been less concerned with the civilian population they could have occupied the Donbass within days using carpet bombing just as NATO has done in most of its Middle Eastern exploits, killing hundreds of thousands of civilians. In the case of NATO's exploits, together with the US, it lost every campaign while Russia successfully prevented ISIS from taking over Syria and is winning in Ukraine. There is of course, always the excuse, that, "... we were so badly advised" or switching from "... we are following the science" to "... we are following the the advice of our world-beating intel"; and thereby hangs a tail. There is always someone else to blame for illogical and reckless decisions and therefore, of course, none of this would be a matter for resignation of anyone taking the decisions.

In the meantime our policy remains that of enthusiastically encouraging Ukraine to fight to the last Ukrainian, after all it is only Ukrainians dying and it is good for the British armaments business and, above all, this criminal and bloody shambles meets with the approval of the US State Department. The fact that this, combined with sanctions against Russia, is helping sink our economy into a serious cost of living stagflation crisis, leading to increased unemployment, does not appear to be a real concern of a highly paid and somewhat smug cabinet. After all, the Conservative MPs have just provided Johnson with a vote of confidence forcing the country to endure this continued mismanagement. What could go wrong?

06/06/2022: The general understanding of diplomacy is that is the management of relationships between countries and it involves an ability to maintain a due diligence in basing statements of on mutually agreed facts in order to maintain a dialogue and avoid upsetting anyone when dealing with difficult situations. It is often the case that in order to make progress quiet diplomacy as opposed to public accusations and threats is the most productive tactic so that public declarations are able to register progress, no matter how small, in the resolution of an issue. This requires an effort on all sides to gather evidence which needs to be shared to enable an adequate verification of what is factual and what is without merit.

"Cackle diplomacy" does away with such considerations. Cackle is the collective noun for hyenas whose natural habit is to hunt in packs. In the wild they each attack a quarry by each attempting to bite them and then retreating until the quarry is injured enough to be unable to resist any further harassment so as to succumb and be savaged, killed and eaten by the cackle members. Of course, places such as the United Nations Security Council have yet to witness such gory scenes, but cackle diplomacy is there for all to see. Cackle diplomacy is a technique that is based on the practice of US attorneys throwing as much mud as possible to see if anything sticks with the judge or the jury. There is no particular attention paid to facts and verified evidence. The mud to be slung is distributed to each member of the chosen cackle diplomatic corps, see right, as a long list of negative accusations to attack, rather than enter into a productive dialogue, with a particular country. It therefore becomes a show piece to be disseminated by a willing media. Rather than present measured evidence-based reasoning for other parties to respond to in an equally measured manner, "Cackle diplomacy", being organized around a pack mentality, is meant to be intimidating as well as generate an impression of each member of the cackle is of the same opinion.

The UK authorities stated that Sergei Skripal a Russian double-agent was poisoned by the nerve agent Novichok in his adopted hometown of Salisbury in March 2018.

The UK accused Russian agents of having carried out this act. The Russian government requested evidence on multiple occasions, for them to provide a structured response.

After 4 years, the Russian authorities are still waiting for this evidence to be sent to them from the UK.
No matter how small a group makes up the cackle, they refer to themselves as representing "world opinion" which greatly impresses the media who dutifully report the cackle statements. However, it is notable that each member of a cackle seldom expresses an independent opinion, arrived at as a result of an unbiased analysis but rather, they repeat the same list of unverified accusations even using the very same terminology; in all cases, read from a prepare script.

In the exchanges between the representatives of the Russian Federation and those members of the Security Council

The Ukrainian government accused Russian troops of shooting several members of the public in Bucha when they left. There is a considerable amount of logical evidence to establish these accusations are false. Some satellite images turned up showing the locations of the bodies in a single road in Bucha were reviewed by a SASI expert. This "evidence" directly undermines the case emphasizing it's false flag event" characteristics. In actual shooting events, there are very typical characteristic patterns of distributions of clusters and dispersions of bodies of those killed in relation to those shooting. In the image bodies are regularly spaced out in two lines, as if dropped off at intervals from a transport of some kind. In other words it is highly unlikely that these people were in fact shot where they lie. The question therefore arises as to why the Russians would shoot civilians and then transport them to the road concerned and place them there.
and other UN members who are in the US State Department cackle, all of the presentations are essentially the same and all are accusatory as opposed to being queries to enable the Russian representative to reply. The tactic of making very long lists of accusations without any accompanying evidence is intentional. This is because any serious diplomat would have some difficultly dealing with untrue statements. Without evidence there are no grounds for a response. As a result, the impression left is that the Russian representation is "failing to respond". Since most accusations are false, no reply should be expected, but the public, observing the proceedings will not be aware of the reality. In any case, when the Russian representatives do reply to specific issues, the members of the State Department's cackle tend to be dismissive, without offering evidence to justify this. Being dismissive is a displacement tactic to avoid analyzing or responding seriously to what the Russian representative has stated.

In his statement to the UN Security Council on Monday 06/05/2022, Charles Michel remained true to the form of cackle "diplomacy" by sustaining a pseudo-dramatic irrational and mendacious smear. He said several things about Russia that are patently not true.

Russia has not used food as a weapon against Africa or anyone else. As the largest world wheat exporter its wheat is available but several countries are afraid on sanctions by permitting Russian ships dock. Marine insurance companies have also expressed concerns, fearful of US sanctions if they provide insurance on Russian ships. Michel stated that Russian ships can dock in the EU which is not relevant. The interpretation of recipient countries is causing confusion and the State Department rhetoric does not clarify matters. Russia has nor stolen Ukrainian grain although the nationalists in Mariupol set 50,000 tonnes of grain on fire in a silo, before they left. Odessa cannot export by the sea route because Ukraine has mined the harour. As a result of negotiations between Russian president Putin and Ergodan of Turkey, Turkish navel experts have offered to clear Odessa harbour of mines and provide safe passage for Ukrainian wheat carrying vessels which will also be guaranteed by a Russsian naval escort further down the chain. The Russian navy is not preventing Ukraine export grain. Apparently Zelensky has rejected the idea.

Finally, Michel made the mendacious claim that Russia was exporting grain stolen from Ukraine. In tracing back the origin of this accusation it turns out to refer to an absurd report, photos and all, of a grain cargo loaded in the Sevastopol grain terminal and taken to Lebanon. The grain concerned was produced in Russia and the ship was also Russian. This simply serves to demonstrate that Russia is not holding up grain exports.

So Michel's false diatribe was just another show piece for the benefit of the grinning assembled cackle diplomatic corps consisting of a very dishonest smear to obscure the constructive work completed by Russia to compensate for Ukranian incompetence and EU inaction.

Because of the lack of serious intent to verify the truthfulness of statements made by cackle members, many events in the Ukrainian affair, which were set up intentionally to reflect badly on Russian activities, have since been shown to not have occurred.

However, they remain part and parcel of cackle accusations, even today, as if they were established facts. The Western media, in reality, in fear of the cackle and being kept on the "inside track", continue to spread disinformation. Thus the West's diplomatic missions are major participants in an international cancel culture designed to intimidate anyone who dares come up with alternative narrative to their verbal mud.

It is very evident that there is, therefore, absolutely no attempt to mount a dialogue that is both informative and constructive leading to degrees of positive resolution. There is no attempt to demonstrate the value of intelligent and informed diplomacy in contributing to global peace, security and wellbeing. Recent examples of persistent misrepresentations include a list of atrocities invented by the recently sacked Ukrainian Ombudswoman who had descended to inventing events and atrocities that never occcurred or her assertions were so bizarre, as to be unbelievable even by the Ukrainian authorities. The Bucha event, see right, is also one that never took place as stated, but remains an assertion of the members of the cackle. This is why the Russian representative, Vasily Nebenzya, was justified in walking out when the EU cackle member Charles Michel, repeated several such misrepresentations (see box on the left) for the sole satisfaction of the assembled members of his cackle, in a speech to the UN Security Council on Monday 06/05/2022.

The outcome of this unseemly behaviour of these elements making up the cackle diplomatic corps sets a very bad example to the world constituency and, in particular, to the world's youth. Why on earth would any intelligent student aspire to become a diplomat? To see highly paid and apparently highy educated adults acting like a bunch of hyenas and somehow expecting so be accorded some form of respect on par with their assumed status as "diplomats", is a tragicomic scenario to behold. What hope for the future can such people bring through their frank demonstrations of building time-wasting destructive show pieces that make a mockery of the United Nations. We need governments that instruct and enable their diplomats to maintain well meaning progressive dialogues designed to map out our futures founded on a vision of the importance of a collective security.

06/05/2022: In researching details on the Ukraine-Russian conflict we were pleased to discover the work of the Crimean, Russian marine artist Ivan Aivazovsky; it is most impressive. Below are some examples of his work. Some of his paintings have a romantic, "Turneresque" quality.

It is important to reflect on the fact that our government, in following the blind alien "cancel culture" of the United States has sought to "cancel" everything Russian. The United States has a lived culture that is fundamentally alien to that of Europe. It is based on a foundation involving the genocide of indigenous peoples and slavery based on capture and mistreatment of people from other countries. The violent remnants of his inhumane mindset flicker within that society in a commitment to guns, regular mass shootings of innocent people, including school children, a horrendous growth in the homeless, accelerating inflation and a legacy of military exploits which since 1945 have resulted in deaths of in excess of 20 million people, most of whom were civilians.

Our lost, immoral and weak leadership in Britain, in both major political parties, willingly bow to this monstrosity and proactively participate in a frenzied denial and attempted throttling of the self-evident amazing contemporary and past contributions of Russians to sport, art, literature, science, technology, space exploration, and other domains, to European and world culture. No individual from any country, should be subjected to public declarations of their support, or otherwise, of their governments. To demand that individuals from Russia sign documents declaring their opposition the acts of the Russian government, as a basis for allowing them to express themselves freely, is a tyranny. This crime directed against such individuals is an affront to the people of this country, who are constrained for fear of becoming conspicuous and, therefore, targets for rebelling against such injustice. While the government wishes to introduce sanctions against acedemic institutions to prevent the de-platforming of people with contrary viewpoints, it sets no such standards in practice. Our leadership, so-called, behaves in an embarrassingly craven manner, fearful of the very culture it has generated, in support of the artitrary notion of a so-called "values-based and rules-based order" promoted by the USA. We are expected to tolerate the expanding cultural desert in our political landscape where leaders lie and people are no longer expected to have the courage to seek and express facts, to be honest and to take decisions that are ethical.

Why do politicians in this country support a government that assumes that the people of this country should accept such moral decadence?

Stormy Sea at Night, 1849

Among the Waves,1898

View of Constantinople, with the Nusretiye Mosque, 1856

Battle of Çesme at Night, 1856

06/05/2022: As the USA, and now the UK, wish to supply longer range missile systems to Ukraine the logical response of Russia is to extend the width of the final buffer zone to reduce the likelihood of these devices being able to reach Russian or Donbass territory. A 100 km range system simple adds around 60,000-100,000 square kilometers of territory lost by Ukraine, depending on what Russia decides are the final demarcation lines beyond the administrative boundaries of the Lugansk and Donetsk republics. This is equivalent to 25%-40% of the area of the UK. Russia has already demonstrated the ability to detect and eliminate over 450 such weapons. To add such weapons to the Ukrainian inventory, just as it is obvious that Ukraine has lost the military campaign, will guarantee heavy casualties amongst the individuals being trained in the UK to handle such systems.
Painting of the Russian squadron in Sevastopol by the Russian marine artist, Ivan Aivazovsky (1846)

On the constitutional questions of territory. On February 22, 2014 there was an unconstitutional and violent coup against the democratic government of Ukraine openly supported by the US State Department. This action was openly assisted by representatives of factions with a violent intent with respect to Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens and those with dual Ukrainian-Russian nationality making up the majority of the Ukrainian populations in Crimea and Sevastopol as well as the administrative regions (oblasts) of Lugansk and Donetsk. As a result of the fear of the likelihood of violence directed against this minority by the "new government", Crimea, Donetsk and Lugansk declared themselves to be independent of Ukraine. These declarations were later confirmed by referenda. On 11 March 2014, the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol declared their independence from Ukraine. They went further, however, requesting annexation by Russia in which case Russia required that a second referendum be undertaken to ascertain whether or not the population would wish such an annexation by Russia. On 16 March 2014, a referendum was held in Sevastopol to receive votes on the question:"Are you in favour of the unification of the peninsula of Crimea with Russia as the subject of the Federation?" With a 89.51% turnout and 95.6% majority voted Yes. Then on 17 March 2014 the councilors of Sevastopol City Council voted in favour of the integration of the city into the Russian Federation, with the same status as the cities of Moscow and Saint Petersburg. Sevastopol was annexed by Russia in 2014 with the rest of Crimea and since then has been administered as the federal city of Sevastopol. As a result, this population of around 2.5 million people, were saved from the onslaught and murderous attacks suffered by the other communities who had voted for independence in Lugansk and Donetsk. Since 2014 some 15,000 people have been killed. Following 8 years of violence aimed at the people of the Donbass by the Ukrainian government, the likelihood of the population ever contemplating becoming reintegrated to Ukraine is zero. Therefore, on the basis of the fact that the Ukrainian government initiated a military campaign, accusing the Donbass Ukrainians who voted to become independent of an illegally created government, of being "terrorists", the reintegration of such regions is without any constitutional or democratic foundation.

The record shows that the guarantees drawn up for a peaceful solution under the Minsk agreement signed in 2014 and again in 2015 with United Nations approval, were wrecked when Zelensky declared that Ukraine would not carry out this agreement in February 2022. As a result, Russia, who had relied on the Minsk agreement to bring abut a peaceful resolution to the Ukrainian government's military aggression, at the request of the people of the Donbass, recognized the "republics" of Donetsk and Lugansk and agreed to help defend them against the Ukrainian government forces. This undertaking also included recapturing the full extent of these administrative regions. Russia did not initiate this fighting, Russia joined an ongoing war initiated by Ukraine in 2014 and which Western media has largely ignored including the lack of reporting on the massive scale of slaughter of civilians in the Donbass.

The other intent spelled out at the beginning of Russia's campaign was to de-militarize Ukraine and take on the extreme Ukrainian nationalist brigades which have an underlying Nazi genocidal attitude towards Ukrainian citizens who are Russian speakers or of dual or Russian nationality. Their genocidal intent has been born out by the 8 years of violence in the Donbass where military effort has been concentrated on domestic dwellings and the people of the Donbass and this characterizes the current crescendo of Ukrainian efforts on their receding frontier with the Donbass, where their efforts concentrate in targeting civilians. Unfortunately, the continual supply of heavy weapons to Ukraine by the UK, USA and others only means this genocidal campaign will continue.

The sooner Ukraine negotiates seriously the sooner we can return to the important topic of the establishment of a mutual strategic security framework that guarantees the security of all.

Vilfredo Federico
Damaso Pareto
Vilfredo Pareto

Vilfredo Pareto was an Italian engineer, sociologist, economist, political scientist and philosopher.

He contributed to the understanding of relationships that determine the distribution of benefits in an economic system. He developed the concept of Pareto efficiency. This is a state of allocation of resources in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one individual worse off. However, Pareto was not reflecting on the impact of productivity and as a result ended up with a zero-sum identity. This is somewhat paradoxical since Pareto was an engineer.

RIP dismantles this concept by establishing a positive systemic consistency principle based on the promotion of productivity to raise and distribute real incomes.

Pareto pointed out that income tends to follow a Pareto distribution, a probability distribution. His principles on income distribution have appeared today in the slogan concept of "the 10%", who have benefited more from conventional economic policies while the rest of the population have been prejudiced. This has morphed into "the 1%"

He made important contributions to economics, including income distribution and in the analysis of individuals' choices. Choice theory is an important underlying component of constitutional economics and to which the Real Incomes Approach contributes.

04/05/2022: As the government struggles to pop rabbits out of a hat within the vice of the debt-tax trap created and maintained by conventional economic policies, it is worth referring to some slogans that go beyond "It's the economy stupid" to stating what it is, about the economy, that needs to be fixed.

The policy debt-tax trap imposes on government a zero-sum game not only of, ".... if we help you today tomorrow you pay it back in tax tomorrow", to a policy-imposed Pareto efficiency. Pareto efficiency is a state of allocation of resources in which it is impossible to make any one individual better off without making at least one individual worse off; the zero-sum game referred to. However, Pareto was not entirely correct - see box on the right.

Real Incomes Policy (RIP) is based on the concept of a move towards a positive systemic consistency. In order to unpack this sentence the following terminological definitions help clarify things: Positive - that which is deemed to be beneficial; Systemic - affecting all components of the economic system, that is, individuals and economic units, in a similar fashion; and Consistency - having the same directional effect, that is, benefits accrue at all levels but the degree of benefit will normally vary. Pareto did not take productivity into account whereas RIP actively promotes productivity and the distribution of the gains in terms of pricing to achieve a positive systems consistency. RIP moves policy beyond the zero-sum debt-tax trap, maintained by the government, and provides a coherent basis for tackling the cost of living crisis.

03/06/2022: We have received a very surprising number of emails containing questions on the document refereed to in this leader. We have forwarded these to the author. Since there appears to be considerable interest in the content and just two basic questions, we have asked the author to provide us with his responses so that we can publish them in this medium.

02/06/2022: We are pleased to announce that the promised document, "Options worth considering to solve the cost of living crisis" has now been published by Cambridge-Economics Network. The contents are an edited version of a presentation at the Cost of Living workshop organized by Agence Presse Européenne last month.

This document sets out the justification as to why there needs to be a major change in direction in policy to escape from what is termed the "debt-tax trap" created by monetarism. In other words, increasing government direct support only means later rises in taxation which is infeasible for increasing numbers of working constituents. This state of affairs is made far worse by inflation trending towards stagflation where unemployment is added to the negative balance which rises as a result of falling real wages. Government policy needs to concentrate on the means of reducing the rate of increase in prices and to stabilize, and then reduce, prices. Current policy is no more than a palliative in that it relieves the burden of low paid constituents, to some extent, but does not solve the fundamental issue of price rises whose effects are becoming more profound and destructive.

Another document entitled, "The consequences of being a nation of shopkeepers" is in preparation.

31/05/2022: The Cambridge Institute for Sustainability Leadership (University of Cambridge) has released a report, authored by Anna Barford and Jane Nelson, entitled, "The case for living wages". This document (pdf) can be accessed by clicking on the image on the right.

Alan Jope, CEO, Unilever writes in its introduction,

"Capitalism is evolving to incentivise businesses to create better outcomes for more stakeholders.

Living wages are an important part of this evolution. They strengthen businesses by improving employee engagement and productivity, and align corporate conduct with customer expectations. A living wage economy would dramatically increase consumer purchasing power – uplifting millions from poverty and creating a prosperous market for consumer goods companies like Unilever. This would also be an important step to healing inequalities in our fractured society, and increasing the odds of success in tackling the biggest challenges that the world faces today."

This statement encapsulates some of the thinking behind Real Incomes Policy (RIP) which, of course, is also geared towards eliminating inflation.

A document covering the issues of living incomes and inflation was produced by SEEL in 2020 can be accessed by clicking on the image on the left.

29/05/2022: This week's Economist Newspaper has a short article concerning the flip-flop of the Conservatives in, at first opposing Labour's plan for a windfall tax for energy companies and then applying it (which seems to have happened after the Economist edition had been signed off to print). The original opposition was put down to such taxes preventing needed investment so a windfall tax would be "... un-Conservative" and the Economist mentions that in some government circles consideration of applying similar taxes to electricity generating companies has occurred. The Economist note that this is "... not very Conservative", in spite of the fact Thatcher applied a windfall tax on banks being justified in terms of their profits being the result of the then government policy of high interest rates rather than the result of increased efficiency or better services to customers.

The significant rise in bank profits under the Thatcher government and in energy company profits under this Johnson government are both the result of Conservative government policies, both are linked to ideologies. On the one hand, monetarism and, on the other, a commitment to sanctions against Russia. Under Thatcher thousands lost their homes as a result of high interest rates through bank repossessions of mortgaged homes. In reality such an arbitrary decision resulted in sound mortgage contracts taken out in good faith, being transformed into sub-prime mortgages by government policy in the middle of a serious cost of living crisis and stagflation. In spite of this disaster being the result of government policy no one was ever compensated. Monetarism continued to hollow out the economy after the Thatcher government fell. The situation now is that as a result of monetarism creating a long drawn out bubble in land and real estate markets many constituents in this country cannot afford a mortgage, even at low interest rates. Now the Bank of England has just begun to make matters worse for constituents aspiring to purchase a house by raising interest rates which will also raise costs all round. The Bank of England's policy of quantitative easing (QE) created massive profits for banks and asset holders and drove funds away from supply side investment. There have been, therefore, plenty of asset holdings and profits that could have been taxed because the massive 12 year run in rising profits was a direct result of QE. In addition, without any strategic analysis to identify the core economic interests of the constituent wage-earners in this country, in the middle of what was a rising stagflation caused by QE, our foreign policy has exacerbated the state of affairs by creating a significant rise in the prices of energy resources and derivatives such as fertilizer. This has significantly worsened an already serious policy-induced cost of living crisis for constituents and created an unwelcomed rise in input costs for the overall services and productive sectors of the economy. Whether one wishes to refer to any of this as not being very Conservative when it is in reality not very anything but wholly arbitrary and aimless, indeed, very destructive. Sunak's decision on the windfall tax seems to be a somewhat thoughtless panic move by a government trying to show resolve on the economic front to mimic the equally absurd resolve on the foreign affairs front.

Although the Conservatives keep repeating the cliche of the need to have a "prosperous" economy to be able to afford essential changes, the fundamental perennial gap is the complete lack of a sustained productivity-enhancing policy to bring about a deceleration in price rises and an eventual decline. This latest decision relies on excess profit taxation to bolster real incomes of people in work to be able to afford basic essentials. This is not sustainable since it does nothing to slow down the rate of increase in inflation. Governments of this country need to structure macroeconomic policy to address supply side pricing, wages and margins. The measure of productivity needs to shift from shareholder value to the balance between the real values of wages and shareholder income, both of which should rise by the similar percentage. With moderated or even reduced unit output prices, real growth can rise from consumption fueled by incremental wages and shareholder value. Contrary to the general drift of the economic theory which appears to permeate government thinking, such price changes can be secured in the short term rather than long term by applying Real Incomes Policy (RIP). Such an approach can hardly be expected to emanate from the Conservative policy stasis because for some 40 years they have been locked into the monetarist paradigm, along with Labour. It was under Labour in 1975 that Denis Healey opted for monetarism to try and solve the balance of payments problem. All subsequent governments have failed to solve our balance of payments problem. It has steadily fallen deeper into negative territory to become the second worst in the world. This is the direct result of a fixation with monetarism having created severe constraints in the form of a debt-tax trap as opposed to the freedom offered by an innovation and real incomes growth approach to economic policy.

28/05/2022: Two workshops covering the current cost of living crisis were held the last and previous weekends by Agence Presse Européenne Correspondents' Pool. On review of our article reporting on these workshops, we were advised to modify specific details and to submit it for publication. Cambridge-Economics have accepted the draft document for publication subject to possible adjustments resulting from review. We have been informed that this publication has been released. Click on the image on the right to access the document.

In the meantime we provide the salient points concerning the cost of living crisis and the logical solutions.

It will be noted that the government's proposals do nothing to encourage companies to control prices, this is why energy companies have so-called excess profits. Therefore the onus for handling inflation lies with those who produce and set prices, companies. The trade off is that moderating prices helps slow down the rate of inflation which SDAG-SEEL predicts will have reached around 12% by the autumn because nothing is done to stem the rise in prices. Bank of England interest rate rises will only depress financed investment and lower turnover as a result of the declining real incomes of constituents; this will raise operational costs.

The government makes a plea that energy inflation is externally generated affecting all countries. However, the ongoing cause of exogenous inflation linked to energy, fertilizer and some other essential commodities is an unrealistic foreign policy which, at the moment, is exacerbating the state of affairs. Although the UK consumes little energy inputs from Russia, advocacy that other countries should sanction Russia impacts the price across all sources and markets.

The solution is a Real Incomes Policy (RIP) which is able to:
  • create a lead price reduction
  • stimulate market penetration
  • encourage productivity-enhancing investment
  • enable increments in wages
  • expand UK manufacturing
  • secure substitution of high cost inputs
  • secure import substitution
Because the Chancellor applies static "affordability" criteria to outlays, based on national accounts, there is a failure to apply real incomes growth concepts by applying compensations paid to companies to lower prices. However, these are not subsidies but are applied to provide companies with the opportunity to improve productivity to justify those prices over the following period. This technique is common practice in supply chain contracts. In other words government funding has a demonstrable impact on real incomes growth unlike the so-called "super-deductions", which constitute little more than a vote harvesting technique with no guarantee of any productivity impacts. RIP is a more direct and effective way to tackle inflation at the main point of input inflation transfer, than allowing prices to rise and then subsidizing consumption at higher prices. This is inefficient and has little impact on inflation. The current macroeconomic policy framework contains no incentives for companies to act in a more responsible fashion. Contrary to statements concerning energy companies, most of this investment is low cost and incremental and in many cases would not involve having to raise loans which, in any case, the Bank of England has made more expensive.

Price caps are a blunt instrument and do not contain the necessary support framework to provide the flexibility necessary for companies to adjust to avoid bankruptcy.

RIP is an alternative paradigm to "Aggregate Demand Management" and is based on "Production, Accessibility and Consumption Management" within which demand comes from rising productivity and wages and not from money injections and rising national or private debt.

One of the important issues raised in the workshops is that the British economy has a limited ability to absorb input inflation because it is largely made up of a service and logistics sector distributing mainly imported goods over which we have no price control capabilities. We also have a diminished manufacturing sector as a result of inappropriate policies over the last 50 years. Unlike any other sector, manufacturing is the main source of innovation and options for sustained real growth in employment and wages. The details of why this is, is explained in another Cambridge Economics paper, "The consequences of being a nation of shopkeepers" to be released at the same time as the policy document, "Options worth considering to solve the cost of living crisis". We will post links to these documents when they are released.

Correction: 27/05/2022: The previous headline to this leader mistakenly stated the rate of elimination had risen by 20%. In fact it has remained the same throughout the campaign.

26/05/2022: Over the last 90 days of the campaign the rate of destruction of major Ukrainian military hardware assets has been roughly 100 items each day. This rate has not diminished. During last 2 days the number of major hardware items destroyed since 24/05/2022 was 212 items or 106/day, consisting mainly of tanks, vehicles and drones.

SASI reports that many Ukrainian personnel in the Donbass are surrendering, largely because commanders have abandoned troops made up of increasing numbers of inexperienced and untrained civilians, most of whom do not have any combat experience. Many have been found to be without ammunition. Most had no body armour. As a result the numbers of captured personnel are beginning to create a management problem which is being temporarily resolved by rapid transport to safety, some distance from the combat zones. It is also evident that most of the destruction of private properties in the Donbass is the result of Ukrainian rather than Russian shelling.

SASI has also reported that, given the reality on the ground, there is a strategic rethink on the part of many countries' foreign policy and diplomatic personnel. Currently these discussions are secret and limited to in-country groups, but within a very short time there will be an attempt to coordinate an identification of a way to back away from offers of military assistance to the Ukraine. There will be pressure brought to bear to initiate negotiations for peace. Ukraine's rhetoric concerning refusal to cede territory has been assessed as being unrealistic. As a result of 8 years of targeting civilians by the Ukrainian military and an estimate of between 13,000-20,000 killed by Ukrainian action, the vast majority of the populations of Lugansk and Donetsk will never accept reintegration into Ukraine. Crimea, with an overwhelming majority (exceeding 95% in favour), decided to leave Ukraine in 2014. Ukraine, as a result, has little realistic claims over these territories and attempting to enforce reintegration is unrealistic.

The current unrealistic momentum for continued military action is maintained by the USA, UK and Poland. However, the domestic state of affairs in most countries in Europe, and including the UK, is giving rise to resentment of the economic hardships that have resulted from poorly thought out US and UK-inspired sanctions against Russia. If the US and UK maintain their current strategies, there is likely to be a serious fall out between the USA, UK and most other European countries. The failure of the NATO block to handle this affair in an effective manner is llikely to place the future of NATO on the table.

26/05/2022: Our deficient economic policies are failing to prevent many British constituents, faced with a serious cost of living crisis, from being pushed over the edge. The Ukrainian government, realizing that they are losing in the Donbass, is contemplating legislation to permit their officers shoot personnel who wish to surrender.

It would seem that the cosy relationships between our government and that of Ukraine, has created a significant policy-induced economic disaster in the field of energy. This sees politicians, made up of people who are well paid and in a comfortable financial position, being quite prepared to allow the state of affairs deteriorate to an unacceptable state and are willingly allowing constituents to be pushed over the edge. This is all for the sake of wholly illogical ideological ends.

In the case of Ukraine, this is likely to lead to troops killing their officers as was witnessed within British forces at the end of the First World War.
In the meantime, our inept economic policies have created a housing price and rent crisis. This has combined with destruction wrought by an irresponsible jingoistic foreign policy, under that loose cannon, Liz Truss.
This policy supports the USA's objective of bringing Europe to a collapse. As a result, there is likely to be social unrest and increasing political instability in the United Kingdom.

There will, of course, be attempts by this fading government to crack down on any dissent by branding such a natural reaction of constituents as requiring an oppressive clamp down in the name of "law and order". While Liz Truss continues to exacerbate the state of affairs, Priti Patel, another loose cannon, will "manage" the "home front".

In the meantime Rishi Sunak has not, and will not, come up with solutions because of the ongoing destruction wrought by government loose cannon decision making.

The energy costs crisis is the result of a thoughtless foreign policy backfiring on British constituents. While Liz Truss advises the public that this is an essential cost, it is not. It is an arbitrary imposition on an increasing proportion of voters. The first step to ending this cost of living crisis is for the government to stop supporting those sanctioning Russian energy products and to advocate that Ukraine stops fighting and agrees to a peaceful settlement. But since the government is hopelessly uncoordinated and appears to not understand the implications of its decisions, Sunak is having to subsidize a high cost energy market which, at its root, benefits the Russian balance of payments and the strength of the ruble while our own balance of payment continues to fall deeper into negative territory.

Unfortunately, that other loose cannon, Boris Johnson, revels in all of this since it provides an opportunity for him to state he is far too busy eagerly promoting warfare oblivious of the fact that he is pushing increasing numbers of voters over the edge. As long as Boris Johnson's hold his current position so will the Ukrainian crisis be prolonged as a result of the UK supplying arms. As a result, the longer will the energy crisis last and the cost of living crisis will get worse. Johnson is not good for this country but in spite of the practical evidence, his dillusional and self-important attitude leads him to think that his ongoing activities are too important to seriously consider resigning. This is in spite of his excessively long litany of lies and poor decisions that have exacerbated our economic state of affairs.

21/05/2022: Following the debacle of shoulder-launched missiles having a limited impact on the Ukraine campaign the USA has switched to a ridiculous second world war mind set "solution". They have promised 90 M777 Howitzers the lightweight artillery pieces and Australia and Canada have promised 10 more between them. These constitute very heavy suicide vests for the operators. They are manned by between 8 to 12 trained artillery personnel depending upon the loading and firing procedures applied. The pieces take about 5-6 minutes to set up and 5-6 minutes to move, if need be. Apparently the M777s supplied are not computer assisted so there will be issues with accuracy. However, it is well established that the Ukrainians are intent on maximizing damage to residential areas and killing civilians in the Donbass, so this detail is of less relevance to them.

This form of engagement is completely out-of-date against modern systems. The Russians have very precise computer assisted triangulation radars to project shell trajectories (angles/elevations etc) backwards to pinpoint the location of each M777. The result is produced instantly. The Russians then have the choice of responding with a full spectrum range of armaments within 5-6 minutes. Within 15 minutes it is not possible for Ukrainians to move the piece from the accurately identified synoptic surveillance zone coordinates, by moving to cover of some sort; camouflage has no utility. As a result locating and destroying M777s and their crews is a piece of cake. It is worth mentioning that the Russian self-propelled 2S5 Giatsint-S (2S55) artillery guns (see right) have been used to elimitate M777s. The Russia 2S55 are more flexible and resilient because they can move at some speed from the coordinates of any launched salvo so even if the Ukrainian side could locate the lauch coordinates any response by them is unlikely to find and damage an S2S55 or its crew. The other factor is that the S2S55's have roughly half the number of operational personnel of M777s. However, with each strike there is a loss of around 9 trained Ukrainian personnel. So the 100 M777s donated are likely to result in the loss of around 900-1000 dead or seriously injured Ukrainian personnel. During the last week, Russia has been applying these standard techniques to eliminate a large number of M777s and their crews, with ease.

This completely out-of-date thinking by those who are "supporting" Ukraine is simply helping Russia liquidate Ukrainian personnel. To help Ukraine, governments should stop supplying useless weapons and encourage the country to stop fighting and negotiate. The options are fighting to the last Ukrainian or accepting conditions laid out by Russia which in detail are not onerous The USA, Europe and the UK need to reflect on the follow up to this affair by seriously considering Russia's 2007 proposal for a mutual strategic security arrangement including all countries as a basis for lasting peace. As it is, the follow up will demonstrate just how useless NATO has been.

The world has moved on and so should NATO. NATO does not have adequate defensive capabilities as a result of astronomically over-priced out-of-date weaponry and large numbers of European-based US personnel. These people are supported by out-of-date equipment and constitute a costly civil service that is unlikely to ever be called into any meaningful action. In any case, no US president would ever press the nuclear button for the sake of Europe to invite retaliation and certain liquidation of the USA. The NATO defensive "umbrella" is a charade constituting no more than "sales talk" designed for exercise a mind control to instill feelings of insecurity on the weak and ignorant to entice them into wasting public funds on over-priced weapons. In strategic terms, NATO's high profile showpiece advice has been demonstrably out-of-date and, in reality, has only contributed to increasing the deaths of Ukrainian personnel and levels of general chaos and insecurity. The fact that the Ukrainian government sees its role as demanding that Ukrainians fight to the last Ukrainian is a sign of poor advice and fanaticism which should not be encouraged in any way.

For lack of independent leadership, Europe has capitulated to US "cash diplomacy" and allowed NATO, the proxy of USA foreign policy, to dominate European foreign policy objectives. As a result of this corruption, NATO's strategic incompetence and ignorance of the economic dimensions of its decisions, has resulted in this affair drifting into a major economic crisis for all NATO members and the world. Therefore the global status of NATO has all but imploded. The majority of Arab and Islamic societies do not support NATO's and the USA's appeals to impose sanctions on Russia. They join the other countries that represent 75% of the world's population. Following the USA's lead, Europe has isolated itself from the rest of the world.

In the meantime, the leadership of BREXIT Britain vainly attempts to demonstrate its ability to outdo the USA in strategic over reach. It pursues an irrational completely out of date "colonial gunboat mentality", reflecting serious issues with the basic education of ministers and their true understanding of the lessons of history. It is troublesome that for such people there is a perverse pride in past military disasters and cruelty inflicted by past campaigns to keep alive that irrational "jingoism" founded on base ignorance and lack of concern for the lives of "foreigners". Such people confuse capitulation with failure but are prepared to help destroy a nation they claim to be assisting. Too many decision makers are "military reservists" so they maintain this out of date perspective on the role of the military. There does not appear to be a strategist amongst them who has the objectivity of a realpolitik approach. If there had been such individuals with any influence, this affair would have been prevented or terminated within a week through undertakings and negotiations. There is a juvenile attitude to such events that comes from a desire to "win" or "get back" at the perceived aggressor. Usually the intelligent move is to avoid aggression and impose peace; this is always what constituents prefer. As in the case of NATO, the British government has demonstrated a very poorly thought out delinquent and irresponsible behaviour which has exposed the people of Britain to a major cost of living crisis which no one voted for. Ibn Nr, the strategist, has referred to the much vaunted very expensive British submarine-based nuclear deterrent. He compares the system to a group of suicide tubs. The locations of the subs can be tracked by Russian marine reconnaissance drones. As a result sub crews activating launches would be the first to perish.

All of this can be summarised as a proof that there is a need to heed the Russian appeals for a mutual strategic security agreement which they sent to the USA and NATO in December 2021. These were vitally important documents deserving a balanced response. Of course, to form, the US State Department ignored these proposals and nervous directionless NATO proxies did the same while Ukraine-an neo-Nazi brigades continued their slaughter of Russian-speaking civilians in the Donbass. Hysterical politicians and a heavily censored media duping our national constituency aside, there remains an urgent need for such proposals to be put on the table as the pincipal and only focus. There is a need to put an end to this infantile and irresponsible stance of placing "all other options are on the table" which normally constitutes a threat of possible military action. This never was a way to negotiate and come to an enduring agreement. There is an urgent need for an agreement containing operable checks and balances, covering at least the USA, Europe, UK, Australia, New Zealand, Russia and China. There is an urgent need for the world to jointly reverse the global economic calamity and tackle climate change in a mutually collaborative, effective and peaceful fashion.

In spite of fanatics like Anthony Blinken and Victoria Nuland at the State Department, there are far more responsible and balanced proposals appearing in the USA media, such as the recent article by Diana Ohlbaum in "The Hill"- click The Hill image to access.

21/05/2022: This weekend APE correspondents will attend a SDAC workshop on investment in the context of the cost of living crisis. There will be a demonstration of a cloud-based set of analytical tools that help investors ensure that all factors that can affect an investment's performance are taken into account. Something like 35% of investments fail and in the agricultural sector the failure rate is around %(data from OQSI and World Bank). With the emerging requirements for enhancing sustainability (SDG 12), lowering temperatures (SDG 13) and reversing the rise in income disparity and poverty (SDG 10) this approach is becoming critical to all new investments. The 2019 UN SDG Report states these SDGs are all going backwards. An important aspect of these tools is the determination of the likely extent of risk and likelihood of occurrence of identified hazards, such as price variations, weather or drought. The likelihood of "solutions" in reducing risk is also measured. This ends up with a determination of the resilience of any particular investment to identified hazards. This new approach replaces the so-called highly subjective Theory of Change (TOC) approaches. Although many would refer to these capabilities as artificial intelligenc (AI) SDAC refer to this as simply digital logic. Currently the percentage of investment projects subject to estimates of economic rates of return (CBA) is around 20%. Many SME investments simply install new equipment without determining the learning curve profile to calculate the time it will take to gain the full productivity potential. This can lead to serious cash flow problems and a need to raise further finance to survive and, in some cases, failure. A large proportion of so-called super-deductions are not used to increase productivity.

The case of the cost of living crisis will look at the integration of economic policy with due diligence requirements to gain policy traction. Policy traction is measured by comparing the quantitative stated objectives and time lines of productivity gains with actual achievement. Investment resilience has an important role in ensuring policy traction. In the case of the cost of living crisis cash assistance for lower income constituents does not solve the core issue of inflation and therefore has no traction in lowering unit prices. With the appropriate policy frameworks and instruments it is possible to gain traction and resilience through a combination of due diligence procedural design supported by supply side incentives. Contrary to general assumptions, this can provide a more efficient means of reducing inflation in the short term, rather than the common assumption of inflation being a medium to long term issue. We will post a summary of the workshop highlights.

20/05/2022:In last Thursday's Question Time, the issue of rising prices - inflation - was raised as well as the fact that a good percentage of the in-work population in Britain have wages that are insufficient to cover bare essentials. One of the key questions that came up was put to each panellist by Fiona Bruce the programme anchor. Bruce has become effective at not being shoved off her line of questioning in quite an effective and diplomatic manner. The question she asked each pannellist was, "What would you do to solve the inflation crisis". None of the panellists who included, Lucy Frazer MP (Conservative), Lucy Powell MP (Labour), Alyn Smith MP (SNP), Mo Hussein ex-Press Officer for PM and Emily Carver of the Institute of Economic Affairs, was able to provide a coherent answer. Some avoided answering by stating this was a Bank of England brief. This is in spite of the fact that working from their own bases it would have been assumed that this question would be foremost in people's minds and will have been analysed in some depth. This state of affairs is truly lamentable and reflects the fact that both the economic theory and ability of economic policy to manage inflation is poorly understood by decision makers.

Lucy Frazer, the Conservative MP, valiantly repeated what the government priorities are by covering the key headline actions. In reality, what she mentioned does include the main issues but the actual mechanisms of how these meld together into a coherent workable policy to reduce inflation was lacking. This has proven not to be a challenge limited to Lucy Frazer, it is a major problem facing the whole government narrative. In particular, this also applies to the Chancellor, Treasury and, by extension, the Bank of England.

All of the Parliamentary Committee appearances of the Chancellor and Bank of England representatives have transmitted the same message. There is a lack of a practical understanding of what causes inflation and therefore no workable propositions that impact the mechanism of transmission appear.

The 2022 Edition of the British Strategic Review sets out in some detail why monetary theory is flawed. Under the current precarious state of the economy, the conventional derived policy propositions from this same theory will not be able to reduce inflation without throwing the economy into a depression. Squeezing inflation out of the economy by generating additional poverty by increasing unemployment is hardly a solution.

We will soon post a coverage of the deliberations of a workshop held last weekend by APE Correspondents' Pool which explained in some detail the practical mechanisms causing inflation and a family of solutions that can actually bring prices down in the short term.

19/05/2022: GrayZone has posted details of a corrupt tiny group of people who are alleged to have organized an anti-democratic manipulation of events including spying on civil servants and movements opposed to BREXIT so as to manipulate events to deliver to the USA a Britain free from European oversight and law, as the lead pliant supporter of USA foreign policy. The implications are serious and the evidence, including copies of emails between members of this group, seem to constitute a manipulation of events to mount a coup against Theresa May in favour of Boris Johnson. They also recognized the danger, for them, of Jeremy Corbyn's Labour position of a second referendum on the final BREXIT deal so they worked with media to undermine this by attempting to label this Labour position as ridiculous. However, in terms of the likely economic impacts of a hard BREXIT Corbyn's position represented the only logical way to safeguard the right of the people of this country to finally express their preference in the light of better information; this was the only open democratic option left to the voters in this country. The cabal's favoured position was the more extreme "hard" BREXIT forced through by a core of cabinet fanatics within a small inner group around Boris Johnson. The result of this corruption has been a worsening of the economic wellbeing of the British population and now, with the US and NATO pressure created the Ukraine situation which has resulted in the world, and this country, facing the worst economic crisis since the 1970s.

There are indications in these allegations that members of the same cabal provide the Home Secretary Priti Patel with support and are attempting to influence her decision concerning the extradition of Julian Assange to the USA. The alleged members of this cabal include the following: Evelyn Farr, Richard Dearlove, Gwythian Prins and Robert Tombs

The implications of these revelations are far reaching in terms of the removal democratic accountability and national independence of political decision-making by limiting options to the strict interests of the USA as opposed to the interests of the population of this country. The more serious issues that arises from these revelations are the possible involvement of several in government collaborating with what appears to fall under various categories of criminality and sedition. This exercise of hidden unaccountable power led to arbitrary decisions affecting the wellbeing of the whole British population in what constitutes a tyranny.

It is well worth reading the GrayZone report on this sordid affair because it is well presented and written and contains copious evidence of wrongdoing by elements with past association with British intel - to access click on the image above left. The notable factor is the ease with which these people are reported to have been prepared to deceive and lie to manipulate individual and public opinion through pliant media or by "digging up dirt" on anyone they do not like. It is suspected that these revelations and copies of emails came from someone in British intel who realized the potential damage that all of this could do to the service. On the other hand, it is alleged that this cabal, or someone currently in intel, wish to get rid of Johnson as prime minister because he is completely over-stepping the mark with a banal confidence which has caused the country to lose independence in decision-making. Johnson's bullish position in attempting to lead the sanctions against Russia and outdo the USA in promoting the military armament of Ukraine, has already led to an exacerbation of the impacts of Covid spiralling into the serious current economic state of affairs affecting the whole world and, in particular, the British economy.

The consequences for the tiny Conservative party, with a membership of less than 0.4% of the British electorate, in reality a pipsqueak faction, comes into question. The fact that such a tiny faction controls Parliament as a result of an election of dubious validity and that a few thousand misled members elected Johnson as leader, calls into question the British factional party-based electoral system which is crying out for needed reform.

Intel people are not good at economics or even strategy but they can be effective, if permitted to operate in secret, in manging the grubby business of effecting and manipulating visceral procedures to secure influence through lies and mind control. As a result, the outcome of this chaotic democratically unaccountable corruption can be appreciated by the reality of our spiralling cost of living crisis. Inflation is likely to surpass 12% by late summer 2022 and this would represent a decline in real incomes of 48% if this is not brought under control within 5 years. The fact that this will cause suffering and social instability is all part of the game exercised by such individuals who are, or border on, psychopathic personalities.

So far, there has not been any reaction, that we are aware of, from the European Commission relating to this report and the said mechanisms and covert behaviour applied to secure BREXIT. It is true that the last President of the Commission, Jean-Claude Junker, did comment that many lies had been stated in the BREXIT campaign in Britain and it will be recalled that the leader of the BREXIT pack was, indeed, Johnson who has form on the subject of misrepresentation and lies since the time he was a journalist based in Brussels. However, in spite of the fact that most of European foreign policy has now ended up being orientated by military questions, very much under the control of NATO and the USA, these revelations are likely to result in strong reactions from the European Union. The current dispute related to the Irish Protocol where the government intends to change their agreement with the EU is likely to see the EU, Good Friday Agreement, or not, pushing events towards Irish reunification by applying sanctions on the UK. The purposeful marginalization of Ireland and Northern Ireland and all populations under devolved assemblies, by Johnson, again reflects the bizarre bullish and somewhat dismissive arrogant overreach of this individual. This incompetence has already led to a rise in the support for parties that favour Irish unification.

Meanwhile, while our economic affairs, and that of the European Union, wallow in a disastrous state of incompetent management arising from a too close an alignment with the USA/NATO objectives, the economic progress and status of Russia and China continue to advance in a significant fashion - see previous article - below.

17/05/2022: The balance of payments of several countries will undergo major changes in the next year. The degree of change depends upon the extent that the USA, Europe and some other zones attempt to apply sanctions on Russia and in particular to curtail their consumption of Russian gas and or petroleum.

This subject came up at an internal editorial meeting on SEEL's Strategic Review a new quarterly which will be associated with the British Strategic Review, an annual launched in early 2022.

Some very early back of envelope calculations suggest that sanctions against Russia serve no useful purpose for those imposing them and they prejudice the constituents in the United Kingdom and most countries in the world. Indications of likely changes see Russia and China both increasing their balance of payments to take up pole positions in the global balance of payments table. Germany will lose its position and face severe difficulties as will most countries imposing sanctions.

The USA and UK will remain as the worst performers linked to the dissemination of their manufacturing sectors as a result of applying inappropriate monetary policies over the last 50 years.

Although the rapid rise in Russia's financial performance is directly related to the rise in gas and petroleum prices caused by sanctions, the notable factor is that product sanctions have resulted in Russia incentivising companies to import substitute through innovation and investment. This has resulted in an ability also increase the export of a range of products from agricultural commodities through high tech and advanced military equipment.

This proactive policy, in contrast to the previous Soviet system, which collapsed, is a reflection of the radical changes that have occurred in economic policy orientation in Russia.

One of the accelerating effects, resulting from the West's willingness to confiscate Russian financial as well as other assets without due process has served as a demonstration effect. As a result, there has been a movement away from dollar-based agreements and transactions management systems, such as SWIFT. This in turn has limited the ability of the West, and the USA in particular, to sanction Russia based on dollar-related business.

The Strategic Review editorial declared that currently it is still difficult to assess the overall impact of the de-dollarization of commodity trades and contracts but this is bound to impact organizations such as the World Trade Organization, the World Bank and the IMF because of a rapidly declining relevance of their decision making to global development. Chinese-based Yuan and petro-Ruble-based finance is likely to grow to significant levels in African and South American development and BRICS countries. The changing attitudes towards the "West" which are underlined by a general mistrust is likely to see an expansion of the BRICS block with some significant new members. The countries that have avoided collaborating in sanctions against Russia have around 60% of the global population where the most significant global economic growth in markets will take place.

14/05/2022: It is not altogether clear why our media misinform the British public so much concerning the Ukrainian state of affairs. Although Western media made much of the resistance of Ukrainians preventing Russia from occupying Kiev, as we have explained, there never was any intent to occupy Kiev, the movement of a large troop movement in the direction of Kiev was a decoy used by the Russians to attract Ukrainian troops from the Donbass region and to monitor the location of troops and hardware in the rest of the country. On the 6th of this month we advised that Russia was doing the same with the city of Kharkiv, so on cue we now have the somewhat nonsensical reporting about the plucky resistance of the Ukrainians in "driving out" the Russians from Kharkiv when they never were in Kharkiv. The Russians are withdrawing now as a result of completing the same process as they applied in Kiev.

The losses of Ukrainian military hardware can be observed in the stats in the table on the left. Based on the hardware audit, Ukraine has lost most of its operational systems and this has increasingly exposed its elite fighting forces. Based on unverified and several sources, the losses of personnel could be around 35,000-40,000. We do not have access to hardware and personnel losses on the Russian side but these can be replenished more easily and conveniently by Russia.

The current "Western" strategy of extending "support" to Ukraine, the more the loss of Ukrainian personnel will accelerate. This will result from poorly equipped and untrained reservists and conscripts taking the place of the deceased professional personnel. They will not be able to use unfamiliar Western supplied equipment effectively without direct operational support in the field. They will also be unable to maintain this equipment. It is more rational to prevent these uneccessary deaths and further suffering by calling a cease fire and to consider Russia's demands concerning neutrality and no NATO membership. From a purely logical standpoint of securing future European security, these demands are not excessive.

13/05/2022: The failure of the government to present coherent plans for action to tackle the cost of living crisis or so-called levelling up agenda relates directly to a gap in knowledge amongst the assembled government economists concerning real incomes. All governments since 1975 have worked on the principle that economic growth is measured by the monetary turnover measured in nominal pounds. Within this environment transferring money from one section of society to another or from one economic sector to another is a zero-sum game. Politicians are therefore having to make decisions on which winners are worth supporting in terms of gaining votes. As a result, policy has created an accumulation of abandoned groups of losers, including the low paid in work and important service groups such as NHS nurses. The winners have been asset holders. The government can claim that employment levels have never been higher but they fail to admit that real incomes for the lower income segments are rapidly declining. This is why the turnover in food banks has increased so dramatically.

Under this scenario, government sees raising its own debt to support people through the pandemic has to result in higher taxation. Besides taxation, the government offers contributions towards paying essential costs on the basis of a repayment such as the £200 payment being paid back in tranches of £40 each year. It is here that the lack of understanding of the government becomes very evident when they insist that this is not a loan. Under inflationary conditions the value of money is declining across the board because of a general rise in prices. Under such circumstances, inflation is the equivalent to an interest rate because the nominal value of money is declining at the rate of inflation. Therefore having to pay back a fixed nominal sum results in the person repaying this sum and each time losing an increasing amount from their disposable income in terms of their real income or ability to purchase other essentials. This is because the prices of all other essentials will have increased in the intervening period between payments. Therefore the £200 payment is the equivalent to a loan with interest payment. It became very apparent in an embarrassing exchange in a Committee meeting that Rishi Sunak clearly does not understand real incomes concepts supposedly as a result of his experience as an accountant where results are based on a balance based on zero-sum calculations ( see: From earned income to pauperism and back ). This lack of understanding is a general condition amongst Treasury and Bank of England clerics ( see: "Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis ).

As was the intent during the 12 years period of quantitative easing (QE) (2008-2022) the "affordability" test was applied on the basis of the excuse to pay off debt. However the result was a purposeful reduction in real incomes of wage-earners, a stripping down public services and the exacerbation of a housing crisis and a failure to pay off debt. The current cost of living crisis is the result of QE and a wrong headed foreign policy of acting in a way to encourage a rise in the international prices of energy resources. The government is now reapplying the same "affordability" test to the public sector as and excuse to further reduce its role as a way to "solve" cost of living problems created by government policy in the first place.

To avoid such policy-induced prejudice the government needs to understand and apply policies that are geared towards the generation of growth in real incomes and not nominal incomes. This can only be achieved through a concentration of manufacturing physical or real productivity which can yield at the minimum 2% each year in cost reductions through minor adjustments across sectors and a movement towards state-of-the-art best practice technologies as well as improving the capabilities and real wages of the labour force as a result of learning. This requires a very different mindset in government in terms of economic theory and choice of policy instruments. However, it is unlikely that this government's ideological bent will be flexible enough to realize that zero-sum policies are undermining the state of the British economy. Their preference continues to be bringing benefits to that faction who support such actions, and, of course, support the "party" with a vote and a financial contribution.

This weekend an Agence Presse Européenne Correspondents' Pool workshop has been organized to review the real incomes policies available to the government which could move the country from a destructive dependency on policies that only see debt or taxation as the options that demarcate the territory within which they decide what can be afforded. We will report back on the main points covered in this workshop.

11/05/2022: The attacks on civilians in the Donbass by Ukrainian forces have become indiscriminate using increasingly heavy ordinance of missiles to destroy housing and commercial centres as well as people. It is very evident that the timing and targets used by the Ukrainian military in the Donbass are indend to maximize deaths amongst civilians and is a so-called war crime adding to the 14,000 already killed over the last 8 years as a result of Ukraine's actions against Russian-speakers.

There has been a very rapid rate of destruction of Ukrainian tanks and vehicles, each approaching 3,000 or almost 6,000 items in total (see updated stats on the left). Usually at this stage of campaigns this rate declines but in this campaign it has increased. The ability of the Russian military to down Turkish Bayraktar strike drones appears to have increased dramatically as has the ability of the Russian military to spot and bring down small drones.

During the last 2 days a very ill-advised attempt to retake the so-called Snake Island by Ukrainian forces resulted in a complete fiasco and serious losses. This was planned as a stunt to attract worldwide attention to an action meant to demonstrate Ukraine's ability to strike back a Russia on the occasion of the 9th May Victory Day. However, in this attempt Ukraine lost 30 drones, 14 aircraft and three ships and it is estimated between 50 and 75 personnel. Snake Island is a very small and flat area which simply cannot be defended, if occupied, against Russia's advanced weaponry. Therefore this attempt was completely illogical and costly. It is not clear who authorized and coordinated this attempt but it reflected desparation or advice which is based on an out of date appreciation of modern armament capabilities and therefore an underestimation of the effectievness of the Russian capabilities. Judging from the international messaging and analysis on this event and its purpose, British advisers appear to be most interested and involved.

As a result of strategic incompetence and poor advice, Ukraine appears to be investing and losing too much manpower to incoherent actions; they do not reflect the reality within the theatre. Providing heavy armaments which are easy targets is not a solution. The switch to heavy armaments is related to the fact that, in practice, the supplied shoulder-launched missiles ("use out-of-the-box") have, except for some limited successes, turned out to be generally useless due to system failures such as flat batteries as well as a change in Russian tactics. Some captured Ukrainians have mentioned the lack of utility of these weapons considering them to be no more than toys. The number of deaths of Ukrainians manning shoulder-launched devices has increased because tanks stay out of range but use very precise anti-personnel weapons with a close to sniper precision. This precision has been commented on by foreign mercenaries who have since left Ukraine because they considered involvement to be a suicide mission. The precision is a consequence of the sheer weight and stability of tanks and the support of sophisticated sights and sensors. The mass of the ordinance used also means environmental factors such a wind speed and direction have less effect on the bullets/shells in the common sub- to multi-kilometre ranges within which these operate. The target elevation calculations are also automated enabling vertical precision.

To save Ukrainian lives it is necessary to initiate serious negotiations for peace. Unfortunately, reports seem to suggest that Boris Johnson somehow convinced the Ukrainian president not to pursue the negotiation pathway during his recent visit to Kiev. This will of course lead to more deaths but does he really care?

However, Russia, since the beginning of this campaign has declared its intention to complete its actions to help Donbass republics regain their full administrative area which will take up to around 20 days - a SASI estimate - to complete. Beyond that, Russia might impose a buffer zone beyond the Donbass borders of around 50-60 kilometers as well as security posts, based on negotiation or advancing forces, as a means of reducing the future risks to the Donbass population. This is a result of the experience under the ineffective Minsk agreement cease fire arrangements during which the killing continued.

It is evident that the decision by the Ukrainian government not to implement the Minsk agreement but to increase their attacks on the people of the Donbass was a costly mistake because Russia had no alternative other than to join this war on the side of the people of the Donbass. It would seem that a considerable amount of the pressure to not implement the Minsk agreement came from the USA. Knowing that Russia was relying on Minsk to terminate the murder of people in the Donbass on the basis of a rational peace agreement, it has to be asked why the USA and NATO encouraged Ukraine to opt for war knowing that Russia would have to step in to defend the people of the Donbass. The results for all have been a disaster and the deaths unacceptable. The blame for this major strategic error on the part of the USA and NATO is being redirected by Western media towards Russia which has a duty to defend Russian-speakers and passport holders against aggression.

In spite of the serious consequences of rising gas prices in Europe, a decision has been taken by Ukraine to stop Russian gas flow through a North Eastern transfer point to Europe as from this morning. Ukraine has cited maintenance difficulties due to the conflict which are of little merit since Russian military would not interfere in the operation of these transfer points. However, this decision could precipitate a significant negative reaction in Europe against this decision because the Russian supply company wishes to continue with meeting their obligations under the existing supply contracts with European consumers. However, Ukraine has imposed conditions that interfere with existing agreements. This is likely to exacerbate the already increasingly difficult situation for constituents in specific European countries by limiting their access to gas and also causing a further rise in consumer prices.

Images and videos are not evidence in the sense of providing a cast iron confirmation of who carried out atrocities. Much visual evidence in today's conflicts is staged. Journalists are ill-qualified to fact check evidence under conditions of conflict. This is because observing outcomes of an incident usually does not provide any indication of who carried out an attack. Those linked to military will almost always blame whoever they are up against. On the other hand, the willful murder of one's own citizens by military contingents are known to occur and then the guilty party states that enemy forces were responsible. In some cases military don the uniforms of their enemy to carry out such tasks in order to generate a "locally witnessed" event so as to generate a collection of witnesses to state, as a resultof the deception, that a specific side carried out the attacks concerned.

The destruction of houses and apartments quite often cannot be linked directly to one side or the other. However, in the Donbass, after 8 years of conflict, there is ample confirmation that most of the destruction of houses and civilian deaths have been caused, and continue to be caused, by Ukrainian action. They continue to deploy a now well-established procedure of withdrawing from mapped cities and villages and then timing attacks from their new positions aimed at specific points in cities to coincide with known times of community agglomerations in markets, transport hubs and schools.

The accusations of the existence of "mass graves" have all been disproven where Russians have allowed access by journalists in those areas taken by Russians in the Donbass. On the other hand, accusations of mass graves related to areas where Russians are no longer present such as Bucha, and others in the North West of Ukraine remain as accusations by Ukrainian authorities but little forensic evidence other than statements and numerous body bags, has been provided. The problem is the issue of knowing who killed any of the people concerned.

In war, unfortunately, extreme actions, including killing civilians who are supposed to be protected, is used to stage false flag events to blame the other side. Such extremes are encouraged by the desire to produce media content to demonize the opposition. Unfortunately journalists and media hopeful for maintaining their circulation, accept images and words which have no context with respect to who is responsible for atrocities. As a result media contribute to a widespread dissemination of misrepresentations. This, in today's environment, is a macabre behaviour intentionally used to shape public opinion to gain political support for government decisions.

08/05/2022: The blitz of propaganda surrounding the Ukrainian crisis makes objective analysis difficult and the establishment of a peace-making process virtually impossible. One of the most significant problems is a top down demonization of either Russia, on the one hand, or Ukraine on the other, very much buoyed up by the media. As a result what is considered to be "evidence" of war crimes is more often than not a casting of actual or non-existent events as real events. Although we have a national media, such as the BBC, which is supposed to be impartial, this organization still repeats details of events as being attributable to Russian or Ukrainian actions when the mounting post-"event" information has demonstrated that these widely circulated "facts" are a total misrepresentations of the truth. As a result radio chat hosts in the UK arguing against contrary facts resort to accusing those doubting the government narrative on Ukraine or Russia as being sympathizers or supporters of Russian propaganda because the "evidence" proves them to be wrong. Radio hosts have even stated that views opposing the UK government narrative is treasonous and in the last war people raising such views would have been imprisoned. This, to a large extent, is the problem. The government is running a blunderbuss propaganda and censorship campaign even although we are officially not at war, and therefore, those who wish to exercise their freedom of analysis and expression can attempt to balance the public discussion. In the meantime, the government is, in fact, doing all it can to encourage Ukrainians to fight on at risk to their lives. This is a very easy way to provide an impression of resolute decision making and support when we are not directly at risk. Our politicians are content to wear blue and yellow ribbons and agree to assign budgets and military hardware all paid out of public resources, and to otherwise get on with their lives.

The most important current priority is to bring the killing to an end which means Ukraine needs to be brought to the negotiation table to compromise, yes compromise, by backing down from the position of "not surrendering". The notion of the valiant David standing up to Goliath palls at the levels of Ukrainian corruption and political extremism which is exposed by those presenting the alternative narratives while corporate media condemn this information as Russian propaganda. It is obvious that the USA and UK want this war to continue so as to tie Russia up in the long campaign but this only means more Ukrainians and Russians being added to death lists as a result of our government's actions.

A neutral demilitarized Ukraine is clearly a step in the direction in terms of a mutual strategic security framework as a rational compromise which would remove the threat of any future military actions. This would not be a "step down" but rather a step up to establishing a peaceful future for the whole of Europe and Russia.

Recently, interviews have taken place with Russian media and captured Ukrainian commanders who were in the Mariupol Azovstal plant and captured while trying to escape. It is evident that the Ukrainian government wanted them to fight on in a suicidal manner while promising reinforcements which were in fact not being sent. Although most interviews with such captives have been unprompted rambling sessions, a recent one was somewhat triumphalistic on the part of an interviewer and this was quite distasteful given the actual plight of the captured Ukrainian commander. However, this was a microcosm of the equally distasteful reactions of the USA and UK which gave rise to this current crisis. This was the negative reaction of the USA and UK to Russia's appeals in 2007 for a mutual strategic security framework to include all peoples of Europe. The assumed luxury of being able to dismiss other populations is a strategic weakness exposing a blind spot to the fact that this creates concern and is perceived to be a threat to the survival of a people and their culture. Arming and assisting Ukraine to continue its targeting of Russian-speaking civilians in the Donbass and supporting Ukraine's cancellation of their undertakings in the only hope for a peaceful settlement, in the form of the Minsk agreement, was an indication that NATO and Ukraine represented a security threat to Russia. What followed was inevitable but very much driven by an animosity held by leaders in the USA and UK.

The United Kingdom, in particular, appears to have developed an endemic close to pathological paranoid and irrational political animosity towards Russia. Remarkably, this appears to have emerged from the days of expanding empire when Russia, under Tsar Peter 1st, Peter the Great, (1672-1725), adopted English ship building processes creating a large and powerful navy modelled on the Royal Navy by the time of his death. However, English leadership considered this to represent a potential economic and military threat to England's expanding colonial ambitions. Since then there were collaboration and adversity such as the Crimean War over what today would be considered to be somewhat irrelevant issues but confronting the primitive notions of power and spheres of influence.

Russia, as an ally during World War II, contributed significantly to the termination of Nazi dominance in Europe, at a significant cost to Russia. The post-war cold war was underlined by the economic devastation suffered by the Soviet Union. With the collapse of the Soviet Union a shameful triumphalism on the part of the West, glorified the failure of a political system but ignored, as usual, the needs of the people. Privatization of state assets throughout the previous Soviet satellite countries was supported by the EU PHARE programme, the UK Know How Fund and USAID, inadvertently created a small group of multi-millionaire oligarchs, largely through corrupt privatization deals enabling the acquisition of significant productive assets at bargain basement prices or even free of charge to so-called "young communists". These individuals became influential in the "new politics" as a result of the enormous differentials between their wealth and the economic states of new political parties in Central, Eastern Europe and the Baltic fringe countries, all of which were characterized by a "new democracy" with a wide range of levels of corruption. Vladimir Putin came on the scene and reacted to this state of affairs and set about reconstructing the Russian economy. He has succeeded, while at the same time creating a political opposition funded largely by those oligarchs who were subjected to legal processes alleging corrupt acquisition of state assets. Within a relatively short period of just 20 years, Putin has been able to guide the country back to a state of economic resilience largely because he had been willing to delegate responsibilities to capable administrators. The importance and evidence of the state of Russia's economic resilience has been well demonstrated by the success of Russia in resisting major negative impacts caused by the economic sanctions imposed by the USA, NATO countries and the UK. On the other hand the economies of countries imposing these sanctions have proven to be far less resilient and facing a serious recoil effect on their cost of living.

Many oligarchs who left Russia to avoid legal processes, fund British political parties. In the United Kingdom, many parliamentary exchanges, when it comes to Russia, are markedly coloured by the use of exceptionally negative adjectives concerning most things Russian. Indeed, the whole development of the "cancellation" of all things Russian, including Russian citizens who have no connection to Russian politics being isolated and insulted by demands that they denounce their own government come from this subliminal irrational psychosis of a manufactured hatred promoted by politicians. There does appear to be an issue of a biased educational orientation of those who enter politics in the UK and a particularly shallow appreciation of, and therefore dismissive attitude towards, the significant role of Russian history and culture in the shaping of modern Europe.

As a result, the United Kingdom suffers from a dilettante leadership that is not fit for purpose. Rather than indulge such pathological outlooks or advocacy to support such irrational positions, people need to enquire and seek collaboration with Russians to work together to bring about peace. The most effective foundation to establishing the necessary levels of communication is for people to understand that the people of Russia and, indeed, Ukraine, share the basic human desires and motivations of the population of Britain. For such understanding to lead to beneficial results for all, people need to reject the pathological desires of leadership, so-called, and to demand a rapid coordinated movement towards a practical mutual strategic security arrangement whose fundamental objective is collaboration between peoples through a communication of shared cultural values and expressions as the foundation for a productive and fulfilling peaceful existence.

The issues of Boris Johnson being an inveterate liar and being embroiled in party gate as well as supporting an MP on the make, with the Patterson affair, pall at the depths on immorality that surround his every decision to avoid being forced to step down. The latest decision on this irresponsible journey, Johnson has enthusiastically thrown his efforts in entirely the wrong direction. He is leading a campaign to support the Ukrainian government which has imprisoned leading opposition politicians, closed down independent media and is implicated in the assassination of journalists and opposition MPs. This government has also created national heroes out of those who collaborated with the Nazi murders of close to a million Roma, Jews, Poles and Russians during the Second World War. These completely undemocratic acts are the result of the ominous rise and hold that neo-Nazi battalions and their political representatives have over the Ukraine government and society.

Johnson has appeased these violent elements by assisting them consolidate their power through contributing to the spreading propaganda, including advice on the organization of false flag events based on the Syrian White helmets model, by training them and supplying arms all justified on the basis of the absurd notion that defending Ukraine is defending our freedom. No acknowledgement is made of the 8 years of warfare pursued these neo-Nazi battalions against innocent civilians in the South East of Ukraine in the Donbass where this killing still continues. In developing a high profile well-publicized diversionary tactic of supporting Ukraine, Johnson is helping the installation and consolidation of a Nazi-oriented government in Europe. This government came into existence in 2014 as the result of a bloody coup organized by the US State Department in the middle of Europe with the assistance of these neo-Nazi brigades. Johnson's decisions only helps strengthen the growth and spread of the negative consequences of Nazism in Europe in supporting this ongoing murderous brutality.

This is worse than Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler because Chamberlain was duped by a false promise. On the other hand, Johnson is aware of the continuation of the genocide is the result of a broken promise of the Ukrainian government not to pursue the peaceful option of the Minsk agreement to which it had agreed in 2014 and again in 2015. This decision indicated that the neo-Nazis had taken over the direction of government policy and wished to continue with the genocide. Johnson's irresponsible actions are a frantic effort to save his own skin and survival by any means within the parochial Westminster bubble by supporting wholesale murder and war crimes in Ukraine. He equates this horrendous killing to a defence of democratic principles when the track record of Ukraine is a demonstration that no such principles exist.

Johnson has destroyed the image of Britain being an international vanguard against Nazism established during the Second World War and has replaced this with an image of cowardice and decadence as a result of his singular enthusiastic championing of development and spread of Nazi brutality in Europe today. As we witness the results of this corruption, Johnson risks becoming remembered as an articulate war criminal with blood on his hands.

The horrific scene below is a Nazi murdering a woman and her child in Ukraine in 1942. Then we fought to eliminate Nazism. Today Ukrainian Nazi battalions are continuing to murder civilians in the Donbass region of Ukraine. The British government enthusiastically supports this genocide by Nazi battalions willingly providing arms and training to these factions in an open grossly insulting affront to the memory of Britons who died in the Second World War fighting Nazism.

06/05/2022: A considerable number of regular Ukrainian army personnel and some nationalists have been captured in the South East of Ukraine. Unlike the prompted interviews of some Russians captured by Ukraine where they are prompted to criticize their own service and country, those captured by Russia do not appear to be prompted but are simply recounting their experience in their own words. Sometime rambling but containing important information. Although we have no means of verification some common and important issues have become apparent. Much of the hyped equipment supplied by the UK, USA and others has turned out to be relatively ineffective in practice. Anti-tank systems quite often do not work or they explode before reaching their targets. The overall operational effectiveness of NLAWS ans Javelin ATGMS appears to be around 20%-25%. Training on these devices seems to have been completely theoretical so when the systems do not work, few have any idea how to fix the issue. In many cases batteries supplied were flat and many items beyond their stated replacement dates. The promotional explanation of these devices being "out of the box ready" has not proven to be the case. This has caused a widespread deception on the part of men concerned whose lives depended on these systems working. Some questioned the value of assistance provided by members of NATO and there is an apparent deeply cynical view of the practical utility, and therefore value, of the West's assistance. The reality that the Ukrainian efforts will continue until they run out of people. A recently arrived British Brimstone missile was deployed by Ukrainian troops near Zaporizhzhia but it did not reach its target and flopped to the ground. It was picked up in perfect undamaged condition by Russian scouts; it has been sent to the MOD RF for systems analysis.

In terms of Russian tactics, Russian tanks now remain beyond range but are now picking off infantry armed with anti-tank weapons with large calibre and explosive munitions. In several cases captives note that the Russian tank anti-personnel systems, in practice, turned out to be extremely accurate and lethal. The experience with the shoulder-launched anti-tank systems leading to direct lethal hits on those trying to use them was the cause of the foreign volunteers (mercendaries) returning to their countries. In spite of the propaganda concerning the efficiency of the nationalist battalions, foreign mercenaries who have since left Ukraine have stated that the corruption and disorganization is excessive, equipment deficient and in reality there is a lack of effective coordinastion and supply logistics. As a result, people are expected to fight with insufficient body armour, ammunition and quality of arms.

In some instances, civilians with white arm bands were rounded up by neo-Nazi nationalists who then ordered regular army personnel to shoot them.

In some scenarios nationalists were shooting "anything that moves". There is an obvious animosity between regular Ukrainian army personnel and neo-Nazi nationalists and there have been examples of one party shooting the other.

All of those who were wounded have stated that they received prompt medical treatment and the fact that Russians have not left wounded Ukrainians to die in the field but have rescued them. These men had been told the Russians would torture and kill them if captured. In separate reports it is apparent that there are cases of Ukrainians torturing and executing Russian captives.

The most effective tactic deployed by the Russians since the beginning of the campaign include holding tactics designed to dilute the ability of Ukrainian forces to concentrate effort. The most obvious example was the "invasion of Kiev" which Western strategists misinterpreted as a failed attempt to occupy Kiev. This misinterpretation is still broadcast in Western corporate media. The same tactic is being applied at the moment in Kharkiv, again with success. Having destroyed most Ukrainian hardware, the Russians have introduced an effective support to rapidly advancing infantry in the Donbass using KA 50 series gun ships which report on what is ahead as well as eliminating hardware and Ukrainian troop concentrations as they advance, leaving the infantry to do essentially a mopping up operation, leading to a rout. This is why the rate at which tanks and vehicles are being taken out has risen significantly during the last 2 weeks.

An odd observation confirmed by Russian medics is that nationalists quite often have narcotics in their kits designed to incite rage and dulling of any pain. One name mentioned as a drug used is Ephedrine. This explains that their "bravery" is more linked to fanaticism induced by drugs. This situation is very similar to the Fallujah onslaught in Iraq when NATO and US tank crews were on drugs and playing loud heavy metal music while attacking civilian zones leading to Fallujah suffering one of the highest tolls of civilian casualties including the alleged use of white phosphorous.

This goes a long way to explain the situation in the Astoval plant where nationalists, in a completely hapless situation continue to resist surrendering and threaten the lives of those who might consider laying down their arms. These nationalists are making increasingly bizaar demands. The Ukrainian government insistence that they do not surrender is a cruel indictment of the inhumanity of those in control of these troops who knowing that they are on drugs they can therefore promote these people, in such an impossiblre situation, as being brave national patriots. Clearly the Russian command cannot negotiate with people in this state of derangement. It would appear that this is the reason that Vladimir Putin prevented a wholesale onslaught because of the risks to Russian personnel. An observation was made that once the Astoval plant nationalists run out of drugs they will then realize their predicament and lay down their arms.

It is worth noting that in an interview with Oliver Stone, which features in the documentary, "Ukraine on Fire", Vladimir Putin referred to the danger of neo-Nazi drug addicts; he seems to have been better-informed than most. To access this documentary click on the image on the right.

06/05/2022: The predictable outcome of the local elections points to a more fundamental issue. With all parties, including Conservative, Labour, Liberal Democrats and Greens not having distinct economic policies that represent alternatives to monetarism, which has failed this country, it is impossible for any to provide and inspirational leadership. Inspiration comes not from Johnsonian assertions or Starmer's questions about partygate, the sometimes nice sounding combinations of words from Davey or the often sound logic of Lucas. Inspiration comes from demonstrable practical propositions that are likely to improve the real incomes and wellbeing of constituents.

Monetarism the totem pole of all British parties since 1975 has delivered a disaster for the majority of constituents of this country in terms of rising levels of income disparity, a declining manufacturing sector and skilled employment, rising balance of payments deficit and a cost of living crisis. However, no one in these parties questions the failed logic of monetarism sustained by the clerics employed by the Bank of England, the monetarists' temple. Just as in the religious reformation of the past, economics as a whole needs a reformation arising from what are errors, abuses, and discrepancies in monetary theory and derived policies. This process needs to be taken from economists, academics and politicians who remain committed to a false logic and whose prophesies have constantly failed to deliver constituent wellbeing. These issues have to be reviewed by non-economists and those who live with the consequences of economic poor policy outcomes. By opening up analyses amongst the constituents of this country in a participatory manner it will become possible to trace gaps and needs to constraints and thereby identify the determinants and mechanisms able to satisfy the needs by correcting distortions.

All of our political parties together have memberships that do not surpass 1.25% of the total electorate and this is why these parties lack the intellectual critial mass and exposure to the people of this country to come up with anything practical. By becoming more participatory, acknowledging that alternatives are required and permitting people to come up with practical suggestions, such a process in itself would be inspiring and would lead to existing policy alternatives being considered more seriously. The current bunch of political parties are clearly not fit for purpose largely because the current separation of economic theory and practice from the real economy where the increasingly impoverished constituents of this country dwell.

.... No way out for the Bank ....

05/05/2022: In a short presentation to analyse the recent Monetary Policy Committee of the Bank of England decision to rise interest rates to 1% at a short SDAC-Strategic Decision Analysis Group workshop, provided a clearer picture of the current UK predicament.

The cost of living crisis in the United Kingdom is a function of the purchasing power of the pound and the real incomes of wage earners. Wages have a purchasing power to obtain real goods and services according to the prices of these items. Inflation, the rise in unit prices of goods and services results in less being able to be purchased for a given nominal income. Therefore, the purchasing power of the currency and of specific wage levels declines. For example a 10% inflation rate is equivalent to a loss in purchasing power of the currency and wages of 65% over a 10 year period. 5% inflation would involve a loss of around 40% and 2% a 18% loss in real incomes, in rounded percentages.

Currently the United Kingdom is heading for a 10% inflation linked to four issues:
  • Rises in prices in international commodity markets for gas, petroleum, food, fibres, feedstocks and minerals largely linked to inappropriate strategic policies related to imposing sanctions on Russia;
  • Rises in domestic prices and rents of land and real estate and financial assets as a result of inappropriate macroeconomic policies;
  • Constraints imposed labour force remuneration as a result of inappropriate national corporate accounting norms;
  • Constraints imposed on corporations as a result of an inappropriate national taxation regime.
These four effects result in an economy incapable of responding to rising costs in a swift and effective manner by raising productivity to lower unit costs, raise wages and set unit prices at a compensatory level.

Russia offers gas and petroleum on the basis of long term contracts and unit prices set currently at around 10%-15% of the so-called free market spot prices. The British government could lower the price of imports by accepting Russian gas but refuses to do so. Therefore the United Kingdom government has taken a conscious decision to rely on more expensive energy resources leading to a cost of living rise in these particular products and derivatives such a agricultural commodities requiring petroleum derived fertilizer.
Source: McNeill, H. W., "British economic prospects", Introduction to Real Incomes Policy, SDAC-SEEL, 8th January, 2022.
The other part of this story is a misunderstanding amongst many economists concerning the origins of inflation. To understand this misunderstanding let us consider the question raised initially concerning the value of the currency. If the productivity of suppliers of goods and services rise and they are therefore able to lower their unit prices, the purchasing power or real incomes of wages rises. In terms of gaining market penetration under competitive conditions companies have to trade off their unit price setting against productivity and the distribution of funds to profit and wages. The countries that are committed to this approach as a result of a developed productivity culture are Germany, Japan, China, Netherlands, Switzerland, Russia, Taiwan, Singapore and South Korea. This productivity culture is intimately linked to the process model of constant product and process productivity improvement as illustrated on the left. The process model which results in a flow of incremental innovations is also combined with a better understanding of the need to pay compensatory wages to maintain national demand levels to drive learning curves through higher throughput. All of these countries come at the top of the international balance of payments league table. Germany, for example has over 1,400 SMEs that are leading exporters staffed by people with several generations of dedication to the state of the advancing art. Britain, on the other hand, together with the USA is at the bottom of the international balance of payments league table. The UK, in particular, has allowed the question of the complementarity between physical technical productivity, labour force learning and acquisition of tacit knowledge or skill be lost as a result of undermining the contribution of labour to corporate productivity agreements to maintain a stable growth in demand through compensatory wage settlements. This is only possible if there has been sufficient targeted investment in productivity enhancing changes or innovation.

Any serious accounting for these essential relationships were abandoned in the UK in 1975 in the stagflation period created by the rises in international petroleum prices. In spite of stagflation being obviously caused by cost-push inflation and inadequate technologies to secure petroleum substitution and avoid a rapid decline in currency values and purchasing power, an academic economics approach called monetarism was heralded as the saviour of stagflation. Monetarists consider inflation to be a purely money volume matter by equating the volume of money in the economy to "demand". They consider "demand" to be manageable through the policy instruments of base interest rates and managing the volume of money injections to the economy. This of course ignores the essential role of compensatory wages and productivity as the main determinant of real demand with productivity-based price setting being the unit price moderator. As a result the raising of interest rates depressed the economy and prejudiced thousands of families who lost their homes because nothing was done to increase the wages of home owners and many more lost their employment. This misunderstanding of the origins of inflation has persisted now for some 45 years and has been accompanied by a fall of investment in supply side production productivity and as a result real wages have been depleted manufacturing competitivity has declined; thus the disastrous balance of payments.

Monetarism is counter-productive in the sense that exactly when business requires low interest rates to counter inflation through incremental productivity investments, monetarists raise interest rates, making access to finance more difficult. Corporate taxation and accountancy norms place labour in a costs category resulting in a tension between shareholder dividends, profits and wages. Since the principal decisions are made by management the corporate taxation and accountancy code provided a negative incentive to marginalize investment and wage payments. After 45 years of monetarism UK manufacturing has been hollowed out, productivity is low and largely uncompetitive and we import most goods and services.

Just as we need to invest in higher productivity initiatives, the Bank of England, on cue, will undermine this process by raising interest rates and probably cause a further depression in economic activity. This illogical action is typical of monetarism and is damaging. The industrial cultural productivity deficit in the British economy can, however, be compensated through a Real Incomes Policy which can accelerate the process of manufacturing catch-up to generate well-paid employment and thereby real economic growth in consumption, as opposed to money volumes which do nothing but enhance speculative asset purchases which benefit few but which exacerbate the costs structure of the whole economy.

05/05/2022: In spite of increasing numbers of sanctions being leveled at the Russian economy the strength of the ruble against all major currencies has risen.

Year on year the ruble quotations show a 16% gain in value against the British pound whose quotation is falling. The British pound is failing along with the balance of payments as a result lack of investment and productivity. The current cost of living crisis caused by inflation is, in part, due to the backfiring of inappropriate anti-Russian sanctions. This economic decline in the UK is also due to serious structural issues in the British economy created by inappropriate macroeconomic policies implemented by Labour, Conservative and coalition governments over the last 50 years. The most prejudice was inflicted on the wage-earning segment by the Bank of England's policy of quantitative easing during the last 12 years which drove injected money into assets such as land and real estate, offshore investment, stocks and shares, objects of art and an explosive financial assets sector (derivatives) and drained money away from much needed investment and growth in the supply side manufacturing sectors.

05/05/2022: [Source: Time; RT] Lula, Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, Brazil's president from 2003 to 2010, has returned to Brazilian politics just over a year ago after the Latin American country's supreme court cleared him of corruption and money laundering charges, allowing him to run for president once again.

In an interview with Time he expressed the opinion that Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky really did want a war with Russia, otherwise he would have negotiated long before the Kremlin's special military operation started.

Lula drew attention to Zelensky's constant broadcasts around the world, addressing almost any audience and regularly receiving standing ovations. Lula said, "..sometimes I sit and watch the president of Ukraine speaking on television, being applauded, getting a standing ovation by all the [European] parliamentarians. This guy is as responsible as Putin for the war. Because in the war, there’s not just one person guilty. This president of Ukraine could have said,

'Come on, let's stop talking about this NATO business, about joining the EU for a while. Let’s discuss a bit more first.

"It seems like he's part of the spectacle. He is on television morning, noon, and night. He is in the UK parliament, the German parliament, the French parliament, the Italian parliament, as if he were waging a political campaign. He should be at the negotiating table," Lula explained. "Nobody s trying to help create peace."

Lula also noted that people are inciting hatred towards Russian President Vladimir Putin, but "that won't solve things! We need to reach an agreement," he stated. "But people are encouraging [the war]. You are encouraging this guy [Zelensky], and then he thinks he is the cherry on your cake. We should be having a serious conversation: 'OK, you were a nice comedian. But let us not make war for you to show up on TV.'

And we should say to Putin: 'You have a lot of weapons, but you don't need to use them on Ukraine. Let’s talk!'"

Notably, speaking of US President Joe Biden, Lula admitted that he respected him for his economic policy proposals, although

"it’s not enough to announce the program, you've got to execute it."

And Biden is reportedly having a "difficult moment" with that. Moreover, Lula believes the American president has not demonstrated leadership with respect to the Russia-Ukraine crisis.

"The US has a lot of political clout," he explained. "And Biden could have avoided [the war], not incited it. He could have talked more, participated more. Biden could have taken a plane to Moscow to talk to Putin. This is the kind of attitude you expect from a leader. To intervene so that things don't go off the rails. I don't think he did that."

Moreover, Lula expressed the view that Biden would not have been required to make any "concessions" to Russia if he had made an effort to negotiate. In the same way that the Americans persuaded the Russians not to put missiles in Cuba in 1961, Biden could have said:

'We're going to speak a bit more. We don't want Ukraine in NATO, full stop

' That’s not a concession,"

the former president said. According to Lula,

"we politicians reap what we sow."

"it’s not just Putin who is guilty. The US and the EU are also guilty. What was the reason for the Ukraine invasion? NATO? Then the US and Europe should have said: 'Ukraine won't join NATO." That would have solved the problem," he stressed.

Furthermore, he blasted European politicians for inciting the current volatile situation.

"The Europeans could have said: 'No, now is not the moment for Ukraine to join the EU, we'll wait.' They didn't have to encourage the confrontation," he offered.

Lula's comments come as Brazil is gearing up for a showdown in the October 2022 presidential election between the Workers Party politician and current Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro. In relation to the presdential election, recent polling gives Lula a 14-Point Poll Lead Over Bolsonaro.

04/05/2022: Tomorrow the constituents of the United Kingdom are expected to cast their votes in local elections throughout the country. Most people are feeling the cost of energy and realizing that other prices such as housing and food continue to increase. Many suggest that the local elections are more about community charges than about national politics.

The disgraceful influence of this government has been the suppression of free expression of Russians as a result of a Fascist-like policy of blind cancellation. They are advocating only allowing individuals to carry out their normal activities and who have no connection with politics, who have signed a shoddy document that states that they do not agree with the actions of their government.

This Stazi-like small-minded and disgraceful finger pointing has created an intimidating inquisitional environment where no one can protest against this injustice for fear of becoming conspicuous by rebelling against it - this is how low our government has stooped to succeed in manipulating society. Vanquishing participation and ruling by dictat and intimidation is a denial of all things the people of this country uphold as essential for freedom expression and liberty.

Such feeble minded organizations as Wimbledom are examples of submissions to a tyranny in their cowardly banning of Russian tennis players.

This unforgivable participation in intimidation is a justification for boycotting Wimbledon by all who value freedom.
This is not a particularly logical position. The ease with which local authorities can manage budgets is directly related to the effectiveness of macroeconomic policies "managed" by central government and it is these that create a cost of living crisis. Local authorities might be able to economize but the main culprit is central government.

Since the last energy crisis in 1973, Labour, Conservative and coalition governments have deployed monetarism ever since. Rather than encouraging investment in British industry and manufacturing through petroleum substitution and sustainable processes, all major parties supported increasing financialization, globalization and, as a result, British manufacturing was undermined by lower cost imports. The ability of manufacturing to pay skilled workers compensatory wages declined as did investment in manufacturing. As a result, productivity declined and income disparity rose. The inevitable outcome of a lack of investment in the real economy and over indulgence in financialization, led to the 2008 financial crisis. Rather than steer policy towards real economy investment to raise productivity, the government opted for an intensification of financialization by applying quantitative easing. This resulted in most funds injected into the economy going into assets and not manufacturing investment. By the time Covid turned up we had achieved the status of being the country with the second worst negative balance of payments behind the USA which has the worst balance of payments. As a result, even before Covid, we continued on the downward spiral of falling productivity and falling real wages. By contrast, Germany, paying higher wages and in the same geographic European zone as the UK has the highest balance of payments in the world.

Over this same 50 year period the British parliament demonstrated its ability enter wholly useless and costly military campaigns to support NATO and the USA and all of which were lost. These poorly executed and failed military ventures helped to spread ISIS and its many variants throughout the Middle East, Africa and Asia. The cost has added up to over 1 million innocent people being slaughtered and the creation of the worst refugee crisis made up of people still fleeing the violence our governments helped create in these countries including Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria. However, the government avoiding the responsibility of having created the refugee crisis are openly proposing to send such people to Rwanda a country with one of the highest poverty indices in the world. The UK government has a good deal of responsibility for the creation of these refugees but openly avoids facing up to this responsibility in a shabby manner.

In 1973 the International Monetary Fund under a Moslem Managing Director did not attempt to prevent Arab countries from raising their prices but cynically made use of petrodollars to "finance" petroleum imports by low income countries using petrodollars supplied by the Arab nations concerned. Petroleum prices therefore rose seven-fold within a decade. Paradoxically, the "price of energy" vanished from the political agenda because political parties and selected politicians were benefiting from the generosity of petroleum supplier and industry lobbies. The corruption associated with over-priced arms deals started under the Conservative government of Margaret Thatcher and continued under Tony Blair. Blair closed down the Serious Fraud Office investigation into this affair. As a result of this generalised corruption the idea of green energy and petroleum substitution was placed on the back burner for 35 years.

Six years ago the European Referendum resulted in a decision for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union. The processes and procedures adopted by the government since have transformed British politics into a landscape characterized by intolerance and abandonment of values once held dear to a large proportion of the British population. The intolerance is associated with an import from last century Europe as a variants of Fascism made up of economic policies shaped by corporations and politicians who support such policies because of personal and party interest in financial support, on the one hand, and a close to fanatical intolerance of individuals who disagree with this way of managing policy, on the other.

Just as Mussolini regarded this arrangement as common sense the post-war period witnessed this intolerance of diverse opinions under the shameful period of McCarthyism in the USA. This process of attacking individuals for actual or perceived contrary views was made possible by cowardly informants and finger pointers. In central Europe such a system was managed secret police and the Stazi whose work involved surveillance, torture and assassination.

Weak governments and assorted politicians who resort to or collude with, the use of intimidation to promote their own causes, fear the truth. Goebbels explained this concisely. They therefore conspire to hide the truth or "cancel" those who would expose the truth. The most shameful and blatant example of this is the case of Julian Assange who has been tortured by a weak British government fearful of the intolerant USA authorities. This government demonstrates a subservience to those who carried out horrendous acts that were exposed in the documents, images and videos which came into the possession of Wikileaks and were published as information of public interest. In a process similar to the Nazi German "People's Courts" the judges have slanted and ignored evidence, passed judgement and pronounced the sentence by agreeing to extradition of Assange to the USA.

This is an open demonstration of the objective of this government to intensify the regime of fear in this country in order to dissuade others from exposing the truth of government excesses and corruption. At the same time the "opposition" says nothing in an act of denial of the importance of truth, no matter how inconvenient. This government and the main oppositions parties expect the people of this country to support those in the local council elections who are members of these same parties that make up this corrupted government and parliament.
The failed military ventures that have created the massive refugee crisis is the result of a too-eager notion by our parliamentarians of regarding militarism as the solution to problems. Following the poor orientation of the USA and NATO there has been an attempt to replace our lowest cost and most reliable source of gas in Europe, Russia, by USA Liquefied Petroleum Gas that is around 35% more expensive. Following a bloody coup against a democratically elected Ukrainian government coordinated by the US State Department, in the middle of Europe, our government did not question this overt destruction of democracy. The UK and NATO countries began arming Ukraine in supporting a civil war against two Ukrainian states (Donetsk and Luhansk) who had declared independence because of fears of the likely outcome of neo-Nazi elements gaining influence in the following Ukrainian puppet governments. The fear was the open declarations by neo-Nazi elements in the puppet government to eliminate Russian-speakers and dual passport holders. The Ukrainian government proceeded to imprison opposition politicians, banned the use of the Russian language, closed down independent TV and radio stations and lately has published a list of individuals who have written or spoken against this government. Several of the politicians and journalists on this list have since been assassinated. This government was and is in no way democratic and it has continued its creeping genocidal attacks on the civilian population of the areas of Ukraine that declared independence. All the way through this horror the UK government has continued to train Ukrainian military and supply arms.

The promise of a peaceful resolution to this conflict, under terms of the Minsk Agreement, was the main hope expressed by the President of Russia as the way to terminate the military intervention. However, the Minsk agreement was abandoned by the Ukrainian government under the direction of the US State Department in early February 2022 after 8 years of warfare. Clearly the intent of the government was to continue to kill Russian-speaking civilians and dual nationality (Ukrainian/Russian) individuals in the Ukraine’s East. The areas that were coming under an impending major invasion from the Ukrainian army, trained and armed by NATO, appealed to Russia for help to avoid a wholesale slaughter of civilians at the hands of the Ukrainian army and neo-Nazi battalions. Therefore, Russia joined this ongoing war, it did not start this war. The fact that the Ukraine openly declared its intention to become a member of NATO while at the same time murdering Russian-speakers and Russian passport holders in former Ukrainian states reflected badly on NATO's declaration of being a "defensive" alliance. Therefore, this affront and associated danger was justification enough for Russia read this as an intent on continued violence supported proactively by NATO. Russia was left with no choice oher than to push back militarily.

Russia, in the second world war did the bulk of the heavy-lifting in overcoming the European suffering from the German Nazi regime. Russia lost over 25 million citizens in this effort. Russians understand that the Nazi threat starts with small fanatical groups who were hardly noticed by West Europeans. Leon Trotsky saw this danger early on when Joseph Stalin also appeased Hitler in an agreement which, like the Minsk agreement, was abandoned by the Nazis. Neville Chamberlain's appeasement of Hitler is an example of the type of naive and costly mistake being made today by the British government and parliament in appeasing Ukraine through declarations and by training Ukrainian military, supplying arms and encouraging it to fight rather than negotiate for peace.

This irresponsible attitude and the additional promotion of, and participation in, sanctions against Russia has exacerbated the international prices, not only of energy but also food and other commodities. The "benefits" of this trail of government decisions and a complicit parliament, for the people of this country, in addition to the problems of rising Middle eastern and African refugees, is an unsustainable rise in the cost of living. This aspect of the cost of living has combined with the policy-induced rising prices and rents of housing and commercial premises resulting from asset speculation taking place as a direct consequene of Bank of England's quantitative easing.

And yet the bulk of MPs in parliament expect the constituents of this country to support the candidates of their parties in the local elections. The central government has removed any effective capabilities for local authorities to have any relevance under such a social and macroeconomic disaster they have created. If one observes with care the antics of the government in handling BREXIT it is clear that the power of decision making in Westminster, especially with this latest government relies heavily on a "Little Englander" mentality, particularly apparent in the prime minister and current set of cabinet members in their failure to have run the government and parliament in a truly participatory manner. They largely ignored the wishes of the people of Scotland, Wales and Ireland. To compensate for this inept bias, it would seem that it is best for constituents to vote for those representatives in the devolved regions who look to a politics that is more independent of the Westminster bubble. The people in England are left with a choice. Vote for those parties who have together created the social and macroeconomic mess we are witnessing, and all feel in our pockets, or vote for those who represent an alternative to these main parties. This should not be just as protest vote, but rather be the first steps in bringing about change to shun militaristic violence and campaigns that are always lost, and getting rid of those who implement poor macroeconomic policies. Britons need to take the initiative to begin to shape a future to bring us back to the sanity of a peaceful and sustainable participatory future as a worthy legacy for our children.

02/05/2022: There is an excess of unjustified assumptions in most of the media reports on the performance of the Russian military units operating in Ukraine. This week's Economist Newspaper has a coverage which is a typical example of an inadequate and biased analysis.

The Russian President declared the objectives of the exercise precisely at the time it was launched and these included:
  1. Assisting the self-declared republics in the Donbass to defend themselves to put an end to 8 years of creeping genocide and the killing of civilians by the Ukrainian government forces - this involved ending the Ukrainian occupation of th formal administrative areas these republics;
  2. To demilitarize Ukraine;
  3. To de-Nazify Ukraine.
  4. To carry out this excerise while minimizing the harm to civilians and supportive infrastructures;
  5. There is no intent to occupy Ukrainian territory;
One of the most misleading common statements in strategic analyses of the Russian performance has been to assume that Russia had intended to take over or occupy Kiev. Looking at the objectives, that was never an intent. This move was to pull a proportion of the Ukrainian forces from their concentration along the Donbass border by advancing on and appearing to surround Kiev to attack the city. This tactic worked but it might have been costly in terms of some equipment and lives of personnel. The focus on Kiev permitted the Russian units to discover a good deal concerning the location of military assets and personnel helping initiate a rapid completion of the liquidation of most of Ukrainian military hardware assets. Once, these backup assets which could compromise Russian effectiveness in the Donbass were eliminated the Russians withdrew from Kiev. The withdrawal had nothing to do with brave Ukrainians standing up to Russian units.

Redacted is a medium created by Natali & Clayton Morris, independent journalists.

To find out more about the truth concerning what is going on in the Donbass, click on the video link above...
The other commentary relates to the fact that observers are not taking into account Russia's undertaking not to harm civilians and supportive infrastructures. Although this relates as much to non-Donbass residents as it applies to Donbass residents, this means the tactics used are more exacting and involve more time to complete. There is an obvious need to avoid air and missile attacks on civilian areas and making use of these assets on mainly military targets. The fact that Ukrainian military and nationalist battalions place artillery and missile launchers in the middle of civilian areas is an issue but the Donbass forces are learning how to handle this. This contrasts greatly with the indiscriminate killing of civilians carried out NATO and the US forces who carpet bombed whole towns in Iraq and Syria where the main victims were something of the order to one million civilians. Similarly, in Afghanistan, Libya civilian casualties rose to unacceptably obscene levels.

The Russians have opened countless humanitarian corridors a technique developed in Syria. However, as in Syria, Ukrainian nationalists either prevented civilians using them or fired on people using them in the same way as ISIS did in Syria. By far the greatest civilian residential damage has been wrought by Ukrainian forces in the Donbass, especially in Mariupol, and there is no doubt that their principal targets remain civilians. Their tactic is to map out areas they occupy, then to withdraw and then shell the towns and villages they have left targeting areas where they know there

To learn about the Nazi cover up in Ukraine click on the video link above.
are normally concentrations of people during the day such as railway and bus stations and markets. It is now evident that the Mariupol theatre and maternity hospital attacks given so much publicity were Ukrainian nationalist stunts. A so-called mass grave of 9,000 people outside Mariupol has now been visited by independent journalists only to find that this area is a normal cemetery and there is no mass grave. Some graves are occupied by Ukrainian soldiers buried in separate lots and in coffins. The Bucha story has now lost most of its credibility.

Such propaganda and false flag events do not win wars although they do gain a social media coverage and headlines for corporate media they also titillate and pad out poor strategic analyses. The current state of Ukrainian demilitarization achieved by Russia can be assessed from the data in the table above left.

As the Ukrainian government has not engaged in serious negotiations and does not seem to be independent of US State Department instructions, the Russian government has stated that this will result in changes in the original objectives. It is not clear what these changes entail but they could be taking precautions to strengthen the long term future defence of Crimea region of Russia and the Donbass republics.

02/05/2022: At an Agence Presse Européenne workshop this weekend the issue of appropriate economic policies for the United Kingdom were reviewed. According to the economist Hector McNeill the country is already in recession with a high real incomes deflator associated with inflation heading for 10%. He stated that,

"At this level recession cannot be avoided. The default monetarist response to rising inflation is invariably to do the wrong thing such as raising interest rates.
McNeill explained that all of the policy eggs are in the same Aggregate Demand Model "basket" which cannot tackle cost-push inflation gracefully because they have no handle on productivity.

The culprits are monetarism, Keynesianism, supply side economics and modern monetary theory whose theories and works cover the relationship between real incomes and productivity in blank pages.

As a result there are no relevant policy instruments.
"Under similar circumstances, this is what the Thatcher government did only exacerbating the depression and forcing many people with sound mortgages to be forced into a sub-prime mortgage status and losing their homes. Attempting to impose any of the existing policy instruments will only exacerbate the state of affairs since there are no conventional policy instruments to tackle the issue of cost-push inflation."

McNeill carried out extensive research into the conditions giving rise to the last global stagflation crisis starting in 1973.

"Monetary theory, in reality, does not contain any explanation of the mechanisms creating inflation and therefore can offer no effective solutions. Prices are not set by interest rates or money volumes, they are set by business managers. The rising prices and rents of housing and prices of mineral, energy and food commodities are a result of a considerable amount of quantitative easing funds flowing into price speculative moves in land, real estate and commodities, managed by banks, their clients and hedge funds. This has created a cost of living crisis and the need for managers to increase output prices to remain viable. Thus the price rises were already built in to the system before the Ukrainian crisis. Collaborating in sanctions against Russia are only making things worse."

McNeill considers the current economic crisis to be a result of a too long a run of inappropriate monetary policies which have run down productivity and essential investment.

He said that the way to initiate a reversal of these trends it to introduce a Real Incomes Policy to encourage companies to reset prices and encourage stepwise investments in productivity enhancing initiatives to raise the productivity of companies to absorb cost-push inflation through effective incentives.

"Being outside the EU it is easier to create Real Income Policy incentives while not involving any subsidies from the state and thereby avoiding WTO litigation. By removing corporate taxation and changing the corporate tax code to remove labour from the costs category, it is possible to revolutionize the rate of real growth in the values of profits and wages while moderating and even reducing output prices. This system can achieve a constant real growth in excess of 2% and most investment would come from reinvested margins rather than loans. This is completely counter-intuitive for monetarists and even Keynesians and this solution is more rational than what so-called supply side economics or modern monetary theory, have to offer."

29/04/2022: The latter day pugnacious efforts at diplomacy by the current occupant of the post of Foreign Secretary reflects a corrupted intellect which is almost a carbon copy of that of the Secretary of State of the United States of America. No doubt this cloning of thought processes is to the satisfaction of the Conservative government and the Labour opposition on the vain assumption that ".. we are on the right side". But this is not so. The United Kingdom obviously does not have an independent foreign policy and since the USA has no interest in the prospects of the population of this country, this is a serious state of affairs. Having relied on the NATO arms bazaar for "security" to give an impression of a strategic "defensive" alliance, the reality is that NATO members have a complement of arms that are a couple of generations behind that developed by Russia on 10% of the defence budget of the USA. Clearly a 2% GNP assignment for defence has not resulted in an effective strategic defensive framework, but rather, a wholly exposed membership. Since 1949 NATO members have been involved in bloody conflicts that were uncalled for and certainly not defensive. Since NATO did not honour the promise not to expand Eastwards beyond Germany and its willingness to initiate very high human cost warfare at the request of the USA, Russia was left to draw its own conclusions as to the significance of the USA's manipulation events to expand NATO Eastwards towards the Russian border. The President of Russia did attempt in 2007 to lay out Russia's concerns proposing a mutual strategic security framework which would include Russia. The USA and, of course, the UK, ignored these measured and balanced proposals. There have been 8 years of a war initiated by the Ukrainian government against Ukrainian citizens who did not want to be governed by a government set up as a result of a US State Department coordinated bloody coup in 2014. This puppet regime introduced a series of constitutional acts to marginalize Russian speakers and then in February, the current Ukrainian president declared that Ukraine would not implement the only negotiated and peaceful settlement agreement to this warfare, the Minks agreement. Russia had relied upon this agreement to solve the Donbass violence. This failure was the direct result of the USA State Department officials dissuading all involved from implementing the Minsk agreement. As a result of appeals from the people of the Donbass for protection, Russia initiated the current campaign.

The United Kingdom, rather than encourage the Ukrainian government to resuscitate the Minsk agreement and a more rapid route to peace, has done quite the reverse, following the lead of the USA to ply Ukraine with armaments and encourage the Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. This reaction only confirms that Russia had good reason to initiate its campaign because the USA and UK have not responded in any way that corresponds to a defensive but in fact have transgressed the very first Article of the NATO Treaty which requires efforts to seek peaceful resolutions. No, the USA and the UK have simply continued the slightly fanatical process of using the population of Ukraine and the armed forces to attempt to weaken Russia. Why is it that the United Kingdom is working to sustain a puppet Ukrainian government established through violence by the USA in the heart of Europe, by continued violence? From the standpoint of Britain, this is a foolish bravado which is bound to prolong this crisis, raise the number killed and destablilize yet further international prices of energy, food and other essential resources, thereby causing immense suffering in the rest of the world and exacerbating our own cost of living crisis. This government has been keen to prevent relief for British constituents facing financial difficulties on the basis of the excuse of "affordability". This same government thinks it can afford to participate in a wholesale waste of public money on a corrupt regime and augmentation in unjustified violence and death in a wholly irresponsblle act.

The recent set of statements uttered by the Foreign Secretary at a Mansion House dinner, simply confirm to the world the true nature of NATO members and a wish to expand this failed system to South East Asia. Saying China needs the West because it is 50% of the world market is slightly absurd when, in real terms, this economy is shrinking and the rest of the word's economy is expanding rapidly. All of the main growth in demand for energy resources, capital goods and development finance are in those countries who have refused to participate in sanctioning Russia. Most have recognized the link between NATO's willingness to attack countries who wish to follow an independent pathway or for the USA attempt to sanction countries based on dollar dependency for transactions. The reaction of Russia to refuse to refusal to submit to this form of intimidation and its demonstration on how to neutralize sanctions, has been an amazing demonstration of resilience and independence that most countries seek. As a result, the rate of transition towards barter credits and own-currency-paired trading is beginning to marginalize, dollars, pounds and Euros. This is already resulting in a decline in the purchasing power of these currencies while the Chinese currency and the rouble rise in value as preferred currencies. This is occurring just as the refusal of several NATO members to use Russian energy resources in the future is resulting in rises in the international prices of gas and petroleum.

It is easy to appreciate why the corrupted intellect referred to above is defective because it does not understand the connection between a country's belligerence and the decline in acceptance of that country by those who have no respect for this type of irresponsibility. They look on and observe the rising costs of living in NATO countries created in good measure by the aggression of NATO inviting a forceful reaction. The so-called defensive alliance has created a strategic instability arising from social and economic stress. The government seeks to blame Russia who still offer gas at 8% of current market prices to anyone who is willing to sign longer term contracts. Russia will not supply gas that has not been paid for. Russia so far, has maintained an established tradition of being the most reliable long term gas and petroleum supplier in the world. Of course, the government refers to all the inflation in our economy as Putin's inflation when in reality if is a result of a failed so-called "alliance" called NATO. The government needs to revaluate what is in the interests of the nation. It is not to alienate the majority of the world's population where the main global markets are evolving or to become a promotional agency for a defunct NATO as an example to follow.

27/04/2022: Nicholas Kaldor's inaugural lecture as Professor of Economics at Cambridge University in 1966 set out the reasons why the United Kingdom's apriori emphasis of economic policies needed to be geared to the maintenance of strong industrial and manufacturing sectors. His reasoning was sound. However, with the stagflation crisis starting in 1973 a Labour Chancellor, Denis Healey, abandoned Keynesian policies and a wages policy and did not introduce an industrial policy in 1975. He in fact introduced a monetarist approach which was intensified by stringent conditions of an IMF loan to the country in 1977. Nicholas Kaldor, who has been an adviser to the Labour government, withdrew his services in 1976 as a result of Healey's decisions.

The following Conservative government led by Margaret Thatcher adopted monetarism with enthusiasm but this government represented a significant change in Conservate governance by moving away from what had been a more pragmatic conservativism with a small 'c'.

Nicholas Kaldor became one of the leading critics of the policies introduced by Thatcher, especially in relation to the decline in the UK's manufacturing sectors, declining manufacturing exports and collapse in the balance of payments. He made use of his position as a member of the House of Lords to present coherent criticisms of the economic policies of the Thatcher government.

Some of Nicholas Kaldor's criticisms of the Thatcher government economic decisions between 1979 and 1982 were made into a collection entitled, "The economic consequences if Mrs. Thatcher" and published by Gerald Duckworth & Company in 1983. This has a short introduction by Nick Butler. The cover is shown on the right, we have added the observation within the red bars. The book consists of 19 short but devastating speeches which in their detail demonstrate how, under Thatcher, the somewhat faulty logic of Healey's monetarism created a foundation for a combination of strands of a particular view of society.

Although some refer to this as an ideology it did not pass beyond being a particularly visceral view of human relations based on instinct and with the economic components being without a sound theoretical and therefore practical utility. Weighing up Kaldor's arguments one is left with an impression of a soulless macroeconomic policy environment reflecting well the sense that these people did not believe that there is something which others refer to as "society". Although Boris Johnson expelled most of those Conservative MPs which the people of this country could recognize and admire as "one nation Conservatives" it is very apparent that they had become an issue for Thatcher who referred to them as "wets". At the margins one does sense a whiff of fanaticism attached to some extremely negative views or fixations on social class-related motivations of society. This attitude is alive and well in the current administration and occasionally flickers to the surface in the pronouncemnts made by the current Chancellor. The notable point is that this decline has continued ever since under Labour, Coalition and Conservative governments all of whom deployed monetarism as the main policy drive. The point of particular interest is that while the current government continues this creed and we now face the very same predicament faced by the Thatcher government in the form of rising inflation caused by external resource prices and a cost of living crisis exacerbated by the very same errors made by the Thatcher government.

Lessons have very definitely not been learned as the economic trends initiated under Thatcher continue as a failure to resuscitate our almost nonexistant manufacturing sector to reverse the decline in the balance of payments and a government presiding over the continual decline in the real incomes of wage-earners and continuing to place higher tax burdens on the sections of the constituency least able to afford such payments as the cost of living rises. Unfortunately, this government does not appear to be aware of the magnitude of the current extent of the country's economic decadence in a performance that repeats the Thatcher years with policy justifications, as Kaldor explained, being assertions devoid of sound theoretical and practical coherence. Whereas the Bank of England and the government wheel out monetarists to explain their policies, they seem to remain unaware that the axioms and general theory of monetarism were shown to be groundless as a result of detailed analysis completed by the Strategic Decision Analysis Group at SEEL in 2021. This major advance in economic theory and explanation of its implications for the United Kingdom were set out in some detail in the 2022 edition of the British Strategic Review.

26/04/2022: Loose talk has serious implications and sometimes consequences, when the subject matter is a military action.

The inappropriate statements of Liz Truss caused Russia to move into a full strategic systems alert, and now, James Heappey, Under-Secretary of State for the Armed Forces is adding fuel to the fire. It is reported that he has expressed the opinion that the use of British supplied weapons for strikes on logistics sites in Russia would be fair game, or words to that effect. The problem with this, although semantic, is that this is seeing the UK becoming involved in decisions, or modes of thinking, in their support for Ukraine that shifts the perspective from "defence" to "attack". The school boy logic applied by Heappey is simply naive. It is quite normal for strategic military decisions to consist of constant reciprocations of locational states as campaigns progress. This signifies that Heappey's statements place at risk the whole of the British supply line to Ukraine including transport, warehouses and even the factories producing the weapons supplied on British soil. Since the country is not under a war regime and state of emergency our supply lines within the country are a more than easy target and any follow up in response to Heappey's ill-judged statements could result in the deaths of people in this country. Relying on NATO's article 5 is plain idiocy when the UK government is transgressing Article 1 of NATO which reads:

"Article 1: The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

Heappey recently responded in a TV interview during which he was asked why public funds were being spent on armaments for Ukraine when people were facing a serious cost of living crisis. Heappey's response was quite dishonest. He stated that Russia's use of energy as a political weapon and starting this war threatens our "freedoms" and that he hoped that the people of this country understand that. This is just a repetition of misleading USA State Department propaganda.

Russia has never used its supply of gas and petroleum as a political weapon and has always observed, since Soviet times, their contractual obligations which have involved the supply of gas at a very low price. The only time there was a contractual problem was when it was discovered that Ukraine was stealing gas from transit gas. Also, Russia did not start this war, it joined a war that has been running for 8 years since 2014 when the USA State Department promoted a bloody coup to overthrow a democratically elected government. Since that time national honours have been bestowed on past Ukrainian Nazi collaborators, the Zelensky government has closed down opposition TV stations and imprisoned opposition MPs as well as making no comment on the assassination of a leading opposition politician which occurred after Russian forces left Bucha. The threat to European freedom and the safety of the people of this country is the rise of neo-Nazi power in Ukraine. The UK government did not question the violent overthrow of the Ukrainian government in 2014 or question the antics of the Ukrainian governments ever since. This government is repeating the naive appeasement by Neville Chamberlain of Nazis in 1938. What is worse, however, is that while Chamberlain referred to "Peace in our time" our own government, not only has ignored the 14,000 citizens murdered in the Donbass region at the hands of the Ukrainian government, but has now joined in to help this Ukrainian government. Russia entered this fray at the request of those under threat in the Donbass and who have suffered atrocities for over 8 years.

On balance, whereas Heappey satisfies himself of his own naive logic, the government's actions in supporting sanctions have created problems for the British population with some 20% now facing extreme difficulties with the cost of living and paying for essentials. Heappey, of course, has a salary which means all of this is of no particular concern to him but the people of this country have a justifiable concern as to why the government is spending money to support such a dreadful regime in the name of "freedom". On top of this, the government is raising taxes. In reality, there is no freedom to defend in the Ukraine while the cost of living crisis is constraining the freedom of the people of this country. With a government that refers to "affordability" in setting priorities, it would seem that helping the Ukrainian neo-Nazi battalions murder people in the Donbass is a priority while seeking to serve the interests of the people of this country, is not.

23/04/2022: A recent Economist Newspaper (see cover on right) ran a series of leaders and articles on inflation and a Special Report on Central Banks related to their taking on an array of concerns.

Unfortunately everything cited in these dissertations was statements by economists who consider inflation to be a purely monetary phenomenon. In 1976 it was well-established that money supply is just a part of the story. The main issue is the evolution of manufacturing productivity over which monetary and fiscal policies have no means of direct influence because the appropriate policy instruments have not been developed.

To explain this in a simple way we use a graph presented by the Economist in the article "Hawks take flight" on page 68 (see far right).
For now approaching 50 years, monetarism has distorted the direction of monetary growth by raising asset prices which created cost-push inflation caused by rising prices and rents of land, housing and commercial real estate. Under quantitative easing prices of commodities including energy resources and food have also risen. The Ukrainian situation has exacerbated this state if affairs. The failure to balance monetary growth with increases in physical productivity is a significant gap in macroeconomic theory and practice.

This separation of monetary concerns from economic physical productivity has reduced the adpatability and therefore the resilience of the supply side, slowing down productivity responses to policy-induced rises in prices of inputs.

Just when interest rates need to be lowered to faciitate productive investment to tackle inflation, central banks raise interest rates. Interest rates could be raised if effective productivity incentives were in place.

This is a version of the Phillips curve showing the relationship between unemployment levels and inflation.

We have added the dashed curve b-b.

Below is a diagram produced by the Real Incomes School showing the impact of productivity on the Phillips curve.

As can be seen the b-b curve is just one of three with low productivity resulting in higher inflation, a-a and higher productivity resulting in lower inflation c-c.

Because macroeconomic policy has ignored the application of incentives for productivity and have confused this with incentives for investment - not the same thing - we have witnessed monetarism hollow out manufacturing and general productivity because finance has been redirected into assets.

21/04/2022: Jeremy Corbyn is on the record at warning the country about the influence of Russian oligarchs over British politics over several years and especially on the Conservative party. His warnings turned out to be correct.

Corbyn's view of NATO is also totally rational in the sense that, if we have understood the latest press reports, he has stated that, if there is no balance in security arrangements the resulting insecurity results in a massive non-ending arms race leading to more insecurity and the likelihood of warfare and deaths. On the other hand the government and Labour still hold on to completely out-dated concepts of nuclear deterrence. This has resulted in Russia developing systems which have completely removed the effectiveness of existing defence systems in the "West". Therefore the irresponsible expansionary strategy of NATO destroyed any concept of it being a defensive alliance. And so, the arms race continues creating a less secure world.

Corbyn has his feet on the ground and has turned out to be more rational in his approach than the hysterical militants and rather ridiculous reservist MPs in this country bent of pouring arms into Ukraine and in a completely cowardly manner encourage the Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. Working to give peace a chance, as Corbyn has always done, is a more courageous path, yet more complicated, given the size of the armaments lobby, but this is a far more sensible and inspiring being far more productive than the government's continual willingness to support military interventions and to contribute to alliances that are responsible for the murder of thousands of innocent men, women and children.

21/04/2022: The backward, stultifying parochial bigotry that pervades sections of society, including organizations and even parliament, who wish to prevent individuals or teams from participating in events because they happen to be from Russia is a negation of everything the people of this country are brought up to value. This includes the importance of freedom of expression, respect for others and the right to be deemed innocent and free from accusations when no evidence has been produced. This action of mass intimidation erodes the country's free exercise of the community conscience and ability to ensure fair play. This groveling, small-minded vicious finger pointing and participation in the blind "cancellation" of people who have done nothing wrong and the gross violation of privacy in demanding that Russian sports and artists and others, in a Stazi-like imposition, to sign prepared statements that they oppose their own government's actions, are unacceptable impositions. Such points of view are of no possible business of others. This reflects badly on the small-mindedness and visceral motivations of those who carry out all of this crude hatred in such a self-righteous manner. This has turned into a competition between grovellers in attempting to demonstrate who can lower themselves to become the most convincing champions of the brutal desires of neo-Nazis who control the Ukrainian government and their patrons in the US State Department. Why has Britain stooped so low so as to demonstrate to the whole world such a dreadful show of decadence and a mass hysterical and irrational hypocrisy?

Following the mass murder of, approaching, or perhaps, exceeding, millions of innocent people in the Middle East as a result of NATO actions did others ban American and British athletes and artists in this crude manner? Civilized societies simply do not act in such a vindictive manner.

This show of an ability to uphold a situation where there is no justice only follows the disgraceful treatment of Julian Assange as a broadcast of the United Kindom government's problems with facing up to the truth. The exposure of war crimes, for which there is ample evidence generated by the guilty party, the USA, is a state of affairs which should set Julian Assange free. Therefore, the whole world needs to observe and reflect on the this dreadful groveling of British justice and government, far from setting an example of upholding and demonstrating a freedom of action, have sought to satisfy the desires of the very people guilty of the war crimes exposed and to punish the person who has exposed this vital truth. The lesson for the world, witnessing this disgraceful behaviour, is that, if Assange is extradited to the USA, this government that has overseen this corrupt process and considers it to be acceptable, is tyrannical and cannot be trusted.

The above graphic representation was used for illustrative purposes in the ACP workshop presentation "Britain needs a manufacturing growth strategy" on the 15th April, 2022, by Hector McNeill, Coordinator of SDAG.
20/04/2022: At a mid-week Agence Presse Européenne Correspondent' Pool Seminar the current predicament of the UK economy was reviewed. Rather than review this in the context of conventional aggregate supply and demand analysis the Real Incomes approach which deploys the Production, Accessibility and Consumption Model (PACM) was used. The PACM is in stark contrast to the Aggregate Demand Models (ADM) used by conventional economists.
Inflation rate
Net real income
Loss of real income
The benefit of the PACM is that it is able to expose the nexus or relationship between production costs, unit prices and disposable incomes. As a result analyses can expose what is feasible in terms of supply side output prices and ability to purchase goods at such prices. The space between maximum unit prices for any level of disposable income and unit costs of production at that level of output, traces a "transactional envelope" within which prices are essentially negotiated and profits established. As a result, it is possible to identify occlusion points at which people with different levels of disposable income can no longer afford to purchase an essential product or service. At this point people need to rely on charity or the state such as food banks or the dole, for example. Unfortunately for increasing numbers of people the rise in inflation means that increasing numbers of people in work face very difficult circumstances. This relegates the economy to the status of a "developing" or "underdeveloped" economy.

The decline in ability to purchase essentials represents a decline in real incomes and each level of inflation can be projected to estimate the decline in real incomes expected over a 10 year period. This calculation is set out in the table on the right. Two key inflation rates are shown in red at 5% and 10% because the UK inflation rate already exceeds 5% and it is likely to surpass 10% by August, September 2022.

A 5% inflation rate represents a decline in real incomes or purchasing power of 40% over a ten year period while an inflation rate of 10% represents a decline in real incomes or purchasing power of 65% over 10 years.

Current list of Notes (pdfs) responding to questions on the British Strategic Review:

1. Some aspects of inflation
2. From earned income to pauperism and back
3. Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis
4. Technology, technique and real incomes

Contrary to conventional monetary theory that has emphasized the role of demand in creating inflation, the fact is that most inflation is caused by cost-push inflation arising from rising input costs on the supply side. The effect of this is for the supply side unit production cost curves to rise as shown in the diagram as 0% inflation, line c1-c1, 5% inflation, line c2-c2 and 10% , line c3-c3. The maximum feasible price line for a product is shown as line p-p. High income families can afford higher maximum feasible unit price positions and lower income families correspondingly lower price positions. The space between the unit cost lines and the p-p line is the "transactional envelope" where all business is done. As can be seen, there are three occlusion points at which families in lower income categories can no longer purchase an essential items because the costs line exceeds the price line. At 5% inflation most essentials are associated with an occlusion point oc2 affecting around 12%-15% of households while at 10% the occlusion point moves to oc3 affecting around 25% of UK households.

The causes of the current inflation are:
  • 40 years of monetarism as a major macroeconomic policy framework
  • 12 years of quantitative easing (QE) building up cost push pressure through speculative asset price rises affecting: rents and prices of land, housing, commercial units and commodities
  • Low interest rates crashed real incomes of those on fixed savings incomes - prejudicing older generations
  • Lack of supply side investment to lower unit costs through productivity increases
  • Stagnant wages reducing consumption volumes and therefore a general supply side inability to use their full capacity to reduce costs
  • Tail end of Covid-19 supply chain disruptions
  • BREXIT impacts
Current government policies are exacerbating the state of inflation. In spite of facing such a disastrous structural economic problem the British government has embarked on an irresponsible foreign policy which has significantly worsened the state of affairs as a result of an over-enthusiastic participation in sanctions against Russia. This has helped raise the open market prices on petroleum, gas, food and other essential commodities, all of which are creating increasing cost-push inflation. The enthusiastic participation of supplying armaments to Ukraine will also greatly prolong the cost-push inflation crisis as a result of the failure to advocate and actively encourage negotiation and a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia. As a result the cost of living crisis in the UK will deteriorate creating increasingly difficult conditions for the whole of the British population but also seriously prejudicing around 25% of the British constituents as a direct result of an inept policy. An unrealistic "fan club" and last century jingoistic approach to such a serious topic is devoid of the necessary realpolitk and an ability to understand where the interests of the British constituency lie.

Because the government policy track record and the Bank of England's policy instruments are limited to money infusion and interest rates there are no policy instruments in the policy tool box to tackle the structural problems. For example, there are no policy instruments to provide incentives for the supply side to proactively pursue productivity enhancing investment. During the last 12 years we have witnessed the opposite with banks essentially avoiding SMEs, perceiving such investments to be more risk prone than asset purchases or doing deals with corporations for them to buy their shares back to elevate share values without in fact investing. The main error of the Bank of England, during the last 12 years, has been a failure to introduce more robust controls over the use of low base-rate funds under QE by requiring evidence of loans against economic return rates (ERR) and physical productivity impact (PPI) estimates. Such a condition should be a requirement for most investment related funds advanced. Advances for asset purchased should carry some sort of levy or an interest surcharge. The practice of purchasing "financial assets" in exchange for close to zero interest rate money has hollowed out corporation viability. This profligate behaviour of the government and Bank of England has landed the British population with tax rises when the ability to pay such taxes has been significantly lowered by government policies.

The excuse of Covid-19 having created a need for furloughs has a logic. However, this was not carried out in an effective manner since the government did nothing to provide incentives to strengthen the ability of companies to become more competitive by introducing higher productivity initiatives as a condition for this scheme. This, of course was not thought about, largely because monetarists see everything as purely monetary questions, always overlooking the question of fundamental physical productivity. A contributing reason is the significant imbalance between the "shopkeeper" segments (shops, pubs, restaurants), on the one hand, and the "supply side manufacturing" segments in the British economy, on the other. Having run down the supply side manufacturing side for over the last 50 years under monetarism, this structural problem compromises the speed with which production productivity incentives can recover and assist the overall real growth of the British economy. There are serious consequences for having become a "nation of shopkeepers". The only supply side policies with some utility are based on the production, accessibility and consumption analysis approach and can be found within Real Incomes Policy options.

19/04/2022: Today in the British parliament Boris Johnson attempted justify his refusal to resign by making the absurd assertion that he had to get on with the work of the United Kingdom leading the West's support for Ukraine. It is not unusual for such exaggerated hyperbole being uttered by this inveterate liar. If the United Kingdom has such a intent it should not supply arms and should place all efforts into seeking a peaceful settlement. To encourage Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian is exceptionally cowardly since it is they who will die. Those who drive such an idiotic mentality in Ukraine are the neo-Nazi brigades and politicians. However, by convincing Ukrainians to surrender will save more lives. The Russian demands are not excessive, a neutral Ukraine and autonomy for the Donbass republics. Neutrality was a part of the Ukrainian constitution when it was formed but under the influence of the neo-Nazis, membership of NATO was written into their new constitution, following the USA-coordinated bloody coup which overthrew a democractally elected Ukrainian government in 2014. Rather than train fanatical neo-Nazi brigades in the Ukraine on how to kill, the UK should be taking action to reduce the power of these elements in Ukrainian society. This will be difficult with such groups running "educational" initiatives for many years that are similar to Hitler Youth. These initiatives emphasize purity of race and point out the problems associated with ethnic minorities such as Russian-speakers. Boris Johnson's bravado is as ridiculous as it is irresponsible, given that all of his actions parallel those of Chaimberlan in appeasing the agressors. Johnson appeases a Ukrainian government that initiated a war against the civilians of the Donbass in 2014 and to date over 15,000 have perished. These facts only increase the justififcation that Johnson should resign because he is augmenting the security risks facing this country and the EU.

19/04/2022: Far from being a defensive alliance, the continual breaching by NATO of the very first Article of its Treaty reflects a proactive offensive organization. Article 1 of the NATO Treaty states:

"Article 1: The Parties undertake, as set forth in the Charter of the United Nations, to settle any international dispute in which they may be involved by peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security and justice are not endangered, and to refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force in any manner inconsistent with the purposes of the United Nations."

In the case of 9/11 the USA attacked Iraq, a country with no connection to this event. When, in 2007, President Putin proposed a broader and safer strategic security framework at the Munich Conference on Security Policy, NATO's response was to insult Putin by ignoring this peace-seeking proposal and to continue to expand NATO beyond what had been agreed to following the undertakings related to the Unification of Germany. NATO's attack on Libya and Yugoslavia were also in breach of Article 1. Currently, with the Ukrainian crisis NATO is not seeking a peaceful resolution but is continuing to arm Ukraine so as to sustain warfare and placing Ukrainian lives at risk.

Just as the USA has frequently broken several international agreements and undertakings from security agreements to climate change, so NATO has behaved in a manner which reflects an ability not to honour its commitments laid out in the very first Article of its Treaty.

This behaviour makes participating countries proxies doe American foreign policy headed by the State Department. However, by participating in sanctions and the supply of military resources supporting an ongoing military conflict, not involving NATO members, the NATO partcipants are exposing themselves to justified attacks; hardly a way to avoid endangering peace, security and justice for the constituents of those countries.

The much cited Article 5 does not mean an attack on a NATO member automatically results in the combined effort of all countries to respond and repel such an attack. Article 5 makes it very clear that each member will make their own decision as to how they will react. The USA always seeks to have conflicts "managed" so as to distance them from American shores. In spite of the so-called "NATO nuclear umbrella" it is very unlikely, given the track record of America, that any American president would honour the provision of active nuclear protection because that would expose the USA itself to nuclear attack. The reality is that each country needs to be prepared to protect themselves because the realpolitik of war demands realism. This being the case it makes more sense to bring about a world wide conference to create a mutual strategic security framework which balances security concerns and interests of all and not just those of the USA.

The NATO suggested 2% of GNP allocations for defence which in essence bolster US arms sales needs to be reassessed. Russia spending just 10% of the US military budget has more advanced weapons. 2% of GNP would be better spent on policies in the economic and social realms to protect constituents from the ravages of the NATO stagflation that is enveloping the world as a result of NATO's transgressions of Article 1 and ignoring the legitimate concerns of the peropl of Russia.

19/04/2011: The Homes Secretary Priti Patel has pushed back against the Archbishop of Canterbury's recent intervention criticizing the Rwanda deal proclaiming that Rwanda plan critics " to offer their own solutions." Priti Patel is right on this score but the grotesque and searing banality of the inhumane decision by the government to send those seeking refuge from the conflicts, the House of Commons voted for and our troops participated in, in Africa and the Middle East, to Rwanda is shocking. It confirms the persistence of a colonial and racist mentality. The fact that Rwanda is notorious because of a recent genocidal explosion involving indigenous tribes does not hold out much hope for aliens arriving in that country. This is papered over by Patel and the Rwandans concerned since they are attracted by the money involved.

Most of those seeking refuge have suffered as a result on UK military action devastating their countries and destroying their economies, in most cases reducing per capita incomes by more than 50%. The UK offers such people, after helping destroying their economic prospects, the nightmare of being sent to a country with amongst the highest poverty rates in the world. What could go wrong? In stark contrast the government expressed no concern with the war that started by the Ukrainian government in 2014 against the Donbass region of Ukraine involving a creeping genocide where Ukrainian troops attacks civilians leading to the deaths of an estimate 14,000 Ukrainians at the hands of their own government. Because of the lack of concern with the implementation of the peaceful resolution to this conflict in the form of the Minsk agreement the British government helped train the very people carrying out the creeping genocide in the Donbass. In February the two Donbass republics requested help from Russia. Rather than intervene to advocate the peaceful solution through Minsk, the government has poured various types of arms into Ukraine and encouraged Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. In the meantime, Ukrainians escaping the violence and seeking refuge, it would seem, will not be sent to Rwanda but will be welcomed into UK households who will have received a grant from the government to facilitate. The stark contrast in treatment between types of refugees is shameful.

Priti Patel has never had the courage to go to the root of the problem. As a result she is "managing" the symptoms rather than addressing the causal factors. It seems to be quite beyond her intellectual capacity and that of Boris Johnson an his assorted ministers to analyse events from a systems perspective, that is, being able to understand the interactions and consequences of decisions and events. If, military conflict creates refugees, then the obvious solution is not to participate in or encourage such actions. Statecraft has to be moderated by realpolik and pragmatism. Just because the USA wants to create mayhem in a Middle Eastern country should not mean that we willingly join in the caper before weighing up the likely consequences such as millions of deaths of innocents and millions of refugees moving towards this country. When President Putin presented the Russian Federation's concerns about NATO expansion in 2007 beyond undertakings not to do this, the British government should have taken Putin's concerns seriously. Even in the face of an illegal USA-inspired coup in Ukraine against a democratically elected government in 2014, the UK government said little. Since the eight years of killing of innocent Russian-speaking civilians at the hands of the Ukrainian military in the Donbass became intolerable, Russia had to act. Rather than pressure for peace, the British government clamoured for yet more fighting and supplying arms to Ukraine. As a result we not only have refugees from Africa and the Middle East, attempting to cross the Channel in dingies but we have Ukrainians flying in as well. The causal factors are self-evident and so is the responsibility for these tragedies lying with the British government. So, the solution is for the government to change its general attitude with respect to the ease with which its decisions, or lack of decisions, results in the wholesale murder of civilians. In the light of this massive responsibility for ruining the livlihoods of millions of people, the least that could be done would be for Britain to help reconstruct the countries it has willingly helped ruin. This would also help reverse refugee flows. Until the government changes its bias for aggressive ways and lack of consideration for the lives of others, so this refugee problem will never go away.

Most assume that we do not exist to be cannon fodder for rival armies or adherents to different religions or to be supporters of Britain's tiny factional private political parties whose membership does not surpass 1% of the British electorate. Most assume they are not here to be herded into becoming associated with one group advocating cancellation of others or, indeed, being of the canceled group. In terms of mutual strategic security the rational position is to secure a balance rather than an increasing imbalance with one side expanding and encroaching on the concerns of the other. Once there is balance, any potential imbalance or concerns can be approached and resolved through the identification of mutual interests so as to achieve conflict avoidance as opposed to going too far and having to deal with conflict resolution and the attendant issues such as refugees.

Current list of Notes (pdfs) responding to questions on the British Strategic Review:

1. Some aspects of inflation
2. From earned income to pauperism and back
3. Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis
4. Technology, technique and real incomes

18/04/2022: Last Friday, the economist Hector McNeill was interviewed by Nevit Turk, APEurope Economic Correspondent. McNeill provided some important insights into the latest revelations emanating from the SEEL's Strategic Decision Analysis Group's work on the Real Incomes Approach to economics. The most notable is that quantitative easing has never been an initiative that grows real incomes but was simply a transfer of money to corporations and banks in exchange for largely worthless financial assets. As a result, Bank of England policy removed all incentives for companies and banks to become more competitive and innovative in the supply side production of goods. This is because rather than invest such funds in production they could earn more money, with little effort, by purchasing assets and buying back their own shares to bolster executive and shareholder income. QE has not supported SMEs and supply side productive investment and this has contributed to a general stagnation of the economy and a decline in the purchasing power of wages. This is why we now face a serious cost of living crisis because the government, rather than understanding the extent of this policy-imposed disaster is now pursuing an ideological distractive foreign policy of imposing sanctions on Russia. This behaviour has contributed to a generalized global rise in energy and food prices. This crisis has been further exacerbated as a result of the steep rises in rentals and prices of housing and commercial premises directly attributable to the 12 years of QE and speculative asset price rises in land and real estate markets. Therefore, as a direct result of government policies and an inept Bank of England's QE, we will see the failure of many SMEs as well as the condemnation of around 12 million households (25% of total) into dire cost of living circumstances. This affects some 15-20 million voters; the electoral prospects of this government are extremely poor.

This bizarre behaviour is the sign of extreme incompetence as the government cascades, stumbling forwards by pointing to the next challenge as opposed to solving the last ones. This tragi-comedy of errors is not the sign of mature and rational governance. The cost to the social and economic wellbeing of the British constituency is out of all proportion to difficult to identity benefits of this government remaining in office.

McNeill stressed that for government monetary policy to have a positive role it needs to build in proactive incentives that require a verifiable productivity response by companies receiving any grants. In a rational economic management scenario, government would substitute "give-aways" with evaluated plans for higher corporate productivity which include verifiable equivalent rises in wages and the attainment of price moderation resulting from more optimized resources allocation. This would encourage a positive role of genuine competition and the attainment of what the Real Incomes school refers to as a "positive systemic consistency". Positive systemic consistence is the state of affairs where all benefit as opposed to the somewhat ridiculous zero-sum mentality of the government.

For example, QE and the Chancellor's "super reductions" are no more than vote harvesting give-aways. QE has been a massive give-away and it has harvested close to zero productivity rises within the economy, wages have stagnated. This policy behaviour and the standard zero-sum mentality of monetarists leads the Chancellor to seriously justify this horrendous waste of public money as requiring tax rises on those who have seen their real income decline over the last 25 years. A recent Note on Monetarism and The Real Economy, Number 3, "Why the Bank of England cannot solve the cost of living crisis" link in in the box on right, provides relevant insights to these questions. We will post the full interview after it has been issued for posting.

Viktor Medvedchuk
in hand cuffs
13/04/2022: It would seem that Boris Johnson will not resign for misleading parliament over partygate antics and will use the Ukrainian crisis to paper over yet further chasms arising from the pre-Covid economic crisis, the BREXIT failure and Covid corruption "chum-gate". However, he has opted for the wrong saviour in his increasingly vocal support for Ukraine and accusations leveled against Russia. It is becoming increasingly evident that president Zelensky is surrounded by nationalists who are likely to assassinate him if he attempts to come to a negotiated settlement with Russia. All along the nationalists have used spoiler tactics in the negotiations, so far, by constantly changing and going back on undertakings. These same elements have a gory penchant for torturing Russian prisoners and permitting members of nationalist battalions torture and murdering other captured Russians. The longer these extreme elements are encouraged and strengthened by the supply of weapons the more extreme these factions become. There is a level of illogic in their decisions and proclamations which intensify as they see that they are losing the military campaign in the Donbass which they initiated 8 years ago. Their fear of the Russian intent to go after the neo-Nazi elements has stoked their whole behaviour into a frenzied fanatical state which, of course, was always there. Now, however, it is emerging for all to see.

Their latest antic has been to avoid exchanging prisoners because too many Russian prisoners have been murdered and many of the rest have been tortured. This is why Red Cross prisoner visits were curtailed. To avoid the potential embarrassment of having this exposed they took typically extreme action. They placed Viktor Medvedchuk Chairman of an opposition party in the Ukrainian government under arrest. Medvedchuk is a human rights advocate and he was instrumental in arranging the early exchanges o prisoners in this conflict thereby gaining the gratitude of many Ukrainian and Russian military and their families. However, now that further such exchanges will become a source of negative publicity for this sick regime, president Zelensky has seriously suggested that they exchange this captured politician for a large number of captured Ukrainians held by Russia.
Oksana Marchenko
In desperation, Medvedchuk's wife, Oksana Marchenko, has nowhere to turn to for help in the so-called democracies of the USA, UK or Europe and she has appealed to Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to assist in freeing her husband. Just as Boris Johnson was highly critical of the Iranian government in the Nazanin Zaghari-Ratcliffe case, in this case he so far remains silent preferring to go for ridiculous photo opportunity shoots with Zelensky in the centre of Kiev. He apparently had authorized the provision of useless training for Ukrainian military vehicle drivers when such vehicles, in the current conflict, have turned out to be mobile metal coffins; such training is totally useless (see previous article below).

Besides closing down independent TV stations, some time ago, President Zelensky proceeds with his demonstration of democratic principles by praising the Ukrainian agents for capturing and imprisoning Viktor Medvedchuk Chairman in his social media account. A fellow member of his opposition party stated, some time ago, that the "security" services were planning to assassinate Medvedchuk.

Last week shortly after the Russian contingents left Bucha, another Ukrainian politician, Alexander Rzhavsky, a veteran Ukrainian politician, had expressed that fact that he thought he was safe. He was assassinated shortly after Ukrainian troops entered Bucha.

Although people make the absurd claim that by assisting Ukraine they are defending European democracy it is notable that UK corporate media have tended to ignore the rampant abuse, violence and attacks on democracy under Zelensky. Defending democracy has simply no validity as a reason to assist this corrupt government.

Boris Johnson's ability to ignore the reality of "democracy" in Ukraine is an alarming act of appeasement of this country to the neo-Nazi elements in Ukraine who are eroding any semblance of democracy rapidly. Johnson's appeasement is an affront to all families who lost loved ones in Britain, during Second World War fighting this scourge. Such appeasement is an insult to the millions of Roma, Jews, Russians and Poles who perished at the hands of the Nazis and the Ukrainian nationalist collaborators. Johnson's ability ignore all of this causes us to realize that below the jovial articulate cheer leader image dwells a nasty, ignorant an brutish piece of work who only thinks about his own survival. It is a wonder how the 120,000 members of this tiny factional party, making up less than 0.23% of the electorate, can continue to support such a person. This also raises the question of why does our so-called democracy allow such a tiny faction bring about such a disatrous leadership for the other 99.77% of the electorate? Johnoson's untenable position is continuing to erode, in any case, as his wild decisions on sanctions have the direct effect of undermining the British economy. The whole of the British parliamentary Conservative party and the whole of the Labour party, in their ignorance, support Johnson's Ukrainian jaunts but in doing so they undermine the future wellbeing and security of the people of this country. Johnson does, however, have very important work to do and this is packing his bags and leaving No. 10.

12/04/2022: Ukrainian troops will arrive in the UK for armoured vehicle training with the British military, the government confirmed today. UK Armed Forces Minister James Heappey said the UK would step up its support for Ukraine’s Army stating, "There's 120 armoured vehicles that are in the process of being made ready and the Ukrainian troops that will operate them will arrive in the UK in the next few days to learn how to drive and command those vehicles."

This Dad's Army approach does not appear to be aware of the lessons learned during this recent Russia-Ukrainian conflict. All mobile military vehicles such as tanks, troop carriers and kit transporters have all degenerated into mobile metal coffins for too many dead Ukrainians. This was particularly apparent last night, around 50 Ukrainian military lost their lives by relying on such vehicles to break out of their positions in North East Mariupol. Observing this, the following contingent of around 40 Ukrainians sensibly laid down their arms. All such vehicles are sitting ducks. The Russian contingents don't confront them on the ground with their own tanks, or even infantry using shoulder-launched misssiles. They are using anti-vehicle missiles launched from helicopter gun ships, such as versions of the KA-50 series, that are so far away that they normally cannot be detected. The kill rate is 100%.

We have already reported these facts, repeated here because of the completely inappropriate "help" being provided by the UK government to train Ukrainian soldiers to drive and operate these mobile metal coffins. Clearly this has not been well throught out. Like most government "support" it does not surpass virtue signalling to a public who appear to be unaware of the real state of affairs. This is because of government propaganda carried by corporate media. At the same time, this "training" initative is an act of irresponsibility in bolstering the confidence of trainees to think that this training is of any practical use in a modern combat situation. This initiative is typical of a government who seems to treat everything as a sport of generating headlines but, in reality, they are very much out of their depth on vital strategic and tactical questions. Clearly, people who are not to be relied upon.

In recent weeks intel agencies have admitted that they are involved in disseminating misrepresentations of events, largely to the public. In addition, they have also, in a somewhat child like manner, stated that they have published intel to demonstrate to the Russians just how much they know of Russia's intent and capabilities as a "warning " to Russia. However, the majority of intel statements on Russian intent and capabilities have ALL turned out to be wrong and constitute no more than smoking room scenarios invented over glasses of port and the odd cigar. The so-called "experts" who appear frequently on the UK media channels, including retired military and MPs who happen to be toy military "reservists" spout the same misleading drivel. Russian declarations of intent have been abundantly clear and the Russian Federation MOD briefings have turned out to be precise and accurate. But for some reason our intel and politicians play a game of second-guessing what the Russians are about when this has been made abundantly clear. The other absurdity is the notion that people do not understand what is in "Putin's head". Putin has explained this since his Munich statement in 2007. Our intel might start with that. When they have read it, they should then ask why NATO refused to accommodate Putin's eminently reasonable and diplomatically expressed concerns on behalf of the people of Russia. Their refusal to do so and the UK governemnt lack of common sense realpolitik, essential to defend the interests of the people of Britain, has now landed us with inflation and an accelerating rise in the cost of living. In is notable that our intel on a topic that, is blindingly obvious to strategists, did not string these obvious dots together. Our intel appears to be extremely academic and void to worldy wise experience on the essentials on economic survival and the essentials of social stability in the United Kingdom.

The problem with all of this is that our intel has admitted to being completely politicized and more concerned with inventing and bolstering a Government narrative to mislead the pubic, than do their job in protecting the interests of the British population. This is the ideal environment for Boris Johnson to embellish this nonsense with his own articulate but buffoonish additions which he adds with a straight face in his Churchillian act. This amateurishness drains our international standing, already much depleted by BREXIT. The intel record over the last few years does raise the question as to their independence, and more particularly, their competence.

According to a briefing this weekend, the Russian military never had any intension of occupying Kiev. The concentration of Russian forces approaching Kiev was a decoy to focus Ukraine military efforts on this location to reduce the concentration of Ukrainian efforts and supplies to the Donbass region. This was also used to identify locations of the main concentrations of Ukrainian military personnel and assets. This worked well although this approach resulted in some losses amongst Russian military in the Kiev theatre. The somewhat exaggerated claims of Jake Sullivan that the Ukrainians prevented Russian troops entering Kiev is false. If they had wished to they would have but the tactics applied by Ukrainian military of using human civilian shields would have resulted in massive civilian casualties. As has been stated the Russian actions are designed to minimize civilian casualties. The leadership and the media in the UK has constantly misinterpreted Russian tactics as "blunders" by assuming the strategic approach is unimaginative and that out-of-date kit is being used; all untrue.

The previous leader (see below) indicates how successful these Russian tactics have been. Readers who venture into this leader should come to the conclusion that supplying Ukraine with any military assets is a waste of time and will lead to more Ukrainian deaths. It is time to lay down the arms that remain and negotiate.

Update 10-11/04/2022: Slovakia supplied a S-300 defence system to Ukraine at the end of last week. Russian intel over the whole of Ukraine, and its frontiers, is good. As a result, this system was tracked on the way in and has already been destroyed by a Russian missile attack as well as a S-300 radar system set up at another location and activated by the Ukrainians as a decoy in an attempt to draw fire away from actual system location.
Here in the UK the leading media continue to misinform the British public by not giving air to the more or less established facts that the hospital and theatre attacks in Mariupol were mounted by Ukrainian nationalist battalions and the latest railway station attack in Kramatorsk in the Donetsk Republic was also executed by Ukrainians making use of two older versions of missiles which are no longer used by the Russian military (older versions of the Tochka-U missiles) but still making up part of the Ukrainian military inventory. The Bucha case, on balance, appears to be yet another false flag, widely distributed via a gullible media, but evidence is suggesting this to be a Ukrainian propaganda stunt. Most of the destruction of Mariupol is the result of Ukrainian action. This is also related to the fact that the nationalist battalions had decided to not allow Mariupol, an important Donetsk Republic city, be taken by the Donetsk fighters and they made the mistake of increasing their contingents there with close-to fanatical neo-Nazi brigade elements and a large contingent of foreign mercenaries. These groups are running out of munitions. The command elements of these brigades are considered by the Ukraine government to be of some importance because there have attempted on several occasions to help the senior command escape from Mariupol. In each case, involving several helicopters and a ship, the Russians downed the helicopters and captured the ship.
Update 13/04/2022: As predicted Russian SF units liberated all of the crews of the ships captures by nationalist Ukrainians in Mariupol. Russia has now taken liberated all of the commercial haebour.
Now (09-10/04/2022) the Ukrainian battalions have hi-jacked 2 ships in Mariupol harbour and it is expected that they will attempt to apply their common tactic of using civilians as shields and use the crew as bargaining chips to gain safe passage. However, Russian SF units are experienced in handling such situations. It is noticeable that these local commands are quite willing to abandon their own troops and the mercenaries to their own devices. This is likely to result in more deaths of Ukrainian civilians at their hands as they become more desparate.

If one traces the story of conflict since 2013 in Ukraine, propaganda has become an important vehicle because of the belief that swaying public opinion in the West will help gather support for any decision linked to military support. This simplistic notion is promoted by both the US State Department and the CIA and the UK is providing advice on content. The content of the presentations of Zelensky to each representative assembly, via video link, were obviously not prepared by Ukrainian advisers but were shaped according to the respective assemblies in a crude manner, geared to emotive mind control. However, these processes consist of no more than words and largely worthless perspectives glorifyng the notion of the "brave"civilian armed with a pea shooter confronting a modern military machine. Such absurd and frankly irresponsible notions have a very short half-life as reality dawns, and as the Ukrainian military infrastructure crumbles the world is realising that the West's notion of military defence, or offence, consists of no more than words and futile provisions orchestrated by NATO (see below) which exacerbate the situation of Ukrainians whom they claim to support.

However, the real picture is very muddy in that if one includes the shelling and shooting at people using humanitarian corridors, where many have been killed, the Ukrainian military have been responsible for more deaths of their own Ukrainian citizen than the Russians; this is a fact. Their free abandon and willingness to murder Ukrainian citizens for the sake of producing a "convincing" propaganda video is shocking but it also exposes the mindset of these neo-Nazi fanatics. These people really exist and are not figments of imagination of Russian-speakers who have been murdered or lost family members in the Donbass and, indeed, elsewhere in Ukraine.

In this context the British corporate media does an injustice to the people of this country through their provision of ample coverage of this Ukrainian propaganda "as is", as opposed to serving the people by investigating events before broadcasting headlines manufactured in Ukraine. The devastation of domestic premises in the Donbass continues to be far greater than anything in the rest of the Ukraine, also carried out by the Ukrainian battalions. The striking difference between the Russian and Ukrainian actions is that the Ukrainians openly admit to targeting civilians usually as parts of neo-Nazi rants. In the Donbass over 15,000 people have been killed since 2014 and at least an additional 450 (estimate) in the last month at the hands of the Ukrainian military.

24/02/2022 - 14/4/2022

Item class
Military vehicles
Field guns/mortars
Surface to air missiles
Multiple rocket launchers
Sources: MOD RF;
RP: TASS; Spunik; RT and Pravda.

SASI (Southern Atlantic Strategic Intelligence) estimates that Ukraine has now effectively lost all operational military assets in the classes in the table on the left. A large proportion of assets listed in the official Ukrainian military audit of military equipment is inoperable1 because of the lack of maintenance over the last decade. A proportion of captured Ukrainian tanks were transferred to the Donbass groups. By destroying the main equipment maintenance centres and parts warehouses, Russia completed the job.

The reality is that Ukraine has lost the military contest about 4 weeks ago and currently has no effective systems West of the Donbass to continue fighting except with small arms. SASI estimate that the Donbass will be fully liberated within 20-25 days.

The excessive amount of inoperable military assets in Ukraine is largely the result of corruption. Some of the funds supplied for military equipment maintenance were paid back as "political contributions" and much was diverted into personal offshore accounts and used to purchase real estate in offshore locations such as London.

1 Especially tanks & all vehicle types

The objective of the military operation was declared at the outset to demilitarize Ukraine and help the Donbass region stop the genocide Ukraine has subjected the citizens of Donetsk and Lugansk to for over 8 years. Thus Russia was not starting a war is was joining a war with the objective of terminating it. To do this Russia had to eliminate Ukraine's military capacity and this initial phase was completed about 2 weeks ago (see box on the left).

The early experience with facing Ukrainian shoulder-launched anti-tank and aeroplane missiles has indicated that they have not been as effective as the UK media suggests. In a well publicized online video an attack, based on shoulder-launched anti-tank missiles, on a collection of about eleven Russian tanks did show some impressive explosions and flashes, however, the combination of the Russian ERP (Explosive Reactive Armour) tank covers and the speed of modern Russian tanks, meant that by the end of the video all of the tanks, including those targeted, withdrew in safety from the "kill zone"; the zone was empty and no wrecks left behind. In terms of shoulder-launched anti-aircraft missiles, there were some Ukrainian hits but Russian pilots have learned to reduce their effect through specific maneuvers and flying higher. It is evident that throughout the conflict the Russians have successfully changed their tactics to nullify the impact of shoulder-launched missiles of all types by turning to virtually over-the-horizon use of, for example, KA-50 variant on the helicopter gun ship which also carry guided anti-tank missiles. These can operate at least 5 kilometers from their targets and out of range of shoulder launched anti-aircraft missiles. In the last couple of weeks these have proven to be very effective in eliminating all Ukrainian vehicles and tanks detected with a 100% kill rate. The count of lost Ukraine tanks was some 2,000 in mid March it is now 2,139 and this figure continues to increase. There are, however, very few operational tanks left (see box on left). Any supplies of new tanks will be sitting ducks.

The encircling of the Ukrainians attacking the Donbass is imagined by "military experts" in the West to involve an old-fashion tank battle. However, this is more than unlikely to come about since Russia continues to eliminate Ukrainian tanks from a safe distance. The Ukrainians will try and resort to drones and the advanced Turkish missile carrying versions (Bayraktar TB2). However, the Russian kill rate of these has risen sharply during the last five weeks. It is not yet clear how the Russians are succeeding in detecting and downing them so easily. However, they have succeeded in downing over 443 drones of all types. In late February drones were inflicting damage on Russian armour but as from mid-March they have become virtually useless. While ill-informed Western "military experts" state that the Russians are stuck because they are deploying Soviet style tactics, the evidence shows quite the reverse. So far the Russian military have done exactly what they stated they would do. They have also adapted to the changing circumstances on the ground rapidly as a result of an effective command structure and their concern for not harming civilians. They have also been aided by the increasing lack of utility of what the West has to offer in terms of very expensive armaments, which, in reality have contributed greatly to rendering of the Ukrainian military as increasingly defenseless.

The whole Western strategy is one of strident and somewhat pathological romaticism with countless comfortably seated armchair strategists encouraging the Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian against impossible odds. The only solution, since the onset of this action, has been for the West to encourage Ukraine to stop fighting and negotiate. The rising hysteria and so-called "help" constitutes no more than virtue signalling for domestic constituents bolstered by an extraordinarily dishonest media As a result there has been a rising count of Ukrainian deaths, paradoxically, increasingly at the hands of the Ukrainian battalions. This gory reality needs to be disseminated to the British public. Therefore British constituents would be able to rightfully bring more pressure on the UK government to terminate its grand standing and virtue signalling and to call for all of this madness to be terminated. This, in the current fanatical hysteria and attendant cancel culture driven, in part, by the bizarre antics of Boris Johnson, would take a level of political courage. This would have to stand on the logic of the truth or reality of the situation. Unfortunately the national leadership has a well known problem with truth. As result, the suffering of all continues and it will get worse until this government comes to its senses. Paradoxically, it will come to its senses when the impact of senseless sanctions on Russia rebound as a sharply rising cost of living leading to social discontent. Attempting to blame self-imposed disasters on others for what has become a perennial inability of the government to prioritize the wellbeing of the British population no longer has any traction. This government is very unlikely to be returned at the next election.

The government is losing control over economic stability as a result of irresponsible leadership and an incompetent management of the economy. In terms of irresponsible leadership the continued blind insistence of the UK government in taking a lead in encouraging sanctions against Russia is causing, irrespective of how much this country might be importing from Russia, significant rises in the international prices of commodities including food, fertilizer, petroleum and gas. The impacts within the UK will be an increased pauperism, stagflation and a deeper negative impact added to already negative impacts of Covid and BREXIT. Inflation rates will rise as a direct result of government inability to exercise more responsible foreign policy aligned to the realpolitik of the interests of the British population rather than to a largely ideological commitment to a strategic security arrangement that intentionally excludes the population of Russia while declaring that we have nothing against the Russian people. In terms of a responsible foreign policy our USA-Euro-centric fixation is driving the world into a depression which will exacerbate an already precarious state of affairs in low income countries created by Covid and supply chain disruptions and climate change.

On the side of economic decision making, Rishi Sunak recently demonstrated a shocking lack of understanding the real impacts of the impending rises in inflation. His insistence that his imposed £200 payment to "help" people is not a loan exposed a serious gap in his analytical abilities. It is a loan and it will result in people paying back more in real terms than they received from the Treasury. This mindset, however, is typical of monetarists who think in nominal terms and static budgets. This is why the Bank of England does not have the capability to moderate the surge in inflation, simply because monetary policy does not possess the required policy instruments to influence inflation.

Notes on Monetarism and the Real Economy are free briefs (pdfs) that are sent to subscribers to the British Strategic Review. We provide links to these here. The first one issued last February mentions some aspects concerning inflation and the second, released today (09/04/2022), reviews the state of incomes and explains why Rishi Sunak is so confused with respect to ways to help low income families.

The UK government and media are, on balance, attempting to mislead the people of this country concerning the nature of the Ukrainian crisis by completely ignoring the context of why this has happened and having understood this people would be in a better position to understand what should be done. It is certainly not encouraging Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. The virtue signalling of sanctions will only damage our own economic prospects. The EU and the USA are in reality irrational and they are blowing out of proportion the crudely jumbled together propaganda emanating from Ukraine as established facts. As a result, as in our government's naive appeasement of Hitler in the past, the West is undermining all of its declared principles which were fought for during the Second World War against Nazism and Fascism. The actual result of the West's own media propaganda and government misinformation seeks to ignore the facts on the ground that have led up to the current military action. The West is inadvertently or purposefully - the actual state is unclear - providing a proactive support for a rising Nazism nurtured over time in Ukraine and which is demonstrating a fanaticism only witnessed in the murder of thousands of Roma, Jews, Poles and Russians at the hands of Ukrainian nationalists in the 1940s.

Oliver Stone's documentary, "Ukraine on Fire" provides the historical context that has shaped the conditions for the current crisis. If the reader wishes to gain a more profound insight on the cause of the current military action it is well worth watching this objective documentary. Oliver Stone spells out in a dispassionate tone, events and decision shaping this tragedy and those watching the documentary are left to make up their own minds. This is very different from our current media coverage which, in general, only misleads the people of this country.

We have linked to the Global Research page which contains the link to this important documentary. Click on the image on the left above to access.

While the Westminster bubble in a fit of fanaticism and hysteria is encouraging Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian while sending money and "lethal" weapons to Ukraine which will ensure more of them die. We need to also recall that our glorious armchair warriors have been supporting the sale of UK arms to Saudi Arabia and provide technical military support to bomb Yemen murdering countless men, women and children while providing humanitarian aid to those suffering as a result (that way round it is more profitable) it is encouraging that some politicians have avoided becoming tainted in this wholesale immorality and cowardice.

A politician who has never been tainted by any support of bloody aggression, illegal invasions and a general lack of humanity is Jeremy Corbyn. In a morass of hysterical individuals willingly encouraging yet further bloodshed declared on a daily basis from the benches of the House of Commons, Jeremy Corbyn has spent most of his time opposing this approach to national and foreign policy. He is the only MP to address the World Peace Conference pointing out the futility and evil of this approach to foreign policy and internationally he is well-regarded. The same cannot be said for Boris Johnson or, indeed, Keir Starmer, who considers those in support of peaceful resolutions to potential or actual conflict to be wrong. The proactive promotion of sanctions against Russia are largely virtue signalling to please the USA but they simply have not been thought though by an intellectually-challenged government and parliamentarians who support sanctions that are already backfiring on the British economy. As a result the nation is being forced into a swamp of stagflation and increasing pauperism. Naturally the government is "blaming" Russia but it is their sanctions that are causing the problem given that Russia is still supplying gas at their contract price which now is around 20% of the market price.

All of the ventures this country have entered into and which Jeremy Corbyn opposed stating they would go wrong, did go wrong causing the human suffering that he predicted. While justifying extreme violence as "humanitarian interventions" our shabby parliament has supported ventures that have murdered hundreds of thousand of people on a scale that far outstrips the events in Ukraine by hundreds of thousands more deaths of innocents.

We witnessed the same cross-party hysterics and aggression leveled against Corbyn on the absurd basis that he is antisemitic. This accusation is simply ridiculous. Corbyn's refusal to apologize was justified on the basis that he had nothing to apologize for given that the whole situation developed as the result a policial campaign cooked up by Neobs (Neo-Blairites) and the Israeli government's campaign against Corbyn initiated by Benjamin Netanyahu. As we all know, Netanyahu is currently facing corruption charges.

"The Peace & Justice Project", Jeremy Corbyn's inspired movement is supporting the "El Sueño Existe" festival to be held in Machynlleth, Wales on 5th-7th August, 2022. The Festival Programme 2022 will carry the main themes of El Salvador & Peace and Climate Justice. There will be a full programme of music, informative political workshops, cultural workshops, dance, poetry, theatre, visual art, a full kids’ and family programme, Latin American foods and drinks. The band "Lokandes" will be performing and there will be over 30 workshops exploring grassroots communities in Latin America, and the struggles for peace and climate justice that affect us all. Speakers range from academics, journalists, artists, activists, film makers, poets, campaigners etc. bringing a huge wealth of experience and commitment to the festival. Among cultural workshops "Las Juanas" will be performing a new piece "Grietas/Cracks", and Adam Feinstein will explore the work of the great modern Salvadorean poet, Roque Dalton, whilst a number of Chilean poets will share their work and reflections. The Festival has expressed delight to have the support from a number of campaign organizations, including Jeremy Corbyn's "Peace and Justice Project" Justice Mexico Now!, Nicaragua Solidarity Campaign, Environmental Network for Central America, Alborada, Music for Hope, El Salvador Network etc. And there is so much more.

In a world being blown apart by notions of brave citizens facing war machines and glorification of futile resistance it is encouraging to find there are others with more profound values which bring people together. The world needs this sort of communion more than ever but unfortunately we have elected a government incapable of understanding what this means, when their heroine declared that, "..there is no such thing as society!" and whose leader considers the economy to operate on the basis of greed.

There is more to life than wasting time being affronted by these ranting politicians who hurl insults rather than answer questions and who misrepresent rather than analyse in a genuine quest for truth. It makes a welcomed change to see people organizing a transglobal festival dedicated to peace and genuine security with no ranting, no insults just an environment of mutual respect and human enjoyment. Think about it.

According to the Strategic Decision Analysis Group (SDAG) at SEEL, Russia is likely to achieve world leadership in its balance of payments (BOP) position even within 2022.

Currently Russia has the third position in the world in terms of its BOP at + US$113.5 billion. Germany and Japan are world BOP leaders with + US$289.9 billion and + US$ 174.4 billion respectvely. SDAG analysts have stated that the combination of rising petroleum and other Russian commodity prices, precipitated by US-led sanctions but countered by Russia's logical economic strategic responses, including a willingness to invest effectively in import substitution activities, will create a likely surplus for Russia of between + US$ 150 billion to + US$ 320 billion, promoting Russia into world BOP leadership. In the meantime, the USA comes out at the bottom of the league table with a massive negative gaping hole of - US$490 billion deficit and the United Kingdom, whose government is the leading advocate for supporting US-inspired sanctions and adding their own, while encouraging the Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian, has the second worse position after the USA with a negative BOP of - US$123 billion. Even Zimbabwe is doing better than the USA and UK in terms of BOP performance.

SDAG reports that the state of affairs of the USA and UK is a result of these countries having far too few export options as a direct result of monetarism and globalization and, of late, quantitative easing, having depleted industry and manufacturing, deskilling the workforce and raising income disparty and poverty over the last 50 years. During this time politians played down the significance of the BOP by stating that the growing BOP deficits were being compensated by "financial services". This assertion, in reality, has no logic and this took hold solely as a result of the strength of the financial lobby over government policy decision-making since the early 1970s. A more detailed review of this process can be found in the latest edition of the "British Strategic Review".

Stringers have a record of instantaneous worldwide delivery of news of critical events with conventional reporters turning up, sometimes, days or weeks later ...

The sequence of events surrounding the recent Bucha controversy where Russia has been accused of murdering many civilians do not appear to add up.
Preparatory scene of a well-documened Syrian White Helmet false flag event..all part of Boris' way of "fighting" a war by, as usual, misleading the people of this country ...'
Russian troops evacuated Bucha on 30th March and the day after the Mayor reported all to be in order. Ukraine is covered with "stringers" or civilians with smart phones able to report anything as spoken word, photos or videos. The Internet was operational the whole time Russia occupied the town but there were no reports from Bucha concerning any issues at all. If the so-called "massacre" had occurred as the Russians left, the world would have heard about this on 31st March, at the latest.

It was only after Ukrainian troops and Ukrainian intel agents turned up 2 days later, that 4 days after the Russians had withdrawn, the said "atrocity" turned up in videos and in carefully prepared films by Ukrainian agents on the ground. It was also notable that throughout the West politicians were reading from prepared statements on an "unexpected" incident that had just happened, all using roughly the same terminology to describe the events.

The notable issue is that those supporting Russians, or who were neutral, tended to wear white arm bands or ribbons. All of the "dead" bodies filmed appeared to have white arm bands or ribbons. It is notable that those collecting the bodies were removing these arm bands and ribbons, why? So the question is, "Why would the Russian troops kill those who support them or are no danger to them?" and the other question is, "Why are the Ukrainians removing the white arm bands and ribbons?"

On balance, given the experience of the extremes Ukrainian agents have gone to in Mariupol to mount false flag events in a brutal but amateurish way, it is important, in this conflict, not to take anything emerging as "evidence", at face value. In Mariupol Ukrainian agents were actually sacrificing, that is, murdering their own Ukrainians civilians, in the hope of blaming Russians. This time, this fanatical fringe appears to have gone far further in an attempt to shock the "West" with an even bigger more brutal false flag. The general nature of these false flag events are a variant on the White Helmet efforts in Syria funded by the UK Foreign Office while Boris Johnson was foreign Secretary. It is all part of the dishonesty and misrepresentation applied to sway public opinion by making BREXIT, the economy and even warfare a media event and a battle for ratings. An outstanding question is, "Why has no such fuss been raised over the 15,000 people killed in the Donbass or concerning the mass graves discovered there and concerning the fact that there the Ukrainian troops are in fact targeting civilians?"

There will be a United Nations Security Council meeting on Tuesday (04/04/2022) in which this case will be reviewed.

(2022/04/05): [Slightly redacted to reduce the length of this article]

A Look at the United States' "Most Terrible War Crimes" Since World War 2

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky (2022/04/05) stated Russia was responsible for "the most terrible war crimes in the world" since World War II amid its ongoing special operation in Ukraine, and demanded Russia’s expulsion from UN bodies.
Zelensky was referring to apparent event in Bucha which claims Russian forces executed civilians before they withdrew last week.
The Russian Defense Ministry has dismissed the claims observing that Ukrainian forces had sheled this area abd police conducted an operation in Bucha to "clear the area of saboteurs and accomplices of Russian troops" prior to news emerging of the alleged massacre, both of which could also be responsible for the deaths.
No matter who is to blame, the claim that the Bucha incident represents the worst war crime since the total war that ended in 1945 is clear hyperbole, especially considering the incessant war-making of Ukraine’s patron, the United States.
To help jog the memory of the Ukrainian president, a few examples of US war crimes since 1945 that have not been investigated as crimes include:

No Gun Ri Massacre, July 1950 : Early in the Korean War, US soldiers from the 7th Cavalry Regiment attacked a large group of South Korean refugees at a railroad bridge near the village of No Gun Ri. According to the No Gun Ri Peace Foundation, between 250 and 300 people were killed, mostly women and children. This was covered up until 1999, when AP exposed it. The group massacred at No Gun Ri were by no means the only ones killed by US troops, either, as accusations of more than 200 separate incidents emerged when an investigative committee was launched in South Korea in 2008.

Operation Speedy Express, December 1968 - May 1969: The US Army’s 9th Infantry Division was responsible for “pacifying” a large part of the Mekong River Delta in order to reduce Vietnamese National Liberation Front operations near the South Vietnamese capital of Saigon (today Ho Chi Minh City).
During the six-month operation, the US troops carried out indiscriminate massacres of Vietnamese villages, using air assaults and nighttime riverine attacks to kill as many people as possible. The operation created between 5,000 and 7,000 civilian casualties, and that another 10,899 fighters had been killed. However, the distinction between fighters and civilians was often inflated in the fighters'’ favor during the Vietnam War, in order to make US commanders look more effective.

Highway of Death, February 1991

Demolished vehicles line Highway 80, also known as the "Highway of Death", the route fleeing Iraqi forces took as they retreated fom Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm.
In the final days of Operation Desert Storm, US aircraft annihilated as many as 2,000 vehicles on Highway 80, which runs north out of Kuwait City toward Basra, Iraq. A mix of civilians fleeing the war and Iraqi military units withdrawing from military operations were bombed during two days of airstrikes from February 25 to 27. As the fleeing soldiers were outside of combat, they were not legitimate military targets, according to former US Attorney General Ramsey Clark.
Estimates of the deaths vary wildly, from 200 to more than 1,000. In addition, American eyewitnesses reported that a US armored unit had opened fire on a group of 350 disarmed Iraqi soldiers who had surrendered after fleeing the carnage, killing an unknown number of them.

Bombing of Albanian Refugees at Koriša, May 1999

On May 14, 1999, US aircraft bombed a group of several hundred Albanian refugees near Koriša, Kosovo, who had been hiding in the hills for weeks. According to Yugoslav authorities, 87 refugees were killed in the strike. The US claimed they were being used as human shields by the Yugoslavs, but provided no evidence to back up its claim.

Second Battle of Fallujah, November 2004: The US Marine Corps, in conjunction with Special Operations forces, US air forces, and the British “Black Watch” battalion, launched a massive assault on the Iraqi city of Fallujah in November 2004 that destroyed almost the entire city. The stated objective was to weaken the Iraqi insurgency against the US-UK occupation, but the heavy use of artillery, airstrikes, and chemical weapons such as white phosphorus and incendiary bombs, and depleted uranium, resulted in massive civilian deaths. The Red Cross estimated that 800 civilians were killed in the battle, others in thefield estimated between 4,000 and 6,000 people were killed, mostly civilians; the Guardian noted was a higher death rate than Coventry and London faced during The Blitz bombing campaign by Germany in 1940.

Bombing of Kunduz Hospital, October 2015: On October 3, 2015, a US Air Force AC-130U gunship circled the Kunduz Trauma Center in the northern Afghan city of Kunduz, bombarding it with artillery and machine-gun fire for 30 minutes. The hospital was operated by Medecins Sans Frontieres, who denied US claims that Taliban fighters were hiding in the facility. Forty-two people were killed in the assault and another 33 went missing, including both MSF staff and patients. It emerged that the strike had been directly ordered by US commanders, then-US President Barack Obama apologized for the strike and paid the families of victims $6,000 each.

Bombing of al-Aghawat al-Jadidah, March 2017: It’s estimated that 40,000 civilians were killed during the nine-month siege of Mosul, Iraq, by Iraqi forces and the US-led anti-Daesh coalition, in large part due to the unrelenting artillery bombardment of the city. However, one particular incident stands out: a US airstrike on March 17, 2017, in the al-Aghawat al-Jadidah neighborhood in western Mosul. The US admitted a week after the attack that it had targeted “the location corresponding to allegations of civilian casualties.” Amnesty International reported that as many as 150 civilians were killed in the attack after having been told not to flee the city by US officials, although Iraqi reports say more than 300 were killed.

Siege of Raqqa, June - October 2017 : As the battle for Mosul was drawing to a close, the siege of Daesh’s de facto capital of Raqqa, Syria, began. US Marine Corps artillery pounded the city nonstop, firing 35,000 rounds in five months - more than were used in the 2003 invasion of Iraq. Twice during the bombardment, US M777 155 mm howitzers burned through their cannon barrels - an extremely rare feat, notes the Marine Corps Times. At the same time, US air forces dropped some 20,000 munitions across Iraq and Syria, most of which also fell on Raqqa. Investigations by Amnesty International and Airwars found that the total number of civilians killed in Raqqa was more than 1,600.

RT has an interesting leader on aspects of the decline of the dollar according to a Goldman Sachs internal note.

The US dollar is dealing with some of the same challenges that the British pound faced in the early 1900s, before it went into decline, Goldman Sachs said in a research note released on Thursday. The Wall Street bank warns that the greenback could lose its global dominance. According to the research seen by Business Insider, the move by Washington and its allies to freeze much of the Russian Central Bank’s foreign currency reserves has raised concerns that countries could start moving away from the dollar. Analysts explained the risk as due to worries about the power the dollar grants the US. The challenges that Goldman Sachs named include the fact that the US has a relatively small share of global trade compared to the dominance of its currency in global payments. Another issue is that the country has a deteriorating “net foreign asset position,” with rising foreign debts. In addition, the nation faces geopolitical problems, such as the conflict in Ukraine. The Goldman Sachs economists also said the nation’s large debts due to the fact that it is a big importer of goods could be a particular problem. The British pound, which was once the world’s reserve currency, was displaced by the US dollar in the middle of the 20th century. International investors were more reluctant to hold pounds after Britain amassed huge debts in World War II, the bank’s analysts noted. “If a reserve currency issuers' debt is allowed to grow relative to GDP, eventually foreigners may grow reluctant to hold more of it,” they wrote.

During an exchange between Alison Thewliss of the SNP and Rishi Sunak of the Conservative party during a recent Treasury Committee meeting, Thewliss stated that Sunak's imposed £200 payment, to be paid back in 5 lots of £40 each over 5 years, was a loan and people would have a problem paying it back under current circumstances. Sunak stated this was not a loan but a way of "helping people". Thewliss was right and Sunak was wrong in not admitting that this was a loan. The reason people will have difficulty paying back this loan is because of the rampant inflation which is likely to reach 10%. The value of the currency or purchasing power at between 5% and 10% inflation will decline over the 5 years pay back period meaning that taking into account the price rise of other household items of around 5% to 10% each year, each family will be out of pocket in real terms by around £32-£68 when they have "paid back" the imposed £200 loan!!

Hector McNeill, the economist who has pioneered the development of the real incomes approach to economics and who heads the Strategic Decision Analysis Group (SDAG) at SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab, stated that,

"The exchange between Alison Thewliss and Rishi Sunak was quite embarrassing since Sunak was clearly intellectually-challenged, exposing a shocking naivety with respect to his understanding of the real incomes impacts of inflation on time-based monetary transactions.

Inflation is the equivalent to a tax or invisible interest rate which drains the value from currency purchasing power and continually reduces the purchasing power of family disposable incomes. As a result, as far as constituents are concerned, the Treasury will receive more back than they paid out, because the cumulative impact of inflation causes them to end up being out of pocket in real terms.

This is unfair and therefore quite unacceptable.

His progressing with this loan is, in reality, somewhat dangerous because when people find they are paying back more than they received in real terms, they are likely to interpret this as Sunak having attempted to hoodwink them. While naively attempting to assure Alison Thewliss that this instrument was designed to "help" people Sunak will, in fact, end up making them pay an equivalent of a penalty on a loan that he has imposed on them.

This arbitrary imposition is quite an affront to the human rights and insult to the intelligence of the people of this country.

With time it will create serious difficulies for lower income segments as well as for this government.

Alison Thewliss' suggestion that a grant might be better was entirely correct since this would be a cleaner and genuinely more helpful option.
The Sunak fallacy

InflationItemPayment 1Payment 2Payment 3Payment 4Payment 5TotalExcess

Key: 1. Payments are nominal and real over 5 years;
2. The Nominal payments of £40 each year are cumulated by the inflation rates to generate the real amount paid back;
3. CMC is the cumulative coefficient (the inverse of discount coefficients);
4. The currency is assumed to be losing purchasing power at the interest rate stated;
5. The Excess is the additional amounts paid back, in real terms, by constituents, in each case more than received from the government;
6. Total real repayments on a nominal £200 loan, in the 5% and 10% inflation scenarios are £232 and £267.6 respectively.

This week's Economist newspaper has a peculiar article entitled, "Free exchange: The once and future king" and subtitled: "The dollar's clout may be in question, but the features that give currencies heft are unshakable".

We would suggest that in a week that has demonstrated a drastic decline in the majority of the world's faith in the reliability of the dollar, these titles are inappropriate. They reflect a leap of faith on the part of the Economist.

It is notable that the Economist's article refers to statistics produced by Barry Eichengreen of University of California, Berkeley, relating to the periods up to 2021. Now, in 2022, as everyone knows, we are beset by radically different circumstances where the repetitive attempts of the US government to use dollar transactions and reserves as weapons by issuing sanctions to deny selective countries exercise their free use. This is bad enough, but the increasingly aggressive stance of the US State Department now threatens a wider array of countries to support such sanctions in the shadow of other sanctions being applied to those who do not comply with US State Department wishes. What is absent from these exchanges is the US government making any effort to explain in simple economic and financial terms why their sanctions should be supported. This is because any cost-benefit analysis is irrelevant when the sole scenario under consideration by the US is an imposed economic prejudice. As a result, what the Economist might consider to be an untidy and limited alternative making use national currencies wins, hands down, on the basis of any cost-benefit analysis. Governments need to defend the interests of their constituents and not the perverse demands of a certain Anthony Blinken.

The Economist sees benefits in having a well-regulated currency exchanges that support liquidity, flexibility and reliability; we agree. According to SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab, the current information technology capabilities and their global reach mean that through Commodity Exchange Credits (CECs) the national currency alternatives can provide adequate liquidity, flexibility and reliability. Today the world has been forced to seek a broader concept of a global mutual strategic security taking in the human needs for food, fibre and energy and inputs to produce food, while enhancing sustainability in the face of climate change. The flexibility gained from the ability of switching between currencies delivers more reliability and security than the dollar, under current circumstances. Therefore contrary to the drift in the Economist article we predict that the movement away from the dollar will be relatively rapid, heralding a time when, on reflection the USA might pause sufficiently to realize that its self-righteous belligerence has offended too many of the people on the planet; it hasn't paid off.

The maintenance of the image of the "American way" started out under Bretton Woods as a fraudulent scheme where all the USA had to do was to print dollars to receive in turn goods that involved the use of the dedication of the resources and time of others. Robert Triffin (1911-1993), explained in 1959 that the dollar, as a national currency, was unsuitable as an international reserve currency because of the significant benefits bestowed on the country concerned as well as the practical difficulties of managing domestic needs with the needs for the reserve currency of other countries. He predicted that this setup would fail. Basically the size of the USA economy, in spite of its relatively large and expanding size, would be unable to embrace the potential growth needs of the world economy. For example, as the lead reserve currency, the entire world would need dollars to finance world trade. What is somewhat amazing is that few appeared to appreciate the full extent of the benefits Bretton Woods was bestowing on the future power of the USA. In 1959 Triffin's opinions were ignored, the actual risks facing the USA were not fully understood. The best summation of this new Imperial Preference model but applied to the notion of the dollar as an international reserve currency was made by Barry Eichengreen who explained,

"It costs only a few cents for the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to produce a $100 bill, but other countries had to pony up $100 of actual goods in order to obtain one."

This meant that by 1969, the USA with around 6% of the world population was consuming in excess of 40% of the world's resources. However, an inability to support the Gold Standard by exchanging excess dollar balances for gold, led to Nixon abandoning the old standard in 1971 and switching to the Eichengreen model of just printing worthless money. With this event the IMF became redundant and was about to close, but the OPEC steep petroleum price rise to blackmail countries supporting Israel in 1973, led to the IMF Managing Director Johans Witeveen supporting the OPEC strategy by proposing the recycling of dollars as well as also providing loans to countries to purchase petroleum. This led to a boost to globalization, greased hands of politicians in the West and increasing armament sales to the Middle Eastern countries. All of this occurred because Witeveen, unknown to many at the time, was in fact a Moslem assisting the Arab cause. Massive flows of funds into offshore "investment" began to deplete US and UK industrial centres and eroded employment prospects. The IMF impetus to recycle dollars resulted in the stagflation crisis enduring for over 20 years into the mid-1990s. Reagan and Thatcher, both following the emerging dollar-based logic of monetarism ended up trying to apply monetarism to stem inflation resulting in millions losing their homes and family farms. Income disparity, rose, investment and productivity declined and real incomes fell associated with a deskilling of the workforce. The agencies of the IMF and the World Bank continued to advocate monetarism for commodity-rich and low income agricultural economies but the "restructuring" demanded under loan conditions was not appropriate to low income countries where private operations could not be supported as a result of limited purchasing power. Loans became bargaining chips to force countries to change their economic policies in return for dollar loans whose value only relied on an increasingly aggressive State Department policy of blackmail. The notion of the American way becoming the international way was clearly a nightmare rather than a dream to be shared by all. Today the violence, agitation, social confrontation and social instability that is the USA today has become, for the rising percentage of the population that is sinking below reasonable levels of purchasing power, a nightmare and the American way remains as perhaps, it always was, a dream.

It is notable that when many give evidence before Congressional Committees they feel it necessary to spell out their biographies which invariably start with them having been born on the wrong side of the track and, in spite of facing hardship, "managed" to get an education by working countless jobs, such as scrubbing floors, and to "rise" to their current position, each and every one a shining example of the American way and therefore a member of the anointed. Why is it that Congress and other forums in the US waste so much time on expecting people to expose their personal complexes and lack of self confidence in this way? Why do they have to justify why they are there through an embarrassing self-promotion which has nothing to do with the topics on which evidence is to be given? Confident individuals contribute by applying logic to their statements on the topics in question and provide the evidence, when available. What side of the track they came from is irrelevant.

Daleep Singh, the US administration's Deputy National Security Advisor for International Economics, has been given the job of encouraging major countries to not enter into CEC trade arrangements with Russia which circumvent dollar-based sanctions. His last visit was to India where he failed to convince that government, on the basis of threats, to change course from its intent to participate in such trades. Singh has been the architect of the Russian sanctions but his whole experience has been within the presumptive environment of dollar supremacy and ability of US foreign policy to maintain this through blackmail. This is why the emergence of CECs was so unexpected. However, the discussion of the need to introduce CECs has been on the agenda recently for at least 20 years and a variant was in fact used in the 1960s. Singh only has the standard business and public admin economic training starting in the 1990s, as a result has a limited experience of these alternative economic theories. His professional experience is also narrow having been executive vice president and head of the markets group at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York then deputy assistant secretary of the Treasury for international affairs and then acting Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for Financial Markets in the Obama administration. Follow ups to his Indian visit suggest that in terms of cost-benefit assessments already shared between Russia, China and India, India is opting for CEC arrangements because the economic benefits far outweigh the risks associated with remaining dependent on dollar-based transactions. In addition, the USA's habit of threatening countries rather than deploying transparent strategic economic cost-benefit reviews, is becoming something which most countries want to avoid. Most, in reality, would like to see this sort of behaviour outlawed. Many consider the so-called "rules-based order" to be a code word for the State Department's enhanced diplomatic techniques or a sort of justification for economic water-boarding. This outcome suggests Singh's dedication of dollar-based sanctions will turn out to be a failure leading to a state of affairs where the USA will lose any leverage over China; except, of course, its usual posturing and threats.

The French Head of Military Intelligence sacked because he does not understand the subject...   Since banning the import of Russian petroleum the USA has increased its imports from Russia by 43%.....   The USA has "allowed" India to import Russian petroleum as long as it does not import "too much!"...   The USA has not sanctioned Russian fertilizer because it needs it ....

Gita Gopinath, IMF's Deputy Managing Director, has expressed the opinion that sanctions imposed on Russia threaten to gradually dilute the dominance of the U.S. dollar and could result in a more fragmented international monetary system with small islands of local currency transactions. However, Commodity Exchange Credits involving local currencies are already spreading beyond commodities affected by sanctions to take in most commodities and goods exchanged.

updated: 31/03/2022

Hunter Biden implicated in Ukrainian bio-warfare programme

The Russian Ministry of Defence has unveiled emails showing Hunter Biden's key role in funding dangerous pathogen research in Ukraine. The MoD has published correspondence between the US President’s son and employees of the US Department of Defense Threat Reduction Office, as well as Pentagon contractors in Ukraine. The emails suggest that Hunter Biden was instrumental in raising funds for the American contractors, Black & Veatch and Metabiota, enabling the companies to engage in pathogen studies on the territory of Ukraine, stated the head of the Russian radiation, chemical and biological defense forces, Lieutenant General Igor Kirillov.

Igor Kirillov recalled that earlier, in the course of Russia’s special operation to demilitarize and de-Nazify Ukraine, the military secured documents revealing an ongoing scheme of interaction between US government agencies, the current military-political leadership of the United States with Ukrainian biolabs. Documentary evidence points to the involvement of an investment fund managed by Hunter Biden in financing high-risk biological research in Ukraine. The Russian Defense Ministry presented the names of US officials involved in bioweapons in Ukraine. One was Robert Pope, at the time Director of the US Defense Department's Cooperative Threat Reduction Program at DTRA, which had sought to draw post-Soviet states into biological warfare. Pope spearheaded the "Central Depository of Especially Dangerous Microorganisms in Kiev," the general added. Joanna Wintrall, the head of the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) office at the US embassy in Kiev, led the coordination of military biological projects in Ukraine. "It was under her direct supervision that experiments with deadly pathogens within the framework of projects UP-4, UP-6, UP-8 were implemented in Ukraine, including the viruses of anthrax, Crimean-Congo hemorrhagic fever (CCHF), leptospirosis,". Lance Lippencott, Program Director at the Ukrainian division of the company Black & Veatch, acted as the main contact for officials of Ukraine’s Ministry of Defense and Health Ministry, said Konashenkov.
expansion is the result of the majority of countries losing faith in the dollar because it brings with it potential impositions from the USA to impose their so-called "rules-based order" which remains an aberration lying outside the terms of established international law leading to a justified mistrust.

Beyond primary agricultural and energy resources the CECs concept is already migrating into SECs or Service Exchange Credits which are building up to substitute the current dominant currencies of dollar, Euro and Yen as well as the pound. This will place a dent in the US and UK financial services sector turnovers and upset hedge fund operations reducing the balance of payments of these countries still further.

Attempting to punish whistle blowers, mishandling the Financial sanctions imposed on Russia threaten to gradually dilute the dominance of the U.S. dollar and could result in a more fragmented international monetary system,economy and creating an economic crisis and not responding to climate change are all issues which contribute to the existential crisis facing mankind. Our democratic systems increasingly controlled by corporate lobby interests and the exercise of corporate funding and ownership of media helps promote the intensification of corporate interests of the tiny private political parties that remain nominally in power as government or as "our"  decision-makers in parliament. The current government is controlled by MPs who are members of a tiny factional private political party with less that 125,000 members representative of 0.26% of the national electorate and, as a consequence, do not representative of the people of this country at all. However, corporate money and media is able, under our first past the post electoral system to lever the power of this pip-squeak faction into a position of almost absolute power over the people of this country - what could go wrong?

Seeking better ways for human existence should be our common mission ...

A concise description of the different evolutionary states of human existence can be found amongst Gnostic texts where one can recognize three basic levels of human existence:
  • An uninitiated relatively uninformed physical and emotional state marked by superstition, fantasy, fear and sometimes violence arising from real or imagined threats

  • An intellectual state where people turn their attention to analyzing how mankind and nature works and accumulating knowledge on what is beneficial and prejudicial to mankind's state

  • A spiritual state is where mankind applies accumulated knowledge to improving that state of existence for mankind
It is worth noting that the greatest distance is to be found between the physical and aggressive state of existence when fear could be used as a coercive force and the peaceful and productive state where reason prevails and knowledge is the driving force of man's actions. The state of freedom of people, in terms of thought and actions, is greatest where there is less fear and aggression and where the resolution and settlement of disputes are secured through peaceful means.

However, in the business of gaining political power, one of the techniques of controlling populations is a counter-evolutionary move where a crude and undisguised use of fear is used to justify disruption in people's lives resulting from the assertion that people need to be "protected" through a management of affairs so that they are free from all that might disturb or undermine a peaceful and prosperous existence. Disinformation has an important role in ensuring that people remain ill-informed so that they are more likely to succumb and voluntarily give up fundamental freedoms in exchange for a sought-for security. The conditions providing the motivation for such mass decisions are usually stimulated by politicians eagerly supported by the media who, in turn, are financed by corporations and who themselves exercise a strong lobby to influence political decisions.

One of the monuments to this distortion in direction away from a world of rationality and peaceful existence is the case of Julian Assange. Here is someone who simply passed on documents and videos of public interest to a means of accessibility for the public to this material so that they could discover the lies and levels of censorship being imposed by the USA and, indeed, the UK governments, on the people of the country. What the US and UK governments are attempting to do is serve the interests of the corporations who profit from the deeds exposed by the truth. This has nothing to do with law or breaches of security when the security being referred to is an ability of corporations to hide wholesale murder carried out in the name of our factional governments in the name of freedom, democracy and the rule of law. At home a wall of censorship banishes freedom, democracy is replaced by unrepresentative factional political parties and corporate decision-making and there is, in reality, no rule of law worthy of the name.

Economic policies over the last 50 years, based on monetarism, have driven all countries into debt, lowered productivity and generated increasing income disparity and poverty. Again, the inappropriate economic policies are driven by corporate lobbies who exert their power over factional unrepresentative political parties to ensure economic policies favour corporate shareholder interests. The same is true of climate change. In the late 1960s global environmental challenges were reviewed in detail but the subsequent collapse of the Breton Woods agreement in 1971 and the following price hikes in petroleum starting in 1973, resulted in politicians and corporation enjoying the benefits of petrodollars being recycled back and flowing into the coffers of political parties and corporations causing environmental realities to be forgotten.

Our existential challenges emanate from the corruption of the suppression of the truth for the sake of short term profits of corporations and since politicians only represent their interests, it is prudent for them to suppress the truth concerning matters of importance to the general public while pretending to represent their interests to the degree that they are elected at the next election so as to be able to continue to suppress the truth.

No good can come from the constant devouring of truth ...

Government censorship and lying is a mind control technique designed to herd the pubic into a state of fear that willingly supports the marginalization of any opposition and a blind, often fanatical, support for government decisions, founded on the willing distortion of the truth.

Humans are naturally curious and the ways in which they satisfy this curiosity is complex. Within a free society, it is normal for individuals to develop different viewpoints based on their life's experience, study, interpersonal influences, education, likes and dislikes. As a result, human culture possesses a very wide range of viewpoints on most issues. Because of these facts, as long as individuals are not aggressive or a danger to others, it is possible to review, in an analytical manner, different points of view not so much as projections from those with opposing viewpoints but rather as a voyage of discovery to identify and understand the origins of very different points of view on issues of significance. In the quest for building constructive and peaceful societies, to arrive at agreement on what constitute mutual or shared interests can often not be achieved if interest groups avoid doing the homework of understanding why it is that others have opposing viewpoints. Thus, the ability to arrive at a point in time when all constituents remain satisfied that their mutual interests are satisfied needs a high degree of receptivity and comprehension as opposed to assertion and a desire to kill the opinions of others.

We therefore require a cultural environment within which people are less judgmental and egotistic where there is a tolerance for a heterogeneity of ideas and points of view as the starting point of communications where no one is marginalized. Under common law and the notion of juries, the community conscience has well-developed notions of expected civil behaviour and invariably this involves the fair treatment of all people who operate within the established laws except in those cases where circumstances lead individuals to break the law but who in the weighted consideration of a jury are found to be not guilty. Indeed, the most significant steps in human rights, freedoms of assembly, protest, religion and expression were not the outcome of a crusading politician but rather the result of a conclusion of juries nullifying laws by declaring an accused to be "not guilty". The essential aspect of this basis for human cultural progress is that all should be held to be innocent before sufficient evidence establishes that they are, in fact, guilty. The essential factor in cases where juries declare innocence or guilt, is the open access and irrefutable significance of the evidence in the case. No amount of assertion, finger pointing or statements are sufficient evidence to carry a case forwards to a conclusion and society should not be influenced in any way at simple statements. "The truth..", as William James observed, ".. is what happens". And what happens is the evidence of what shapes viewpoints and interests.

Unfortunately, those devoid of sufficient cultural exposure to rational observation and thinking become the agents of those who would manipulate society through a culture of fear based on a manipulation of the truth. We have arrived at a point in time where institutions, governments and political parties practice a growing intolerance of people who hold opinions that are at variance with the "opinion" or "values" of these institutions. Because of this imposition, individuals today will tolerate an outrage for fear of becoming conspicuous by rebelling against it. Social marginalization through cancellation is the common fear that is used by institutions and government and even social media, to impose points of view at variance of the points of views upon whom these are being forced. Goebbels would have been delirious to observed how this system operates with such ease. In this cultural void of intolerance and intellectually-challenged individuals we have a minister demanding that Russian athletes can only perform in the UK if they sign a declaration that rejects the actions being taken by their own government. It is a small step to ban Scottish footballers from the UK because they favour Scottish independence or athletes from Eire being banned because they favour Irish unification. What has this country, and the current government, come to in having contributed to a growing cultural void through a thoughtless and fanatical participation in a cascade of sanctions which will certainly damage the wellbeing and prospects of the majority of people of this country. Their insistence on supplying lethal arms to Ukraine will only result in more people dying while our government is bravely encourages Ukrainians to fight to the last Ukrainian. They exalt out-of-date images and corrupt notions of the glory of war. This shameful behaviour by leaders, so-called, is setting an atrocious example of immature hysterics and a failure in statecraft to the youth of this country in their glorification of war while ignoring the unnecessary inevitable deaths and horrors.

The brand of this government exposes a fanatical intolerance of more cautious and reasoned advocacy and it revels in projecting a murky fog of misrepresentation and lies, a wholesale devouring of the truth, brazenly practiced by their party leader for far too long.

Central banks do not have the necessary tools to combat cost-push inflation because it is not caused by excessive demand or money supply, but rather by supply side input costs over which monetary policy has no influence. Money volume reduction or interest rate rises only exacerbate the state of affairs. This was a mainline message from a ACP workshop this morning (30/03/2022) where Hector McNeill, the British economist who, identified this policy instruments gap in 1975 and pioneered the real incomes approach to economics as a solution. He set out his analysis of the experience of the last petroleum crisis between 1973 through 1995 when petroleum prices increased seven-fold within a decade. Conventional policy instruments, such as raised interest rates and lower higher marginal tax rates, only served to depress the economy and raised income disparity. We are now starting in a more dire state of economic affairs, and yet central banks still talk of applying the same inappropriate instruments to tackle the current self-imposed inflationary crisis caused by petroleum/gas prices exacerbated by the widespread imposition of sanctions on Russia, creating an unnecessary and renewed energy crisis. The results of conventional policy will be further depression very similar to the stagflation of the 1970s through 1990s. A good deal of this analysis is to be found in the latest edition of the British Strategic Review which sets out the reasons why conventional monetary policy is flawed in theoretical and policy terms.

This article is an expansion on a synopsis of the content of a ACP workshop held on the 6th March, 2022 concerning the implications of sanctions. The delays involved are related to the considerable number of follow up questions which have now been answered. The main problem has been that much of what was stated involved analyses based on the Production, Accessibility & Consumption economic model which is counter-intuitive because much of the conventional macroeconomic theory and practice is based on the Aggregate Demand economic model, which is itself flawed.

The Russian Ruble has brushed aside the impacts of sanctions to return close to its pre-Ukrainian action value against all currencies.

SDAG-SEEL Analytical note:

As a result of a decision one week ago the Russian government had set 31st March,2022, as the date when all new and existing contracts for the purchase of gas from Russia would need to be paid in Rubles as Ruble-equivalents to contract prices. There are technical issues facing most buyers in adjusting to systems through which to acquire Rubles, so this process has slowed down. However, this is likely to increase the value of the Ruble. No gas will be supplied against other currencies; only Rubles qualify as the medium of transaction and accounting. If other sanctions are not withdrawn the foreign exchange impact will mean gas prices will begin to rise in real terms according to the relative performance of the dollar, Euro and Pound all of which are destined to slide against the Ruble because the economies issuing these currencies are not resilient in terms of money issuance not being related to tangible goods or commodities. Therefore, a failure by the USA, European countries and the others, who are imposing sanctions on Russia and Russian citizens, to withdraw them, will exacerbate the wellbeing of the constituents of these countries as a result of the impact of cost-push inflation resulting from rising input costs and declining values of national currencies.

The Yuan, Rupee and Turkish Lira could stabilize depending upon the speed with which the transfer their international transactions away from the dollar into participation in the evolving CEC-national currency-based exchanges. Russia and China have already established these networks and increasing numbers of major trading partners from Africa, South America, the Middle East, East and South East Asia are applying to make use of these utilities.

There is internal pressure within the Russian Federation from agricultural, mineral and essential materials producers to switch their export currency transaction currencies to Rubles. These requests are likely to be given serious consideration and technical and economic specialists will work out the most convenient operational means of implementing the required contractual procedures and terms.

In the final analysis this crisis is the result of a refusal of NATO to understand the meaning of a mutual strategic security architecture or, at least, to refuse to give this a serious and timely consideration which resulted in large segments of the European population1 being exposed for lack of an adequate balance in security cover for over 30 years.
1 Russia constitutes 50% of the population of East Europe.
Indeed, the actual negative impacts of sanctions, on those who impose them, is proof of these facts. Therefore rather than provide a synopsis which would lose context, an article is in preparation and it will be posted soon.

The current levels of misinformation circulating within official government and social media do not contribute to any form of rational assessment of the future prospects of the British economy and the wellbeing of the population of the United Kingdom. An over-zealous carrot-and-stick foreign policy tactic has been deployed by the USA and avidly followed up by British governments for too long. This has led to the current Ukraine crisis. The stick has been a threatening foreign policy stance with respect to Russia, China or any other countries that do not align themselves with the mysterious "rule-based order" where the rules are made up by the US State Department. The carrot is to take refuge, having created tension with respect to those countries not following the rules-based order, being a threat and therefore NATO is pushed onto the stage as the saviour to all as a "defensive alliance". The other stick is in the developing world any deviance from the rule-based order is likely to lead to refusals to advance World Bank loans or IMF loans. On the other hand the Bretton Woods agreement which fell apart in 1971 remains in the form of the remnants of the World Bank and IMF. The conditionality of loans involve direct interference in macroeconomic and fiscal policies in most economies of the world. The monetarist debt-based growth model has placed too many low income countries into states of crippling debt. However, the latest fiasco of hysterical cancellation of everything Russian and the imposition of sanctions which are based on the refusal to permit transactions take place in dollars, has been a wake up call for the whole world, developed, in transition and low income. The extreme nature of the rhetoric and the imposition of sanctions based on leverage over dollar transactions has called for widespread, largely secret, discussions and negotiations between countries who wish to lower their exposure of what has become known as the "dollar problem". In any case even those in the dollar, Euro, pound economies will, because of their apparent refusal to accept Russian gas at 15% of the going "free market" rate will plunge their own countries into a depression largely linked to cost-push inflation; a parallel to the crisis in 1973 after which petroleum prices rose seven-fold within a decade. This economic depression has nothing to do with Russia but is a direct result of governmental decisions attempting to follow the increasingly dubious logic of the US State Department and a President who does not appear to understand the economic consequences of such decisions. In the end, the USA appears to be bent on "winning" and does not care if the whole of Europe, the UK and the rest of world pay a very high price for their "dubious rules-based order".

The world depression to come, is the fault of inappropriate US policy where its well-known strategy of using NATO to keep USA in control, Russia marginalized and the German economy down can be seen to have been partially successful. But Germany remains a problem for the USA strategy because it has the highest balance of payments in the world, even exceeding that of China. In order to fix the German problem depends upon Germany and the rest of Europe continuing to cow tow to the US State Department. This hari kiri act of course is a problem for European constituents. The constituents in Britain are already facing an incompetent government in terms of economic policies in the face of the rising inflation created by an inappropriate support of NATO decisions. Germany, in particular, will suffer and yet the German "leadership" extraordinarily appears to be willing to put the people of that country through economic hardship for the sake of upholding the USA strategy of diminishing the power of that very country. They have even ordered a substantial quantity of military hardware from the States. Win-win USA, lose-lose Germany.

As the hysteria dies down, this carrot-and-stick policy will flounder as constituents throughout Europe and the rest of the world begin to reject those governments who have willingly put the people through levels of unnecessary hardship strangling economic prospects and wellbeing. As a result many of the governments who currently willingly follow the USA's "lead" are likely to fall. The key question remains whether the colour of the changes in regimes with the maturity to opt for a constructive option of mutual strategic security and peace with Russia and all other countries or those who would remain in the USA's camp of continuing threats and selling armaments in preparation for war. Outside Europe, Canada and Australia/New Zealand, the rest of the world has come to their senses and they are all working to eliminate the dollar problem and to opt for a global mutual strategic security state. The USA's notion of "international opinion" which constitute less than 15% of the world's population might continue to pursue their carrot-and-stick insanity but this simply means they will marginalize themselves from the rest of the world culturally and economically.

Videos are appearing of Ukrainian militia torturing Donbass military prisoners by shooting them in the legs as well as severe beatings. These are being investigated by Russian investigation units.

The brutally murdered victim was discovered at an abandoned school-turned-military compound in the city of Mariupol. A criminal investigation has been launched after the body of a brutally murdered woman was discovered by pro-Russian forces at a Ukrainian military compound. A swastika had been carved into her stomach.

"According to available information, Ukrainian nationalists with the Azov Battalion abused a woman from Mariupol for a long time, causing her bodily harm",

 Russia’s Investigative Committee said in a statement on Monday.

"Her body, which showed signs of torture and had a swastika carved into the stomach, was found in the basement of one of the city's schools, where the nationalists' base was located,"
 the statement reads.

Over the past few weeks, the city, claimed by the breakaway Donetsk People’s Republic as its territory, has become the arena of fierce urban fighting between the allied forces of Russia and Donetsk and those of Ukraine. The gruesome find was first publicized on Sunday by Patrick Lancaster, an American who has long covered the conflict in Ukraine’s east. The body of the woman was found by advancing Donetsk forces in the basement of Mariupol’s School No. 25. Now used as a forward base by Ukrainian units, it is littered with left-behind uniforms, weapons, and other military equipment. The Donetsk servicemen who spoke to Lancaster allegedly said they assumed the woman was a civilian who had either tried to escape the fighting or had unwarily expressed joy over the gains made by the Russian and Donetsk forces, invoking the fury of Ukrainian nationalists. Footage from the scene suggests the woman had endured brutal torture before her death, her body being marked with multiple bruises and a torn plastic bag visible around her head. She had also had a large swastika carved into her stomach, painted with what appeared to be her own blood. The launch of an investigation into her death comes a day after Moscow announced it was seeking the source of graphic videos purporting to show Ukrainians torturing and executing captured Russian soldiers. The videos, which emerged over the weekend, apparently show militants beating and shooting their prisoners in their legs at point-blank range, with the captured soldiers dying amid their 'interrogation.'

Cowardly freaks and agents of war....

Too any Western politicians enter politics to "make it". Many have a second job as "consultants" that places an emphasis on earning cash in exchange for assisting arms company interests as opposed to the security and interests of their constituents. To detect such corrupt politicians, simply listen to their pronouncements in parliament consisting of scandalous and irresponsible encouragement to Ukrainians to fight, knowing full well that the odds are completely stacked against them.

These cowardly freaks and agents of war join the craven parliamentary chorus that advocates that Ukrainians "fight" to the last Ukrainian while such imorality bolsters their "consultancy fees".

The bogus nature of NATO as a defensive alliance has been exposed over the last 30 years in its often illegal attacks on countries well outside the theatre of the North Atlantic. With no precision involved, NATO essentially carried out modern versions of carpet bombing of civilian neighbourhoods. In every case the US and NATO lost the battle or war. Losing the Vietnam war after so much human suffering and ecological damage should have been a lesson but Afghanistan was just a repeat of a that outcome. This is in spite of a bloated military budget the USA and the NATO 2-percenters can only come up with exceptionally expensive hardware. This stuff is the food of lobbies whose job it is to "convince" political party managers who, in turn, "encourage" their governments and military "planners" to buy. Most of NATO's hardware is now relatively out-of-date. For example, the purchase by the UK of F-35s has to be an example of totally wasted funds and bloated party coffers. For some time now F-35 pilots have noticed that the closer they operate to Russia the more it becomes difficult to operate and communicate as a result of Russian electronic systems, such as the Murmansk-BN and the family of more refined derivatives. It is notable that whereas the USA schemes take years to finalize at sometimes 10x the original budget estimate, Russian military engineers seem to be more adept and efficient in advancing capabilities of systems within very short periods of time at around 15%-20% of budgets common in the "West". It is not possible to make direct programme comparisons because the quality of final products is so different, but the fact that Russia maintains the edge with hypersonics, electronic defence systems and superior planes on around 10% of the budget of the USA's military expenditure explains to some degree why the USA and NATO can't win a war. Throwing money at defence just produces scrap metal when the whole idea of NATO is not to defend "allies" but rather to be a Hollywood theatre production designed to earn bucks for US and other armament producers who do not produce useful systems. In the meantime politicians such as Jo Biden have on repeated occasions voted for war and the military in their turn have deployed inappropriate military strategies. The offensive outcomes have resulted in the deaths of over 20 million people since the end of the Second World War. Not a record to be proud of but one of overt criminality and shame. Hardly an example of the Blinken cliché, "an international rules-based order" but rather the destruction of the necessary foundation for establishing "freedom, democracy and the rule of law."

28/03/2022: The Russian action in Ukraine has advanced rapidly to demilitarize Ukraine by taking out of action the majority of Ukrainian military hardware including: 308 drones, 1,713 tanks, 170 multiple rocket launchers (MLRS), 715 field artilary and mortars and some 1,557 military vehicles. During the last 30 days of action, the rate of attrition of the Ukrainian military infrastructure has been as follows.

A disappointing BBC and UK media insist there is no Nazi issue in Ukraine. They only mention the Azov Battalion, when there are around 30 such militia. Some have youth/children training schools brainwashing the minds of future generations with hatred towards Russia. Aware of the bad image training such groups would bring on to US and NATO trainers in assisting such groups, these units were "integrated" into the Ukraine army. UK and US trainers now state they train the Ukrainian army but, in reality, continue to train these neo-Nazi militia.

How Ukraine’s Jewish president Zelensky made peace with neo-Nazi paramilitaries on front lines of war with Russia

The History of Nazism in Ukraine. Who is Stepan Bandera?

Commentary: Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem

The CIA May Be Breeding Nazi Terror in Ukraine

Far-right extremists in Ukrainian military bragged about Canadian training, report says"

NATO Training Nazis in Ukraine, as US Floods Russia’s Neighbor with Weapons

Washington Protects Ukraine's Nazis: The UN Extraordinary Vote on Ukraine

The Alarming Rise of Ukraine's Neo-Nazi MPs Since the 2014 "Pro-democracy Revolution"

Why is the West Silent About Ukrainian Neo-Nazi Movements, Azov Battalion, & Bandera Legacy?

Are there really neo-Nazis fighting for Ukraine? Well, yes — but it's a long story
Daily rate of destruction
Total destroyed

As far as we know most aircraft have been destroyed or downed with Russia maintaining an effective no fly zone over their military assets. In the last 24 hours 4 more Ukrainain planes were downed. The Uraininan forces in the Donbass are running out of ammunition and many Ukrainian soldiers are laying down their arms. Missiles and anti-tank weapons supplied to Ukraine have had far less impact that imagined. This is because:

1. Russian ERP tank armour has proven to be effective. In most cases there is impact but crew are not affected and so the tanks roll away or fire back if they detect the origins of engagement. The most advanced tanks have an incredibly high top speed of around 80 km/hour so the combination of ERP and speed of maneuverability are definite advantages. However, in less common cases where heavy artilary has been used against tanks performance has been mixed.

2. Russian pilots (planes and helicopters) have developed techniques to even avoid impact when faced with attacks by shoulder launched missiles.

Please note: A SEEL reviewer has advised that:

1. The following note only refers to the primary commodities of energy (petroleum/gas) and agricultureal commodities of food, fibre and feedstocks;

2. The currency participation projections only refer to the percentage participation of currencies in these primary market transactions.

3. The petroleum/gas-Ruble condition will be implemented as from 31st March 2022 after which the projections reviewed in this article are likely to take effect in those particular commodities.

Initial projections of use of dollar and other currencies
in international commodity trades 2022-2024
An extended workshop this weekend (26-27/03/2022) on the economic and financial implications of sanctions is a follow up to the previous workshop held by the APEurope Correspondents' Pool earlier this month. The second part synopsis of the previous workshop still awaits validation by the presenters. However, in this weekend's sessions one of the most interesting presentations related to what are known as CECs or Commodity Exchange Credits which remove most of the previous issues facing barter trade by integrating a sophisticated currency exchange accounting IT support. Rather than limiting barter trade to massive deals, the CEC system enables smaller traders to join the network to put in their orders and the central hub agglomerates disparate tiny orders up into large exchanges which are then broken down on delivery and routed to order initiants. The coordination of all of this is based on locational-state theory and existing database technologies and the global networks including satellite data hops. Money is not required because the exchange rates are expressed in terms of physical commoities and goods, but as guarantees local currencies would be involved while on the main resulting international transactions the demand for currencies are a function of the producer-suppler national requirements. With most commodity exchanges being dollar-based, the CEC system following the blitz of sanctions imposed by the USA, is likely to expand rapidly and in particular in South America, Africa, Russia, Middle East, Central, East and South East Asia. The acceleration of this impact is likely to be most notable as from spring 2023 if the USA and others continue with their sanction policies.

As energy contracts terminate in 2023 the impacts of CECs could impact the dollar as shown in the diagram on the right. CECs, in reality, enable trading to be ramped up in the rest of the world without using the dollar but on the main transactions national currencies such as Rubles and Yuan are likely to replace the dollar.

According to Agricultural Innovation agricultural commodities are already being affected by sanctions' impacts on transport and futures markets and the energy markets will become increasingly unstable with rapidly rising dollar prices for the rest of 2022 through 2023. The only way to avoid the national turmoil in Western economies is to backtrack on sanctions otherwise several governments are likely to lose their majorities at their next elections.

Very early on during the US-directed bloody coup in 2014 to overthrow a democratically elected government in Ukraine, Western media gave some publicity to the fact that the nationalist neo-Nazi militia were used to bring about this violent transition to the formation of the puppet government. The FBI are on record to have noted that white supremacist militia from the USA and Canada had received training from the Ukrainian neo-Nazi militia and that this represented a de facto export their violent creed back to cells in the USA and Canada. Rather than respond in a responsible fashion, the US State Department, through the CIA, made efforts to reduce this negative exposure by deploying the same tactics as Al Quaeda deployed in Iraq and other theatres where the US was waging military campaigns. This was to constantly change the name of these militia as well as continue to function with no assignable name. Thus although Al Quaeda and ISIS remain the known "threats", in reality, these are countless other militia who intotlal greatly outnumber these two brands operating increasingly worldwide and without using any widely known names.

In Ukraine the official story became that the Azov Battalion, the best known, had been integrated with the Ukraine National Guard (army) and that US, Canadian and UK trainers were dedictaed to supporting the Ukraine military. In reality there are around 30 neo-Nazi militia, some with names others without, accounting for something like (estimate) 25,000 to 30,000 militia. The most significant problem over the medium term is that some of these have youth and even childrens' wimngs, similar to Hilter Youth, where military training and indoctrination of the neo-Nazi racist creed is inculcated contributing to the creation of an increasingly dangerous cultural and societal degeneration within a nominally "democratic" country. This is in a country that already venerates and has statues of several of their most extreme past nationalist neo-Nazi leaders who directed their adherents to assist the German forces murder Roma and Jews in Ukraine during the Second World War. The BBC has recently produced videos which attempt to dismiss the neo-Nazi threat but this is a serious misrepresentation which places the future stability of Europe and the people of Britain at risk. This is a repeat of the case of British government appeasement of the Nazi threat in the 1930s which, because it was not nipped in the bud, led to the Holocaust and bombing of British homesteads and the murder of 1.6 million Roma, 6.5 million Jews and 25 million Russians. The West's ineptitude is a cause of great concern on this front. Russia, it would seem, is the only country that sees this danger in clear terms and the only country who is prepared to counter this deadly drift of Europe back to the pre-1930s.

As the world begins to taste NATO-induced inflation there is a widening acknowledgement that the arms sales function at rip-off prices overshadowed the need to maintain a technological edge over perceived enemies. Russia, on 10% of the military budget of all NATO countries combined has by far the leading technical military capability, according to senior military personnel in most non-NATO countries. NATO campaigns have involved carpet bombing of civilian households and essential utilities while Russia is demonstrating an ability to take out military capabilities while minimizing civilian casualties. NATO precisions weapons and drone strikes have proven to be disastrous in terms of civilian deaths while Russia's latest complement of precision weapons have performed better. 18 months ago Russian military assets were exposed to the Turkish manufactured Baykar Bayraktar series of drones. However, of the 40 such drones purchased by Ukraine only 4 have survived and it is understood that these were damaged on the ground and are inoperable. The most advanced US manufactured planes lose control under Russian electronic attacks and constitute very expensive flying coffins, according to experts.

NATO's failure to establish, with Russia, a mutual strategic security framework during the last 30 years, in spite of Russian advocacy for this, means that 50% of the population of East Europe did not share in a security envelope. As a result when neo-Nazi politicians in the Ukraine parliament declared their desire to liquidate Russians and neo-Nazi militia advanced on the Donbass NATO did nothing. This scenario is exactly how Hitler rose to power resulting in the deaths of 1.6 million Roma, 6.5 million Jews and around 25 million Russians. The inability of NATO, or more to the point the USA State Department apparatchiks who are blindly devoted to the wishes of the military industrial complex they do not understand the past experience and sensitivity of Russia to the dangers of the rise of neo-Nazi power in Ukraine. More to the point, this rise was a result of the State Department overseeing the bloody coup in Ukraine in 2014 which augmented the power of the neo-Nazi's in the puppet regime that followed. Therefore, what was Russia to think? It was apparent that the USA and NATO became aligned with the interests of neo-Nazism which is violently xenophobic and bent on genocide of Russians. NATO is a complete and expensive failure and a danger to European and, indeed, world security; when this conflict is over, NATO needs to go and it needs to be replaced with a global mutual strategic security regime covering all nations and peoples.

26/03/2022: Further to our previous reports concerning the "bombing of a maternity hospital and theatre in Mariupol", the number of Mariupol residents who have managed to escape via the humanitarian corridors and who have stated that this was the work of the nationalist neo-Nazi militia, designed to blame Russia for "atrocities" and "war crimes", has more or less confirmed our original contentions on this matter.

TASS reports that Mikhail Mizintsev, the chief of Russia’s National Defense Command Center, has stated that:

"...the Ukrainian authorities have agreed to none of the humanitarian corridors towards Russia Moscow has suggested opening for the evacuation of civilians from Kiev, Sumy, Kharkov and Mariupol. Starting from March 4 Russia has every day opened humanitarian corridors out of Kiev, Chernigov, Sumy, Kharkov and Mariupol - one corridor towards Russia and another one through the Kiev authorities-controlled territories to Ukraine’s western border. The Ukrainian side has not confirmed a single humanitarian corridor towards Russia yet."

In the meantime, Russia every day agrees to all additional humanitarian corridors that Kiev requests.

Mizintsev stressed that,

"Along all routes the Russian army strictly observes ceasefire, although this slows down progress in the special military operation. This is done exclusively for saving civilians. From the Ukrainian side there have been systematic bombardments of humanitarian convoys and attempts to blame its own inhuman actions on Russian forces. This week alone there have been 17 shellings of civilians, who were using the humanitarian corridors. One of the columns of evacuees that came under such a cynical bombardment was leaving Mariupol."

The propaganda emanating from the West and Ukraine seek to dodge the actual facts concerning the eight years of the military assault on Ukraine on the people of the Donbass and have resorted to stating the President Putin is a madman bent on reconstituting the USSR. As Putin commented the collapse was lamentable but he never expressed or has shown by his actions any desire to reconstitute such a failed system. In contrast, during the last 20 years he has been in a leadership position, the Russian economy has been transformed along lines that have no relationship to the USSR. Putin succeeded in this mission, not as a dictator but rather as someone who has delegated tasks to competent people, many of whom previously worked in intel, and creating a sound operational economic environment for investors and business. In the meantime the real incomes of Russians have advanced leaving behind the dark days of the aftermath of the collapse in 1991. Today, as a result of his leadership and ability to delegate Russia has become one of the most resilient economies in the world and is relatively free from debt.

Over 260 people were killed and 1,100 wounded in Donetsk as result of Ukrainian troops’ actions in past week as a result of a rapidly deteriorating situation on the February 17, 2022. The appeal for assistance from both Donesk and Lugansk to Russia. On February 24, Russian President Vladimir Putin announced a special military operation in response to a request for help by the heads of the Donbass republics. He stressed that Moscow had no plans of occupying Ukrainian territories, but aimed to demilitarize and denazify the country. The chief of the Russian National Defense Management Center, Mikhail Mizintsev, pointed out that during the 8 years following the 2014 coup a period, which was far longer than the Second World War, "each day used to bring about numerous casualties". Today (25/03/2022) TASS reports that Mizintsev stated that:

"The special military operation in Ukraine, which is pursuing certain goals and objectives, was preceded by an eight-year period of severe humanitarian disaster in Donbass, when human rights of over 6.5 million people had been violated and over 14,500 had been killed," he said. According to Mizintsev, " a result of nearly daily shelling by Ukraine’s Armed Forces and nationalist battalions, 4,115 basic facilities were destroyed and 55,310 more damaged. Among them were residential buildings, educational institutions, hospitals and other vital facilities. Over those eight years, the use of heavy weapons by Ukraine resulted in complete destruction of 19.5% of infrastructure in the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics and in considerable damage to up to 37% of it," Mizintsev said. The general said that "from April 2014 to February 2022, 1,451,304 refugees were forced to move to the Russian Federation alone. The escalation of the situation and the higher intensity of shelling of Donbass on February 18-23, 2022 prompted a sharp increase in the number of refugees. During those six days, 106,946 people crossed into Russia. The remaining part of the population, which is 3,600,940 civilians, including elderly people, children, women and socially vulnerable citizens, still stayed in basements under daily shelling without any basic necessities of life - without water, heating, electricity, food and medicines."

"Nevertheless, the countries of the so-called civilized West, led by the United States, would intentionally hush this up, showing total indifference to the fate of millions of residents of the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics. The special military operation began in the wake of that direst humanitarian crisis in Donbass,
" Mizintsev stated.

Based on the record of NATO actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Syria, NATO applied the equivalent of blanket bombing of civilian areas wiping out utility infrastructures for energy, water and often food warehouses. In spite of the rhetoric of avoiding civilian deaths NATO actions succeeded in murdering in excess of 1.5 million civilians in these campaigns.

In stark contrast, Russia is deploying a completely different tactic where the avoidance of civilian deaths is paramount and they are not destroying utility infrastructures. The NATO approach incurs less risk on allied forces with the trade-off being unacceptable civilians deaths often resulting from very bad intel. Russian military are in reality more exposed by their own tactics of avoiding civilian deaths because destructive momentum cannot be applied. On the other hand, Russian intel has a far better insight to locational-state factors in Ukraine.

The matter of fact low key low hype justification for the Ukrainian action presented by President Putin set out in very clear terms the objective of the action. However, spin doctors, politicians and intel agencies have had a field day presuming that there were other objectives such as the reconstitution of the USSR by a madman as well as misinterpreting the locational-states of the action throughout the month of operations. The West has presumed that the Russians are bogged down because of Ukrainian resistance. Since the main objective was to liberate Donetsk and Lugansk the Russian military have not been bogged down but have made significant progress. In Donetsk and Lugansk, the lives of civilians have been put at risk by Ukrainian nationalist militia (neo-Nazi) who actually target civilians and domestic premises. The city of Mariupol in Donetsk is a problem but what is happening there, in reality, follows Russian tactics, as plainly stated in the announcement of the actions, to avoid civilian deaths. Russia is therefore applying successful tactics deployed in Syria where certain cities occupied by ISIS were facing the situation of ISIS using civilians and human shields. Ukrainian militia have been doing the same thing. As in the case of ISIS, Ukrainian militia are involved in setting up false flag incidents emulating the White Helmet type staged theatrical incidents to blame Russia for civilian deaths. As in Syria, the Russians set up escape "humanitarian corridors" for civilians to escape but Ukrainian military invariable deployed spoiler tactics to delay these being put in place as well as bar the entry of essential supplies for civilians provided by Russia. As in the case of Syria where ISIS fired at escaping civilians there are cases reported where Ukrainian militia are doing the same thing by selectively shooting escaping Ukrainians. It has been easier for Russians to establish escape routes to Russia but now the President of Ukraine is accusing Russia of kidnapping civilians and children and taking them to Russia. The hysteria emanating from the Ukrainian and Western governments contrasts with the matter of fact statements being made by the Russian side.

The other complete misunderstanding by the West has been the assumption that Russia intended to occupy Kiev; this was never part of the plan and, as far as we know, is still not an objective. As before, this was stated very clearly at the beginning of the action by Russia.

The Russian military spokesman for the armed forces has indicated that the first phase of the planned operations of the Ukrainian operation has been completed with most objectives achieved. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, Ukrainian Armed Forces sustained serious losses. In order to provide our readers with a complete picture of the Russian position we post the Russian News Agency TASS coverage of this statement. To access this report click on the "Read more" link below:

Read more ...

Sanctions make use of existing organizational, regulatory and procedural infrastructures such as SWIFT and commodity exchanges. However, the excesses and intensity of sanctions applied against Russia in the last month have undermined the confidence and trust of countries, in which 75% of the world's population resides, in these systems. As a result, since most sanctions are linked to restrictions on US dollar transactions and gold bullion there is an accelerating migration of countries away from reliance on these systems. This is because the "West" has demonstrated, in a disastrous fashion, an open ability to abandon solemn undertakings and to impound the belongings of companies, countries and individuals with no due process. In basic terms, beyond the refined statements concerning freedom, democracy and the rule of law those pronouncing such values are, in practice and on an open stage, acting like a rabble of pirates bent on looting assets to which they have no legal right. The West and NATO is not at war with Russia and therefore there is no state of emergency justifying such extreme actions. Therefore, in spite of the existence of international laws and national laws, the "West", led, it would seem, by the United States Department of State, are of no relevance. In place of international law the USA has attempted to substitute something referred to as a "rules-based international order" which like a cameleon changes is colour according to the circumstances and wishes of the US State Department. Thus we see a watershed moment where the USA and the West will lose a good deal of any status it once had as a community capable of providing examples of best practice in international relations. The result has been a rising economic and financial instability undermining the security of countries worldwide resulting in a justifiable and rapid migration to national currency-based SWIFT equivalents in China, India, Russia and Iran as well as gold bullion transactions moving away from the conventional centres. The same is happening with petroleum and gas transactions where the petrodollar has already given way to the petroRuble and petroYuan. Sanctions are senseless and self-destructive to the interests of those who apply them. The medium term economic impacts on the constituents in the USA, UK and the "West", resulting from the NATO-induced inflation are yet to be assessed. However, it is apparent that the West has no effective policy tools to manage these destabilizing trends which have resulted from fundamentally irresponsible failures to establish a mutual strategic security arrangement as requested by Russia for over 30 years. The extent of the rising political instability caused by the economic impacts of the follow up to failures to take rational decisions on security is somewhat unpredictable. In spite of President Biden's assertion that NATO has never been stronger the members have never been so weak because they have relied on NATO and which increasing numbers are now realizing passes for no more than a mirage or an expensive hoax serving the interests of, largely, US arms manufacturers.

24/03/2022: The evolution and context of the events leading up to the Ukrainian crisis is given almost no attention in the UK media. In the place of moderated coverage there is a somewhat scandalous resort to propaganda and xenophobic declarations which add nothing to our need to understand the reasons for these events haven taken place. For this reason, we are re-posting an article which appeared on today's edition of the Russian News Agency TASS that provides a view of the interpretation of what gave rise to this crisis from the Russian side. The article has not been edited and is "as is". This re-post is to help better inform our readership. The article is moderate in tone, coherent and, we think, worth reading. The article can be accessed by clicking on the "Read more" link below.

Read more ...

Lazy lobby-led politicians have allowed NATO to take over European and UK foreign policy. However, the self-evident failings of NATO, and the UK government in particular, in following the US State Department advice to ignore Russia's appeals for a mutual strategic security arrangement has led to the current crisis. Far from requiring a contribution of 2% of GNP for defence, NATO's irresponsible decision-making and stonewalling is going to cost the European and UK economy dearly, leading to a possible NATO-induced inflation approaching 10% p.a. and likely to reach 15% p.a. This represents a cumulative decade decline in the form of slumpflation in terms of a significant decline in real incomes of up to 80%, fall in demand and employment levels across Europe and UK. The US and UK habits of placing armament sales in front of rational foreign policy, has seriously undermined the domestic economy. Clearly not having agreed to a genuine mutual strategic security arrangement has resulted a serious and costly error on the government's part. By attempting to apply economic sanctions blindly as a knee jerk reaction as a substitute for military action, the economic and financial blow back will reach damaging and unacceptable levels. The government's priorities should be the wellbeing of the people of this country and not the image of NATO.

The record shows that since President Putin's statements at the Munich Conference in Security Policy in 2007, Russia has maintained an assiduous conflict avoidance stance. Putin's presentation was diplomatic, balanced and rational and it justified a mutual strategic security agreement covering all of Europe and Russia. However, the infantile, blind and pushy "Godda win" mentality of the USA State Department sought the mantenance of fear in Europe to sell over-priced munitions, the money concerned could have been spent on more needy and essential causes. NATO, as President Marcon observed, has always been brain dead and has acted no more than an arms bazaar. When the USA actively overthrew the government of Ukraine in 2014 and installed a puppet regime which actively pursued a campaign of genocide against the Russian-speaking population in the South East, Russia still purued a strategy of conflict avoidance accepting the Minsk accord as the basis for a nonconflictual and peaceful resolution to this crisis. When Zelensky, on the advice of the USA State Department, declared Ukraine would not implement Minsk and NATO poured arms into Ukraine is was obvious the lives of those in the South East were at risk. The imperative in such circumstances is no longer conflict avoidance but rather conflict to protect those in danger. This situation was brought upon Ukrane by the USA 2014 coup, 8 years of creeping genocide and a final admission that Ukrain sought conflict in the South East as opposed to conflict avoidance.

There are a number of offenses that have been carried out by US & NATO forces over the past three decades that were also televised and which, using similar logic to Biden's recent accusation that President Putin is a "war criminal" would likely fall under the ICC definition of "war crimes." Officials close to the current US administration are implicated in many—in 1998, for example, the bombing of the Al Shifa factory in Khartoum, which produced over half of Sudan’s pharmaceutical products, and which was “taken out on the direct orders of Bill Clinton,” according to Jacobin. Other well-documented NATO transgressions have frequently gone under the radar in the West, and those rare corporate outlets which do acknowledge them often paint the attacks as "claims" or something their victims merely "say" happened. "NATO Bomb Said to Hit Belgrade Hospital," read a Washington Post headline when the Dr. Dragisa Misovic Hospital was reduced to rubble just two weeks after a US B-2 bomber carried out an airstrike on the nearby Chinese Embassy, killing three officials and injuring over 20. The video below left is of Jo Biden openly stating he advocated bombing Belgrade. Seven people killed in a NATO airstrike on a Zliten hospital were reduced to a "Qaddafi Government Accusation" in a headline from US state-funded Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty.

More recently, in a military operation under the leadership of then-Vice President Joe Biden, a US airstrike on a Doctors Without Borders hospital in Afghanistan on October 3, 2015, killed 30 medical staff and patients. A subsequent Doctors Without Borders inquiry found the "US knew site was safe from Taliban but bombed it anyway," as one headline from The Independent put it. The deadly attack on health workers was closely followed up by the bombing of the Abs Rural Hospital in Yemen on August 15th, 2016, when US-manufactured Paveway-series aerial bombs were dropped by the Saudi-led, US/UK-backed coalition in what Amnesty international called “the fourth attack in 10 months on a [Doctors Without Borders] facility in Yemen. US and UK involvement in the ongoing Saudi siege of Yemen, which UN experts estimate has killed 377,000 civilians — 70% under the age of five—has largely gone unmentioned amid widespread Western allegations of Russian "war crimes."

But the Biden administration’s insistence that Russian President Vladimir Putin is a "war criminal" faces another serious hurdle internationally as Biden’s own complicity in the bloody US war in Iraq that saw millions of Iraqis killed over the course of two decades: "Joe Biden did so much more than vote for the war," according to University of Illinois–Chicago history professor Dr. Barbara Ransby, in a recent mini-documentary narrated by Danny Glover, "Worth the Price?", "Joe Biden and the Launch of the Iraq War." (see right) "He was chairman of the powerful Senate Committee on Foreign Relations Senate Committee. He really used his control over that committee to make sure that a majority of the US Senate voted to authorize the war." "It’s questionable whether the authorization to start the war could have even passed Congress without all that Biden did to get it approved," she explained. "He really did play a major role in bringing us into the Iraq War ... He bears much more responsibility than many other senators who simply voted for it."

The last editions of the "BBC Question Time" programmes have been lamentable demonstrations of the power of propaganda where most participants have followed the USA and UK government narratives concerning the Ukrainian affair. It is notable that most of the "atrocities" referred to are items from the West whereas most killing of civilians have been the result of the Ukrainian military and neo-Nazi militia, who have received their training from US and UK elements and who are targeting civilians. They have also set up many false flag attacks which have involved murdering Ukrainians and blaming this of Russia. These are all part of the propaganda designed to obliterate the fact that this military action was started in 2014 by Ukraine leading to the killing of around 15,000 people in the Lugansk and Donetsk (Donbass) regions and which BBC has not covered adequately and the public appear to be unaware of these events as a result of UK government and media censorship.

Concert to mark the fifth anniversary of annexation in Sevastopol, Crimea, March 2019
Yesterday was the 8th anniversary of the peaceful transfer of Crimea from Ukraine to Russia on 17th March, 2014. This transfer took place as a result of the bloody US-managed coup against the democratically elected government of Ukraine for fear of the neo-Nazi groups who had gained support from the USA. On 11 March 2014, the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol declared their independence from Ukraine. On 16 March 2014, a referendum was held in Sebastopol to receive votes on the question:"Are you in favour of the unification of the peninsula of Crimea with Russia as the subject of the Federation?" With a 89.51% turnout and 95.6% majority voted Yes. Sebstopol was annexed by Russia in 2014 with the rest of Crimea and since then has been administered as
Painting of the Russian squadron in Sevastopol by the Russian marine artist, Ivan Aivazovsky (1846)
the federal city of Sebastopol. Then on 17 March 2014 the councilors of Sevastopol City Council voted in favour of the integration of the city into the Russian Federation, with the same status as the cities of Moscow and Saint Petersburg. As a result this population of around 2.5 million people were saved from the onslaught and murderous attacks suffered by the other areas who had voted for independence of Lugansk and Donetsk where since 2014 some 15,000 people have been killed.

The Ukrainian government agreed to two versions of the Minsk agreement under which Lugansk and Donetsk would receive autonomy but remain in Ukraine and there was to be a cease fire. The Russian Federation placed it hopes for a peaceful solution to the genocidal actions of the Ukrainian regime but in February is was obvious that Ukraine had no intention of implementing Minsk as the behind-the-scenes behest of the USA. As a result Russia acted to join in the fighting which had started in 2014 to protect the people of Donetsk and Lugansk. President Putin declared Russia's recognition of Lugansk and Donetsk Republics as a result of a long established position of the Russian Parliament, which he had resisted for some time. He also took this decision in reaction for formal requests from the governments of Donetsk and Lugansk for military assistance because it was obvious that Ukraine was going to invade. This is why at the time of this decision there was a major exodus of women, children and the elderly to Russia. Nikolay Azarov the former Ukrainian prime Minister, who resigned during the US-led coup in 2014, stated that the decision by the Russian President to take the action in Ukraine avoided the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the Lugansk and Donetsk Republics.

In researching the article above we discovered the work of the Crimean, Russian marine artist Ivan Aivazovsky; it is most impressive. Below are some examples of his work. It is important to reflect on the fact that our government, in following the blind alien "cancel culture" of the United States has sought to "cancel" everything Russian. The United States has a lived culture that is fundamentally alien to that of Europe. It is based on a foundation of exploitation of humanity through the genocide of indigenous peoples and slavery based on capture and mistreatment of people from other countries. The remnants of his inhumane mindset endure to this day in American leadership whose military exploits since 1945 have resulted in the murder of in excess of 20 million people. Our lost, immoral and weak leadership in Britain, in both major political parties, bow to this monstrosity and proactively participate in a frenzied denial and attempted throttling of the self-evident amazing contemporary and past contributions of Russians to European and world culture.

Stormy Sea at Night, 1849

Among the Waves,1898

View of Constantinople, with the Nusretiye Mosque, 1856

Battle of Çesme at Night, 1856

President Zelensky has appealed for foreign volunteers to help Ukraine but according to fleeing foreign volunteers this is a suicidal death trap. The fanatical tactics of the nationalist Ukrainian militia are being exposed by foreign volunteers who have had to escape Ukraine as a result of having been forced to take up suicidal positions and then the Ukrainians counting the bodies as their own losses. This aligns with the tactics deployed today 16/03/2022, involving the detonation of a theatre in Mariupol by Ukrainian militia killing an unknown number of hostages held in the basement, made up of local Mariupol citizens. They then stated that this explosion and deaths were caused by a Russian missile. Mariupol is a particularly difficult problem because it is largely a Russian-speaking city and the Azov neo-Nazi battalion have an HQ there. This is why they are killing civilians with such ease and intent in order to satisfy their own fanatical genocidal blood lust and attempts to create false flag events to blame Russia. A Twitter video produced by an escaped foreign volunteer explains the actions of the Ukrainian militia and recounts event that resulted in many dead American and British volunteers who had been used by the Ukrainian neo-Nazi militia as human shields. This account can be found in an article on GlobalResearch entitled, "Foreign Fighters Flee from Ukraine".

One has to ask why our corporate media in the UK are hiding such facts and how the government can "encourage" people to go to Ukraine to help in this conflict knowing that if they go to fight the probability of them dying is extremely high. Their intentional faiure to report such realities simply emphasises the reality that they are only concerned with propaganda. Impartiality is not part of this act. What is more disturbing is that these neo-Nazi militia have received training fom both US and British instructors and recently were showing off anti-tank shoulder launched misiles obtained from Britain. If the British authorities who have been intimately involved with these militia are so unaware of these issues then our intel must be less than third rate. What is transpiring is that foreign fighters are useful for neo-Nazi brigades who are as interested in murdering their own citizens as they are in arranging for foreign volunteers to die as their human shields.

Last Sunday, 6th March, 2022, an APEurope Correspondents' Pool briefing covered the economic consequences of sanctions in the context of the current Ukrainian situation. One aspect involves understanding the dynamics of sanctions and counter-measures and the other concerns policies to counter sanctions within an economies thus affected. We present part one of this exchange.

Read more ...

One of the most fascinating aspects of the Ukraine war is the large number of top strategic thinkers who have been warning for years that this war was imminent if we continued down this path. We list the most important of these warnings.

Read more ...

NATO Training Nazis in Ukraine, as US Floods Russia’s Neighbor with Weapons

Washington Protects Ukraine's Nazis: The UN Extraordinary Vote on Ukraine

The Alarming Rise of Ukraine's Neo-Nazi MPs Since the 2014 "Pro-democracy Revolution"

Why is the West Silent About Ukrainian Neo-Nazi Movements, Azov Battalion, & Bandera Legacy?

being updated...

As the Donbas Republic forces advance, the gory reality of what happened in the previous periods under the control of the Ukrainian neo-Nazi militia occupation is becoming evident. Mass graves are being discovered which will increase the count of civilian deaths in the Donbass since 2014. It would seem that the existing figure of around 15,000-20,000 deaths is an underestimate because in the initial period those confronting the Ukrainian forces were men with no previous military experience including engineers, farmers and miners who were classified as combatants. If we put all of this into some context, the 9-11 attack on the World Trade Center in New York, resulted in the deaths of around 3,000 people. The USA's reaction was to invade Iraq, who had nothing to do with 9-11 and Afghanistan which also did not really have anything to do with 9-11 but Al Quaeda was based there. The American and NATO campaigns in Afghanistan and Iraq resulted in a combined total of civilian deaths of at least 500,000 civilians and the later sorti into Libya killed in excess of 25,000 civilians. Thus on a crude comparative basis the USA's actions resulted in 175 civilians killed for each 9-11 victim. In the case of the Russian action in Ukraine, as far as we can determine Russia is accused of having killed an unconfirmed 500 civilians or appears to have killed 0.025 civilians for each Donbass victim. The talk of a brutal Russian assault is on the basis of these figures completely exaggerated. In spite of this we consider all military actions and killing of people to be brutal final but unacceptable options.

However the current propaganda emanating from the USA and especially the UK governments greatly exaggerates the state of affairs in Ukraine and such finger pointing seeks to hide our governments' culpability of far worse behaviour and to distract attention from the emerging revelations of the past and current murderous reality in the Donbass. The USA, UK and the NATO "alliance" has been far more bloody and extreme in their campaigns. Whereas we welcome Ukrainians into our homes with open arms we turned our backs on those attempting to escape these Middle Eastern blood baths precipitated by dodgy dossiers, lies and the efforts of our military of which too many died for no good reason.

The completely ridiculous propaganda continues to be pumped out by out media and goverments misrepresenting the causes of the current crises.

The dishonest American habit of not honouring undertakings is, in large part, the cause of the current crisis.

The demonization of a leader who has guided his country out of a very dire situation in the early 1990s is ridiculous.

Far from being out of touch he has attempted to defend the interests of his people by having the sense to see what was happening.

Whereas the West is attempting to brand the coming economic depression driven by stagflation (slumpflation) as Mr. Putin's inflation, in reality the result of American attempting to impose NATO membership on an increasing number of European countries while marginalizing the other 50% of the East European population, who happen to live in Russia. Naturally, in spite of the Soviet Union having disappeared in 1992 and the Warsaw Pact dissolving, undertakings by the USA not to expand NATO towards the new Russian Federation have been broken. Joining NATO became a sort of security market and countries vied, like consumers, to buy the "protection" it offered. However, the participation of the people of Russia was embargoed. In an exchange between President Putin and President Clinton, Clinton admitted that Russia was too big because NATO wanted countries they could control. The tendency has been for the prioritization of economic benefits of European integration to have been replaced by the driving force of NATO membership becoming the USA's principal foreign policy objective. The associated result of this would be the overall weakening of the EU as an economic force. This is because trade with Russia for Europe is particularly beneficial, especially in terms of the cost effectiveness of Russian energy resource exports and imports from Europe. The USA and several other energy exporters cannot compete with Russian produce. In the meantime the USA has to make do with the promise of the "NATO security umbrella" notion as a way to sell arms at exorbitant prices through lobbies that look after the personal and political party benefits through contributions of various types. Beyond that, NATO is a set of filing cabinets and paper clips and an oversized civil service based in Brussels. As a result of this strategy, European nations have increasingly abandoned the notions of optimizing economic and social affairs to all begin to communicate on the basis of US-drafted press releases.

In 2007 President Putin presented a very reasonable analysis and proposal for the re-establishment of a mutual strategic security arrangement to include the other 50% of the East European population residing in Russia. Because with the increasing dominance of NATO over European affairs there has been a decadence in the quality of policy analysis and weight given to diplomats. As a result, President Putin's serious analysis and proposal did not receive any response from the European nations and was ignored by NATO. This scurrilous behaviour continued with NATO and the US State Department increasingly dominating European policy. This got to such a level of decadence and arrogance that the US State Department openly brought about a bloody coup against the democratically elected government of Ukraine in 2014, to install a puppet regime. It is notable that the European nations did not react but accepted this violence and anti-democratic event in the heart of Europe. Clearly, with NATO and the US State Department in the driving seat, this was a definite sign of danger to the Russian population. This danger was confirmed by the initiation of a genocidal attack on the people of Lugansk and Donetsk (Donbass region) who are mainly Russian speakers and they wanted to separate from the Ukraine. This confrontation led to the death of around 15,000 people. Russia did not attempt to absorb these regions but agreed that they should remain in Ukraine and a peaceful solution be brought about through the Minsk agreement. For eight years the guarantors of Minsk, in the form of Germany and France, did nothing to implement the Minsk agreement. Between 2014 and 2022 the neo-Nazi factions in the military and government of Ukraine grew in power leading to the imprisonment of opposition politicians and closing down of independent TV stations. What was supposed to be a cease-fire was constantly broken in the Donbass. In February 2022 the very large amassing of Ukrainian forces and large contingents of the neo-Nazi militia built up along the Donbass border and President Zelensky stated he would not implement Minsk. The Ukraine clearly intended to proceed with its genocidal intent in the Donbass by murdering Russian-speakers. Thus the Russian action to stop this. The results are here for all to see. European governments have all taken on board the US State Department habit of attempting to cancel countries that do not agree with US policies and have begun to apply economic sanctions and cultural cancellations of contacts with everything Russian. The last time Europe experienced this type of behaviour was in Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy and Spain. Rather than continue to obey NATO strategic dictates and place as their priority the security, social and economic wellbeing of their populations, European "leaderships" have set a very bad example and demonstrated to their constituents of that they do not place their wellbeing above obeying the desires of an alien country, The USA. NATO is designed to keep any fighting away from US shores and in the ultimate analysis no US President is going to press the button to save a squabbling Europe from it own short-sighted hapless leaderships. In reality the so-called security umbrella does not exist and the resulting instability and stagflation, rising unemployment can be put down to a failed NATO strategy promoted by the US State Department.

The propaganda is now that the coming economic difficulties are down to Putin when in reality Russia is still offering its energy resources at prices around 20% or even less than the current market prices but our blind leaderships such as Biden and Johnson want to brand the inflation as "Putin's inflation". This is jut ridiculous. In the meantime they might also pay attention to the fact that the Ukraine government is making use of cluster bombs to maximize civilian deaths in the Donbass and continue to use weapons supplied by "NATO". NATO countries also cheerlead the fact that Ukrainian civilians are joining the fight against a military force which will lead to yet more deaths. The French have an interesting term for the behaviour of NATO and its members as a arsonist-fire fighters. Rather than coming together under the banner of Europe and in the interests of the people of Europe, including the people of Russia, European governments have come together under the banner of NATO and the State Department whose intent is to weaken the European economy and maintain US hegemonic power, such as it is, over Europe.

Nazi blind hatred expressed in the form of cancellation of culture and knowledge through their book burnings in 1933 ©1933, Aktuelle-Bilder-Centrale, Georg Pahl (Bild 102); German Federal Archive.

In the current propaganda onslaught, the government and in particular its leader, Boris Johnson, are in their element, being about to utter any lies they want and can get off with it. This is truly paradise gained and even the media are not bothering to chase them for lying because their own headlines and content are part of the same orgy. All this flows freely without a Goebbels in sight. They swallow the propaganda flowing from the neo-Nazi brigade reports in the Ukraine and fact check nothing. They rob assets from Russians with no due process but simply on the basis that they are Russian. They attack Russian culture and artists just as the Nazis burnt books written by people with another vision of life.

The distorted narrative flowing from government and the media is so wrong and intimidating that it is causing the population of this country to endure the outrage of arbirary cancellations and suppression of freedomn for fear of becoming conspicuous by rebelling against this madness and being exposed to cancellation by what is turning into a mindless submissive mob rather than a rational constituency. The quest for truth and facts is being crushed. One has to ask where is this country headed with such an inept and dangerous government and opposition?

They personalize the Ukraine campaign as solely the responsibility of the President of Russia, Valdimir Putin whose image has been built up to be some sort of demon. Putin has for a long time been requesting a constructive response from the USA and NATO concerning Mutual Strategic Security since 1992 and in particular in a formal sense since his 2007 Munich presentation as a basis for initiating peaceful adjustment.

This government offers £350 per household who welcome Ukrainians into their homes while spending years attempting to push back refugees who came from the conflicts the UK government participated in, in the Middle East. They certainly never offered families with financial
Hitler Youth in Berlin performing the Nazi salute at a rally in 1933; © German Federal Archive.
subsidies to house these people. Having been driven from their homes by the NATO alliance's attacks, the UK had a greater duty of care to the people feeing from the Middle East. Our government has never acknowledged that the murder and violence we have participated in, in the Middle East is what created this flow of assylum seekers in the first place. The overt contrast in treatment between Ukrainian and Middle Eastern people is a disgrace and makes the underlying state racism very obvious.

NATO and the USA refused to terminate the genocide in the South East of the Ukraine already totalling more than 15,000 dead, following the bloody US-managed coup of a democratically elected Ukraine government in 2014, and then Zelensky stating in February 2022, that he had no intention of implementing the Minsk agreement, which neither the UK or USA participated in. Russia had relied on France and Germany oversee and help deliver Minsk as a peaceful solution to the ongoing creeping genocide in the South East of Ukraine. Given this situation and the intensive build up of Ukrainian troops on the Donbass border charged by massive supplies of new weapons by the USA, UK and others, Russia's duty of care for the people of the Donbass resulted in Russia having to act. Whereas Russia was acting to save the lives of the people in the Donbass no one in the UK government, USA or NATO had any thoughts about the people of Ukraine or Russia. The obvious requirement was an immediate ceasefire to avoid what is happening right now. But no, this aimless lack of moral purpose and direction and now this propaganda jamboree is just the environment our politicians love. They can virtue signal how good they are, wearing little yellow and blue ribbons, making wholly ridiculous statements about freedom and democracy in the Ukraine. Since 2014 the Ukrainian government has imprisoned opposition politicians and closed down TV channels. The number of neo-Nazi politicians in the Ukrainian government has grownas has their power. Their militia continued to run the show and murder Donbas civilians. They chase anything Russian with a view to "cancelling it" and setting an atrocious example in a feeding frenzy of "book burning" acting exactly the way the neo-Nazi propagandists in Ukraine hoped they would. There is no leadership to establish some example of common sense in the West and definitely not in the UK. All of this nonsense of encouraging the Ukrainians to fight and resist demonstrates an perverse and evil cowardice on the part of the West encouraging civilians to arm themselves to resist when armed individuals represent a danger to any military personnel and therefore risk being killed. When all of this is done with, our politicians will, of course, hold memorial services on behalf of those who died surrounded by blue and yellow bunting and laying wreaths in the name of the misled dead, dying as a result of the UK's encouragement of the people of Ukraine to engage in suicidal acts. Such people really don't care about Ukrainians or any mutual strategic security arrangement in Europe. This is why this mess has developed in the first place.

The range of blasting ammunition is presented:

The warhead of high-explosive fragmentary action 9?123? provides the detonation of 162 kg of TNT, which disperses almost fifteen thousand fragments. For the greatest effect, the final maneuver that the Tochka-U rocket makes is important. The area of damage to three hectares is provided by the charge firing at an altitude of 20 meters after the turn from the ballistic trajectory into a regime of a practically vertical drop. The axis of the fragment scattering cone is shifted to expand the firing sector.

It has turned out to be the perfect weapon for indisciminate genocide, in this case carried out by the Ukrainian government on people who were its own citizens.

The Ukrainian Army used ballistic missiles throughout the Donbass conflict targeting civilian areas until February 2015 when the second Minsk Accords were signed. In total, no less than 43 missiles were launched, with both fragmentation and cluster warheads, only two of the latter were aimed at military targets. Since February 2022 beside the shelling that has occurred in the Minsk 2015-2011 period, the Ukraine ramped up its attacks on Donbass residents, as confirmed by the OSCE observers. They have increasingly resorted to the use of larger missiles some of which are armed with cluster bombs to maximize civilian deaths. Just in the last month the Donbass units have downed 15 Tochka-U missiles which have a particularly destructive killing capacity of all living things within an area which is 500 metre wide around the point of impact. Just in the last few days use of these directly against households has been ramped up. The Ukraine military and nationalist neo-Nazi militia are applying a deadly tactic of mapping out areas they occupy then retreating roughly 3 kilometers and then shelling the same areas they have just left with some precision with the intent of destroying the property and lives of all in the villages and towns they have abandoned. Russia has claimed they are not targeting civilian areas. Whether or not this is true is difficult to assess because under these extreme conditions the neo-Nazi militia knowing that they are the target of the Russian campaign will go to any lengths to apply drastic tactics, including shelling their own civilians, to blame these deaths on Russia. The objective here is to attempt to bring foreign public opinion onto their side. Certainly in the South East in the Russian-speaking populated areas of Mariupol, the nationalists appear to have been using such tactics including setting up false flag events such as the recent "maternity hospital attack" last week. Russians are not held back by military opposition they are held back by the fact that the neo-Nazi brigades are likely to extreme actions endangering the local Ukrainian citizens. Foreign journliats in these locations have no means of distinguishing between neo-Nazi false flags and what is attrinbuted to Russian aggression. The favourite false flag sites are, as in Afghanistan and Syria, schools, hospitals and kindergartens and the favourite human targets are children/families and foreign journalists; all designed to maximise the propaganda impact and social outcries.

As an actor by profession, Volodymyr Zelensky is the current President of Ukraine and has become quite an act to follow. He was elected in a landslide victory in 2019 on the promise of easing tensions with Russia and resolving the crisis in the breakaway republics in east Ukraine. On the other hand, he has made no attempt to keep his word on either issue. Having followed the orientation of the USA, he has instead greatly exacerbated Ukraine’s internal crisis while relentlessly provoking Russia. A recent article in Global Research provides details on this man's behaviour and how he sold his country down the river.


The Russian concern with the growth of the power of neo-Nazi factions in Ukraine are not fanciful. In 2017, the Ukraine’s parliament (Verkhovna Rada) voted to outlaw the St George’s Ribbon, an emblem often worn to commemorate those who liberated the Soviet Union from Hitler’s rule. Up to seven million Ukrainian infantrymen comprised part of the Red Army during their struggle against Nazi Germany, as Hitler was finally broken in the east. This decision decision by an increasingly neo-Nazi-dominated Ukrainian parliament to ban remembrance symbols which commemorate those who fought against the Third Reich is an attempt to wash over that awful suffering the Ukrainian state endured during the Nazi occupation, with Hitler outlining plans to turn the country into a servile colony of Germanic dominion. Over elapsing time from the February 2014 US-instituted "pro-democracy revolution", an ever expanding group of neo-Nazis has been elected to office. Another excellent Global Research article describes this troublesome evolution.


Peter Oborne is a rarity amongst jounalists in being particluarly concerned with the matter of truth. He wrote an excellent portrayal of Boris Johnson's lying in his book, "The Assault on Truth" . In a recent article on Global Research Peter Oborne sets the record straight on Jeremy Corbyn's consistent position concerning Russian influence in UK politics. His article is entitles: "Russia-Ukraine War: Jeremy Corbyn Was Right All Along About Putin and His Oligarchs". It is well worth reading. We provide the link to this important article:


We have checked the veracity of statements we have made concerning the Ukrainian crisis. In the extreme bias in the UK media which appears to be willing to simply admit the propaganda blitz generated by the Ukrainian government two basic facts are surfacing. The levels of death amongst Ukrainian citizens at the hands of Russia military is exaggerated and the Russian claim to be only targeting military assets is true but there seem to have been some recent errors which we are checking. In the South East the number of Russia Speakers killed by the Ukrainian military and neo-Nazi militia is significant because their objective is to kill civilians. On balance the incitement and encouragement from the West for Ukrainians is resulting in more civilian deaths, especially in the South East of the country. The attempt to pour more weapons into Ukraine will only result in more deaths of Ukrainian civilians at the hands of Ukrainian forces.

We reported a case of neo-Nazi militia detonating explosives in a building in Mariupol where around 200 people were in the cellar; this has as yet not been confirmed. Our report concerning the false flag event suggesting a maternity hospital had been bombed by Russia seems to have been confirmed. This was staged by the neo-Nazi militia who were abandoning the building which had been a maternity hospital but was closed last month. This particular false flag event has done the rounds over and over again in the UK media and in parliament. What has been confirmed however, from an increasing number of Russian soldiers is that in Mariupol, for example, the neo-Nazi militia have constantly disrupted the operation of humanitarian corridors that Russians have established for civilians to escape the city to safety. This is done by shelling and firing at the corridor areas, preventing families from gaining access to the corridors and in cases shooting people passing along the corridors. Last but not least the Guardian Newspaper keeps insisting in positing a false story of the deaths of 13 Ukrainian military who were defending Snake Island in the Black Sea. As we reported at the time, they surrendered, were picked up by a Russian ship and taken to Sebastopol and provided with a meal and they will remain there until the end of the conflict. Never wanting to miss the chance to smear Russians the Guardian reports that the Ukrainian first deputy foreign minister, Emine Dzheppar, announced the creation of a stamp in honour of these "fallen comrades" to blind the Ukrainian and Western press to the facts of the matter - see left. Ukrainian president, Volodymyr Zelenskiy, the comic, also announced he would posthumously award all the soldiers the Hero of Ukraine award. The Guardian quite intentionally avoids giving the impression of the propaganda intent of the Ukrainian government by giving the impression that the realization that the Ukrainian soldiers "may in fact still be alive" arose after the stamp had been produced. The fact that they are alive was reported immediately after the event last week. The degree to which UK media, BBC, Sky, Guardian, and others, have become sloppy about fact checking in order to follow the government's equally dishonest narrative does a disservice to the British public.

One of the powers of commercial art in the field of politics is that it can convey, in just an image, a mix of messages and, depending upon the viewer, emotions. It is disappointing that a newspaper such as the Economist, with so many years of established tradition in collecting and analyzing, largely, economic data has stooped so low as to use their covers to convey distorted messages. We understand, of course, that the Economist Newspaper relies upon the advertising revenue provided by financial and energy companies and occasionally armaments conglomerates and this is the reason they depart from logic and promote propaganda that aligns with the commercial interests of these groups. However, this week's cover (07-12/03/2022) is just plain dishonesty, see right, where we have crossed out the word Russia and replaced this with Europe. Stalin made the same mistake as the West is now making in appeasing Nazis and he even entered into a ridiculous agreement which, of course, like the USA's common practice, was not upheld with the German invasion of the Soviet Union. As a result 25 million Russians perished. Russians living in the Russian Federation are completely award of this fact. The lesson, that should have been learned, is that the kernels of neo-Nazi politicians and militia are extremely dangerous largely because they are aggressive and intimidating. Similar thugs brought Hitler to power in a "democracy". However, the reason Hitler could inflict so much damage by murdering, in addition to 25 million Russians, a further 1.6 million Roma and over 6 million Jews and hundreds of thousand of people throughout Europe and the UK, was that, mainly US banks and petroleum companies kept Hitler's war effort going even when the USA had declared war following Pearl Harbour and Nazi Germany became a declared enemy. Following Pearl Harbour Standard Oil trafficked their oil supplies through different countries to Germany. Most of the people in this country are not aware of the fact that the Bush and Rockefeller families were major shareholders in this illicit support which ravaged Europe and killed to many all in the name of corporate profit. The US policy was designed to destroy Russia, weaken Europe and diminish the power of Great Britain as a world leader. Today, the USA is attempting to reinitiate this same process under the doubtful leadership of what appears to be a cocktail circuit vain chatterbox, Antony Blinken of the US State Department, starting in Ukraine. It is amazing that commercial interest and dependency for survival has brought the Economist Newspaper to a hapless state of affairs where it openly supports this madness.

After an impetuous decision not to import any more Russian petroleum, the Binden administration has realized that this is going to create horrendous problems for the US economy. They have rushed delegations to Venezuela, a country they have sanctioned for several years to hinder Venezuelan petroleum exports and causing enormous suffering including the deaths of children as a result of medical supply shortages, to grovel and ask if this country will supply petroleum to make up the shortfall. Venezuela has not replied. They have also attempted to discuss this issue with Saud Arabia and other gulf states who are not responding to these approaches. However, knowing where the centre of world power is moving, Russia and Saudi Arabia had closed massive petroleum technology and refinery deals with China during the last month. The petroleum importing countries, including the USA, have not gathered that petroleum prices are a political gambit and don't have much to do with "supply and demand". The USA's experience with the Nymex petroleum exchange is sufficient for them to understand this. Prices are fixed where exporters desire in a trade off between accessibility for lowest income population segments and the highest price that greases political party coffers and politicians' palms in the USA and elsewhere.

The major change is that the new trading patterns will result in a dwindling recycling of dollars back to the USA and UK financial intermediaries and a rising proportion of this trade taking place in Rubles, Rimindbi and Saudi Riyals. This will drain the assets of the major bank and hedge funds.

We will expand on this in an article covering last weekend's APEurope Correspondents' Pools briefing on this topic.

Yesterday we reported on the likelihood that the Mariupol attack on a maternity hospital was fake news and this has been proven correct. In spite of this, UK politicians and the BBC and most other UK media continue to peddle this nonsense to mislead the UK public on this specific issue. Last February this set of buildings, which had been a maternity hospital, ceased operations and the facilities were taken over by the nationalist neo-Nazi militia as their local HQ. Realizing their time was up in that location, they mounted this Hollywood scene for the sake of Western media and others, as a propaganda stunt.
Blinkered from the truth
A local blogger, who happened to be pregnant, got in on the act to attempt to add credence to this story but she was swamped by local "followers" complaining because local people know this was a set up. As we previously reported Russia has already dealt with military asset targets in this location and was not using aircraft over Mariupol. However, this use of Hollywood sets and actors is not a strange for Boris Johnson who used tax payers money to support the White Helmets in Syria who in fact carried out the same sort of false flag scenery mountings to simulate, rather badly, chemical weapon attacks in Syria. These results in attacks on Syrian assets. The troubling conclusion is that even in times of extreme danger Boris Johnson and the BBC continue to mislead the constituents of this country. Even tonight (10/03/2022) the BBC continues this drivel and even stating Russia has "invented" the existence of USA-financed biological warfare laboratories in Ukraine. The reporter concerned was clearly completely ill-informed and unaware that yesterday Victoria Nuland admitted that the USA was urgently retrieving samples and cultures from these laboratories, to return them to the USA, " case they got into the hands of the Russians".

This raises the whole issue of why the constituents of the United Kingdom are forced to pay for costly TV licenses to support the BBC when its very highly paid staff act as no more than hapless mouthpieces of Nazi propaganda because no one bothers to fact check what is coming out of Ukraine. Politicians outside and in the Houses of Parliament also repeat this propaganda in an assertive, emotional and often hysterical manner without first checking their facts. This raises the associated question of whether British politicians think they are voted in to lie to their constituents?

On the question of lying, this crisis has not curtailed the Prime Minister's problem with the truth which threatens the people of this country, if not in dodging bullets, in surviving in a policy-induced decline in this economy as a result of ludicrous and illegal sanctions and confiscation of people's assets, in Fascist style, involving no due process. The impending steep rise in the cost of living is the result of a government that promotes lies and takes actions that will hurt low income families in this country; this is, of course, the last concern on their minds. Ministers assert that all of this is the price we need to pay for the freedom of Ukrainians but since the 2014 bloody US-inspired and directed coup against a democratically elected government, the government decisions have resulted in over 14,000 free Ukrainian citizens being killed at the hands of crazed neo-Nazi militia trained by US military. In addition to these atrocities, an aftermath of the meddling of Victoria Nuland of the US State Department and now under under the US State Department led by Antony Blinken, accompanied in his heroic quest for Ukraine by the same incompetent Victoria Nuland, has continued to turn Ukraine as a failed client state in the heart of Europe as an economic basket case.

The flows of escaping Ukrainians that cover the headlines are a result of the West not encouraging the Ukrainian government to surrender. The unlikely arrival of any peaceful resolution is the result of negotiators on the Ukrainian side working under the duress of knowing that they risk assassination, at the hands of neo-Nazi militia, if they agree to a peaceful settlement. The neo-Nazi contingents now run the government and the only hope they have is for the West to offer direct military support. This is why Zelensky is forced to only make appeals in this sense. The USA, UK and Europe need to understand this reality and withdraw hope of military support including the supply of "defensive" weapons. They need to encourage the Ukrainian army to lay down their arms. In the South East, some Ukrainian soldiers who had laid down their arms were shot by neo-Nazi militia. Last week a neo-Nazi militia thug assassinated a Ukrainian negotiator. The bloody extremes the neo-Nazi contingents are going to create false flag attacks on Ukrainians in the hope of blaming Russia is getting out of hand. These are the realities. It is necessary to acknowledge that Russia's quest to de-Nazify Ukraine is something the West should be supporting. As it is, the power of the neo-Nazi segments grows and becomes more extreme and the disruption and suffering of the Ukrainian people continues. Surrendering is not weakness it would be the indication of the recognition of the facts on the ground and of the need to stop the US-inspired neo-Nazi resurgence in Europe. At the moment, the West is doing the bidding of this group because it is believing in their propaganda. This appeasement must stop. As it is, the West encourages Ukrainians to defend "their freedom and democracy", an easy thing to do when it is they who will die on behalf of such a corrupt regime installed as a result of the US-inspired 2014 neo-Nazi coup.

As we have previously indicated the humanitarian corridors set up by Russia in the West of Ukraine all worked well. However, in the South and East shelling continues even during the opening of humanitarian corridors where Russian-speakers are involved. This is what happened in Syria where ISIS carried out atrocities when humanitarian corridors were opened by the Russians to kill those using them and then blame Russia. The same appears to be happening in Mariupol where the nationalist elements are callous enough to kill Ukrainians in order to blame Russia. The recent "bombing" of a maternity hospital in Mariupol is a possible example where the size of the crater appears to be a missile attack. Russians know the layout of Mariupol and Odessa in fine detail and would not make this type of mistake unless something went wrong with a device. However, all military infrastructures around these cities were neutralized about one week ago. As far as we know, planes are not being used over these cities because of the danger of shoulder held anti-aircraft missiles likely to be used by retreating Ukrainian troops or the nationalist militia still in the cities. The "news" making the rounds is that Russia is selectively bombing schools, hospitals and kindergartens, all targets designed associated with a possible maximization of revulsion against whoever bombed or shelled them. Unfortunately if this in fact happened and who did this might only become clear when this is over according to military logs, if these exist. In dealing with neo-Nazi militia, who are not under the command of Ukrainian government and quite fanatical, it is advisable to await verification because the Ukraine government is using any device and going to any lengths to attract support. They are playing for time, rolling over negotiation meetings and arming civilians and waiting for mercenaries to arrive but all of these actions are contributing to more suffering and death; it is better to call a halt to all of this by accepting defeat. Those with most to lose in this affair are the neo-Nazi politicians and militia and they are gaining increasing command over the fighting. The creates a situation in which the reality seems to be that if Zelensky seeks to genuinely stop the fighting, he will not have long to live. This would not be at the hands of Russian troops but at the hands of the neo-Nazis who surround him and who would see such a decision as an act of a treason. Nazi's have no due process, as happened to a member of their negotiating team last week, they simply shoot the accused on the spot. This is why he frantically calls for external the support which the neo-Nazis need, while knowing it will never come; he has to keep up the act which wastes time and results in more deaths.

A range of discerning journalists are beginning to produce realistic assessments of the dangers of the resurgence of Nazi political power in Europe arising from the USA's coordinated strategy with origins in the late 1950s. Some of the most potent analyses have been written by Jewish journalists who clearly have, along with Russians, a far more acute sensitivity to the dangers of this phenomenon. Starting from small beginnings, Nazi thugs helped bring Hitler to power through democratic procedures and intimidation leading to the deaths of 1.5 million Roma, 6 million Jews and over 25 million Russians. Europe cannot afford to repeat this horror story even although this seems to be the objective of the US State Department and Pentagon. Russia's requests for a mutual strategic security arrangement in 2007 and its request for the Donbass creeping genocide to be resolved peacefully were both ignored. As a result, because of an impending attack on the Donbass population by Ukrainian military, spearheaded by neo-Nazi militia trained by US military trainers, Russia had to respond to join this ongoing war on the side of those most at risk in the Donbass. All of this could have been avoided if the "West" had taken the 2007 proposition seriously and had encouraged Ukraine to stop its war in the Donbass by implementing the peaceful resolution through the Minsk agreement favoured by Russia. This appeasement of European and UK governments of a government controlled by neo-Nazis, is a repeat of the pre-Second World appeasements of the Nazi government of Hitler.

We provide links to three recent articles produced by Josh Cohen, Alexander Rubinstein and Max Blumenthal:

Ukraine’s neo-Nazi problem

How Ukraine's Jewish president Zelensky made peace with neo-Nazi paramilitaries on front lines of war with Russia

The US is arming and assisting neo-Nazis in Ukraine, while Congress debates prohibition

Let others die
I will survive
In a fanatical drive, excelling that of the neo-Nazi militia controlling the Ukraine government, the UK government is stating that it will help Poland supply planes to Ukraine. Any such missions would end up as Kamikaze missions in which Ukrainian pilots would have no chance of accomplishing anything other than their own deaths. If they are supplied with missiles this will result in the airports from which they leave Poland being obliterated. Although there is talk about external forces establishing a no flight zone in the Ukraine, the reality is that Russia already has this established in selected zones covering their troop movements. This is expanding its coverage. All records of flight-based encounters has resulted in the loss of Ukrainian planes. Virtually all Ukrainian planes have been destroyed. Even NATO systems do not operate effectively in Russian-controlled areas as a result of particularly sophisticated electronic weapons which incapacitate enemy plane controls. F-35 pilots have encountered this stating that the Russians have an electronic "missile" use to warn these planes off as a result of pilot losing control of their planes.

The UK governments position is an irresponsible cowardice and typical of those brave souls who encourage others to do the fighting and the dying for the sake of USA State Department's failed policy for Eastern Europe. In the 21st Century it is better to maintain a the quest for peace and not this insane clinging on to the "glory" of the 19th Century appeal of warfare which resulted in so many pointless deaths. In the last war over 35 million people died as a result of neo-Nazi excesses. Those most affected were 1.5 million Roma, 6 million Jews and 25 million Russians The UK amongst others ignored President Putin's appeal in 2007 and encouraged the growth in neo-Nazi power within the Ukrainian government (see right) and poured arms into the Ukraine ready for their intended attack on the Donbas planned for 8th March,2022. With such an overt appeasement of fascism what could have gone wrong?

In a strategic policy briefing held on Sunday 6th March APEurope Correspondents' Pool was provided with a insightful review of the impending economic crisis about to befall the UK and other countries. Following an almost 50 year delivery of monetarism, in various forms, real wages have been driven down and today all consumers are very aware of the cost of living crisis. Following a slow recovery from Covid-19, now, with the Ukrainian crisis, the UK government has pitched in to advocate and spend tax payer's money on sending armaments to Ukraine, train neo-Nazi militia and apply sanctions of Russia. This has been the wrong reaction. All European counties have been guilty of enjoying US cash diplomacy at the expense of their constituents and world peace. Their acceptance of the bloody US coup in Ukraine in 2014 is ample evidence of the dominance of US policy over all European nations. The negative impact of sanctions on the UK consumers is going to be significant. If this push begins to bite and Russia is barred from selling petroleum, then Russia will have no option other than to cut off gas supplies. This will have the almost immediate effect of driving up both gas and petroleum prices. Petroleum is likely to surpass $200/barrel at which point the UK economy will go into tailspin. Share prices will be wiped out. The German economy, which has been a long term target of US policy, will be unable to function effectively and this will impact its trade. Today German exports provide this country with the largest positive balance of payment in the world. The USA on the other hand, being unable to compete, has the world largest negative balance of payments. Unfortunately Europe pays the price for this tension. Previous sanctions resulted in Russia and the Ukraine becoming the largest producers of wheat and wheat exports, which have now been cut off, as a result of sanctions, and Russia's massive fertilizer exports have been curtailed. As a result wheat and wheat based products will rise in price by a factor of at least 2 and alternative production sources will see their yields falling by around 25%. Coffee productivity will also decline resulting in coffee bean futures rising by a factor of at least 2, related to its inelastic demand curve. Russia as a major global supplier of nickel, neon and palladium essential for steel and integrated circuit production, will be curtailed driving up the prices of the derived products.

While the UK government applauds its own apparent defence of "freedom and democracy" it is, in reality, destroying the foundations of our own democracy in the United Kingdom by creating yet more instability and social stress. Because UK economic policy is limited to the policy instruments that are strictly related to the aggregate demand approach they can do nothing to manage the impacts of cost-push inflation. The UK government has no economic tools to combat their own self-imposed damage to the economy. Although there are robust economic theories and policy propositions to counter cost-push inflation in the form of the Real Incomes Approach to Economics, the UK has persisted in applying intensive financialization which exacerbates the state of affairs. A recent House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee report was entitled, "Quantitative easing: A dangerous addiction?" was recently followed by the release of the "British Strategic Review" which spells out in an explicit form why monetarism doesn't work. The Review provides conclusive proof that monetary theory is fundamentally flawed. Relying on this macroeconomic approach is to have no economic strategy that serves the interests of the people of this country.

This topic is somewhat complex but it is important for constituents to understand how macroeconomic policies can counter cost-push inflation. Therefore we are preparing a separate article to explain this in some detail with the assistance of the editor of the Strategic Review. This will be posted sometime this week (7-11 March, 2022).

Credit: Partial image of original by Gleb Garanich

It is encouraging to find that increasing numbers of media are beginning to realise the problem with Ukrainian neo-Nazi control over the government and the creeping genocide they promote is one of the causes of the current crisis. A recent article on the Reuters website gives a view on this serious issue.

Keir Starmer showed a dismissive and weak attitude towards the Stop the War Coalition and his dubious attempt to align Jeremy Corbyn and the Coalition as being anti-NATO and pro-Russian. Jeremy Corbyn has made a statement of Double Down News explaining his position. It is well worth listening to. Keir Starmer censored Labour MPs wishing to join Corbyn in the massive protest Against the War in London on Sunday, 6th March, 2022. Listening to Corbyn it is worth reflecting on the common sense and clarity of his message - this is not something that should be censored. The tendencies in the "new Labour" party under this "new leadership" is less and less tolerant of any opinions that diverge from an imposed "party line". There is a whiff of Fascism about it. The problem for Starmer is that such opinions, as expressed in this video by Jeremy Corbyn, make a lot more sense. They cast a dense shadow of doubt over those in the government and, in particular Starmer, as those who pursue the aggressive responses cowardly attempting to encourage people in the Ukraine to risk their lives while the very same politicians remains comfortably in the Westminster bubble congratulating themselves on their ridiculous posturing.

Just as Jeremy Corbyn's campaigning style captured the imagination of many in this country, making Labour, at the time, the largest European socialist party. Since he left the party leadership members have left in droves. Our wire service has noted that Corbyn's statement has been disseminated worldwide and has found a very positive response, in particular amongst the youth of Europe and the USA.

The latest humanitarian corridors have not been successful in Mariupol but contrary to the Ukrainian government narrative it is not Russians who are shooting at the civilians attempting to use them. This has been confirmed in interviews with some people who have been able toescape. Also, based on reent interviews with individuals who were formerly part of the Odessa and Mariupol administrations, both Mariupol and Odessa are large Russian culture and Russian-speaking cities. Although, following the 2014 Odessa massacre perpetrated by neo-Nazi thugs, both the Odessa and Mariupol communities wanted to separate from the Ukraine. However, their geographic position further from Russia made such a proposition highly risky with respect to logistics of maintaining energy and food supplies. After some consideration, leaders discouraged this move. However, the Ukraine government imprisoned several people in Mariupol and Odessa who they thought were, or were likely to be, participants or leaders in such a move. Because of the desertions of Ukrainian military in the initial attacks on the Donbass, Odessa and Mariupol came under the control of neo-Nazi militia embedded in the Ukrainian National Guard. These units are the most virulent anti-Russians in the Ukraine military and have no problem murdering people with absolutely no due process and just making up shallow excuses such a bland statements that those killed were "traitors" or "collaborators". Their is absolutely no trust between these militia and the Odessa and Mariupol communities, who have lived in fear of these units since 2014. The approaching Russian contingents and the concept of humanitarian corridors, which have worked in other areas, have provided the militia in these cities with the opportunity to use these corridors to pick off people they have always wanted to kill combined with the opportunity to blame Russian soldiers for these deaths. It would seem that this is what is happening. However, the media only seems to listen to the Ukrainian propaganda on there events. The Ukrainian government knows what corporate media are broadcasting and the more these media join in this process of blaming Russia for humanitarian corridor atrocities, the more the neo-Nazis will find they have the freedom to murder civilians in the knowledge western media will blame Russia.

We should be advising the Ukrainian public to avoid getting involved in any actions such as producing or throwing Molotov cocktails because the current rules of engagement means they are likely to be shot. News outlets should be questioning more rather than circulating mis-information that only gives encouragement to neo-Nazi militia to continue their in their murderous quest of killing Russians and Russian-speaking Ukrainian men, women and children.

Integrated circuits, for which there is a critical global shortage, require neon and palladium in their production. These chemicals were discovered by British scientists. Today the largest producers are Russia and the Ukraine. Russia has a long established chip making capability and this is undergoing a rapid expansion. Their accumulated experience covers all aspects of design, production and marketing but the scale is relatively low compared with other major producers. Under sanctions Russia has demonstrated a remarkable ability to accelerate technological developments, production efficiency and scale while improving quality. The basic evolution means that Russia will lag behind in logical element packing densities but the final products will have an identical logical capability because Russian logic designers are equal to any others. The products are likely to consumer slightly more energy and basic materials, being slightly larger in dimensions. In reality this is a minor constraint. As a result, current sanctions Russia has the option of selectively restricting neon and palladium exports thereby disrupting and slowing down chip production, while accelerating their own production.

As in all cases of sanctions producers participating in sanctions are simply losing market share and this is unlikely to come back. So far sanctions have benefited Russia in the sense of their providing incentives for innovation in economic activity, diversification and growth.

Today (06/03/2022), as Visa and Master Card withdrew their services, Russian banks began to issue the Chinese UnionPay cards to replace them.

In any case, worldwide, UnionPay growth is outstripping that of Visa and MasterCard for some time. China UnionPay cards can be used in over 100 countries outside China. One of the effects of politically-motivated sanctions is clearly the destruction of market share and future prospects linked to a lack of "reliability" of services that participate.

Yesterday the humanitarian corridor set up for Mariupol was closed following an explosion which was attributed to Russian shelling. Russia denied this. We have received allegations, so far an unverified notification, that a Ukrainian neo-Nazi militia had fixed explosives to a building whose cellar was occupied by about 200 people. They detonated these explosives collapsing the building on these civilians. It is assumed that most will have perished. The explosion was very loud and this is why it was attributed to shelling. However, the objective of this atrocity was to blame Russian shelling for this terrible event. We await the entry of Russian troops into the city to await any report on this alleged event. However, these sorts of tactics are typical of neo-Nazi militia who in other locations have fired on people attempting to use humanitarian corridors to escape. Unfortunately, much of the more advanced munitions, sent by our naive government and others, tend to end up in the hands of such fanatics bent on murder, not only of Russians and Russian speaking Ukrainians but also non-Russian speaking Ukrainians when it suits their purposes.

Many in the West were puzzled when President Putin and Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov referred to de-Nazification of Ukraine.

Until the fall of the Soviet Union, it was believed that about 900,000 Jews were murdered as part of the Holocaust in Ukraine. This is the estimate found in such respected works as, "The Destruction of the European Jews" by Raul Hilberg. In the late 1990s, access to Soviet archives increased the estimates of the pre-war population of Jews and as a result, the estimates of the death toll have been increasing. In the 1990s, Dieter Pohl estimated 1.2 million Jews murdered, and more recent estimates have been up to 1.6 million. Some of those Jews added to the death toll attempted to find refuge in the forest, but were killed later on by the Ukrainian Insurgent Army, or by some nationalist units of Home Army or other partisan groups during the German retreat. According to American historian Wendy Lower, "there were many perpetrators, albeit with different political agendas, who killed Jews and suppressed this history.

The Roman Catholic Church and later in the 1950s the CIA helped these fanatical Ukrainian elements involved in these massacres as part of a scheme to develop assets to attack the Soviet Union. This included the production of a considerable amount of literature to rewrite the history of the holocaust and the deny the involvement of Ukrainian militia in this genocide so asto cast these Ukrainian fanatical neo-Nazis in a positive light. As a result, this movement gained adherents in the Ukraine believing in a false "glorious" history of national determination. These nationalist and far right political groups in Ukraine, were central to the "success" of the US-managed bloody coup in Ukraine in 2014 which gave a considerable amount of political power to these elements in the "new democractic government". They immediately attempted to continue their genocidal commitments by attacking Russians and Russian-speakers and attacked communities in the Donbass who, in fear of their lives, declared independence from Ukraine. The people of the Donbass organized militia to defend their families and communities made up of largely of civilians. They were able, to slow down the advance of neo-Nazi militia from the Ukrainian side but a creeping genocide continued between 2014 and 2022. The question is why did the West accept this state of affairs? Why did they not help these people in spite of there being over 14,000 deaths resulting from the Ukrainian aggression? Today the "brave" Ukrainian army and fanatical militia are still shelling civilian areas in the Donbass as local militia and Russian troops attempt to drive them back.

Like all normal humans we are against aggression but it would seem to be the only thing that murderous fanatics understand, and this is something Russia was forced to conclude, is a counter-aggression. The cause of this state of affairs lies squarely on the USA's' failed strategic policy which has brought violence to the heart of Europe. A dominated "Western alliance" that is willing to look the other way to exercise a shameful appeasement of neo-Nazis repeats the pre-Second World War scenarios; this has brought us all to a bad place. This is the result of vacillating "leadership" in Europe and the UK, in the pocket of US cash-diplomacy, that is incapable of recognizing the damage the US policies have wrought.

Two days ago, the general conflict status of people throwing Molotov cocktails at Russian vehicles and troops changed to that of a combatants and therefore liable to be subject to lethal attack. The BBC giving wide spreads and constantly publicizing and apparently praising housewives and others making Molotov cocktails for men and others to throw at Russian military vehicles and personnel in the full knowledge that such actions are likely to result in the death of these people. This grotesque behaviour indicates that the BBC simply does not appear to care. This totally irresponsible notion of heroics and media encouragement of high risk actions only puts more civilians at risk of death. The only possible benefit for media is the ability to generate press and media coverage concerning the death of courageous Ukrainians. BBC management need to get a grip on this irresponsibility. Where is Ofcom? Why does the government allow this to continue or are they awaiting the gory scenes of brave civilians lying in pools of their own blood? This irresponsibility needs to be substituted by the promotion of advice and to promote the need for people to distance themselves from fighting and confrontation. In the media frenzy and desire for ratings the BBC, Ofcom and the government have abandoned a fundamental priority in their responsibility of exercising a duty of care for people to help prevent them from coming to avoidable harm and, in this case, death.

Also, for over two days BBC greatly exaggerated the so-called shelling of nuclear power facilities in the Ukraine, which did not happen, causing widespread concern and, in some cases, panic. There is a standard approach to nuclear power stations in this conflict linked to the maintenance of all operational routines by Ukrainian staff and security, overseen by Russia troops to keep neo-Nazi militias away from the sites. Again Ofcom should review the BBC editorial policies in relation to their quality of fact checking and impartiality.

Hector McNeill, head of the Strategic Decision Analysis Group at SEEL has stated at a press conference that, "Before financial sanctions bite, the current liaison between Russia and Saudi Arabia could repeat the 1973 scenario when, during the following decade, petroleum prices rose by a factor of 7 extending slumpflation over period of 20 years into the 1990s." In line with other analysts McNeill thinks the likely price rise could easily top $200 per barrel within a very short space of time, impacting those countries imposing sanctions and well before sanctions have had any impact on Russia. Since gas prices are linked to petroleum prices it would seem that people should be having serious second thoughts about sanctions. McNeill explained that in 1973, a partial solution was the recycling of dollars but this time that will not happen and the value of the dollar will plummet along with stock markets. He also pointed out that, "Monetarism, Keynesianism, supply side economics and Mondern Monetary Theory, do not have the appropriate policy instruments to prevent this." In addition to the lack of appropriate policy instruments he stated that for the sake of UK, European and US constituents it would be advisable to cancel all sanctions, which are irrational, because they are, in reality, acts of war. Therefore, under the present circumstances, they will attract a justified and drastic response directed against those attempting to impose them. This will see the life of many Western governments severely curtailed at the hands of their voting constituents. McNeill is one of the world's leading researchers into the economic theory and policy of these issues at SEEL. He initiated his work, in this area, following the 1973 crisis, in 1975.

The APEurope Correspondents' Pool has organized a workshop for Sunday 6th March 2022 where simulations of the real impacts of financial sanctions on the global economy will be shown. This workshop has been organized in light of the recent spate of "financial sanctions" applied against Russia following the Ukrainian action. We understand that from early simulations the impact of sanctions are not as expected. Economies with "strong" financial services sectors are likely to experience the most severe negative impacts e.g. USA and UK while China, Germany and Russia will face the least impact. We will post a summary of the workshop proceedings.

The overreach of Western countries in attempting to impose restrictions on Russia on the use of SWIFT is bringing about a long planned-for readjustment of many countries to make use of national currencies rather than the dollar. The international information infrastruture is already in place and China and Russia already use the systems for increasing amount of trade. Several other countries are joining to escape from the impositions of sanctions. India is the latest to participate in this transition. This will significantly reduce the use and recycling of dollars leading to the dollar purchasing power declining because the USA does not possess productive capacity across a sufficient range of goods and services to gain exports, as was the issue in 1971, when the USA came off the Gold Standard. Dollars are a fiat unbacked currency and the only weapon to sustain its value is increased industrial and manufacturing productivity. The US Federal Reserve does not possess the tools to influence this issue. The SWIFT embargo is likely to seriously backfire on Western economies and the USA in particular.

It is more than apparent that the so-called negotiating team from the Ukraine does not represent the Ukrainian government, or people, for that matter, but is under the strict control and instructions of the Ukrainian intel which is in the hands of nationalist neo-Nazi elements. It is reported that, following his attendance at the first round of negotiations, Denys Kireev was singled out and shot with no due process by Ukrainian security. This type of action is typical of Nazi-style cancellations used to intimidate others to encourage them to "obey orders". They allege that he was guilty of treason. What he contributed to the first round will be known to the Russian participants but there have been no releases on exchanges. We understand that Denys Kireev was specialised in finance, banking and business issues.

Reported by AGR Daily news 28/02/2022: During the two and a half years of his presidency, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky now has more than a billion dollars in accounts abroad. This was announced by the deputy of the Verkhovna Rada of the Opposition Platform – Party For Life Ilya Kiva. According to him, Zelensky has accumulated $1.2 billion in the Dresdner Bank Lateinamerika in Costa Rica. This money was transferred to the president by Ukrainian oligarchs, such as Rinat Akhmetov, Viktor Pinchuk, Igor Kolomoisky. As Kiva noted, replenishment is done regularly, in tranches of $12 million to $35 million. And they go through banks like First Union Bank, Deutsche Bank, Banque Nationale de Paris. According to the deputy, the movement of such funds would be impossible without the control of the authorities of Germany and France. The matter is not just bank accounts, as Kiva pointed out, Zelensky has purchased a villa in Miami for $34 million and several sets of jewelry for $5.6 million. This, of course, has nothing to do with politics, is it just private business.

Russia has a long experience in establishing humanitarian corridors to permit civilians leave locations where militia and military located. They used these extensively in Syria to save the lives of civilians held by ISIS and Al Quaeda (AQ) terrorists. However, these have different levels of success. In Syria sometime ISIS/AQ used snipers to kill civilians attempting to use the corridors. The other tactic which we understand nationalist/neo-Nazi militia are applying in the Ukraine is to not allow civilians to leave so as to use them as human shields. This is the case at several sites in the Ukraine at the moment. In other cities Russian officers have permitted local police to continue to operate and no harm has come to civilians. There are also reports that nationalist militia have killed Ukrainian soldiers who had laid down their arms. These events are impossible to verify but experience from Syria would suggest that these tactics are being applied in Ukraine by nationalist/neo-Nazi militia.

The lack of detailed data makes the effectiveness of Russia's insistence that it is not targeting civilians diffult to measure but in Iraq, Libya and Syria NATO and US military raised whole blocks of civilian housing killing thousands of innocent men, women and children and then blamed ISIS/AQ for these deaths on the basis that ISIS/AQ were using these civilians as human shields.

The BBC and other media have stated that Russian forces attacked the Zaporizhzhya nuclear power plant in Ukraine as a form of nuclear terrorism risking raising radio active levels. The regime estalished by Russia on nuclear sites is to prmit the Ukrainian security to remain in place and to follow their usual routines accompanied by Russian military to monitor the operations and protect the sites from any external attacks. In the case of Zaporizhhzhya, the MOD report on the incident states that on Thursday some some nationalist militia elements occupied a section of the training buliding, located at a distance from the power station, and attacked the Russian soldiers. They were neutralised and those attempting to escape set the building on fire. This was brought under control with no impacts on radiation. The Ukrainian goverment used this incident to state that Russia had shelled the power station as part of their "nuclear terror tactics" which does not appear to be the case. Unfortunately, there are many cases of such fake news emanating from Ukrainian sources and which are circulated verbatim by media with no validation.

Judging from some correspondence, we need to state that does not support violence or warfare of any kind but we think it is important for readers to gain insights to alternative facts that are not reported elsewhere. Currently the false news and misleading statements concerning the current Ukraine crisis is very significant. We aim to attempt to balance up the public record. We do not support any particular government but think it is important that readers have access to evidence-based facts or attributable statements. Clearly, in the end the assessment of where the truth lies is a matter for readership deduction. Those in possession of additional evidence-based facts can always send them in to us and we will review them with a view to posting them on the site.

The general track record of US State Department interventions is one of failure and the creation of failed states in the wake of hundreds of thousands of dead civilians. Examples include: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Ukraine and literlly hundres of others since 1945. Their total destruction of Syria and installation of an ISIS regime would have created Caliphate and strong terrorist centre impacting the whole world. However, this was prevented by Russian invervention which resulted from the Syrian government requesting help. As a result most ISIS terrorists were wiped out. To date the record of US "humanitarian interventions in the name of freedom, democracy and the rule of law" demonstrate that they have never succeeded, they have devastated economies and left a trail of an estimated 20 million dead people. And this nation aspires to be the leader of the "Western world" and claims to be the leading "democracy" proving protection for other democracies". The track record over the last 76 years is that Europe cannot rely on such an incompetent and aggressive ally whose purpose it to keep any problems away from the shores of the USA but offshore in the countries they are "protecting". NATO needs to become a ETO-European Treaty Organization to include Russia. The USA might of course apply for membership.

Nikolay Azarov the Ukrainian prime Minister who resigned during the US-led coup in 2014, recently stated that the decision by the Russian President to take the action in Ukraine avoided the deaths of hundreds of thousands of civilians in the Donbas. This is because the Ukraine government had planned a major military offensive against the Donbas to occur just weeks after Russian action. As a result Azarov considers many lives were saved. This action, it is claimed, had met with the approval of the USA. Captured Ukrainian National Guardsmen have confirmed that such an action was about to take place. It is evident that Russian strategists found out about this from Donbas agents who had found a map outlining Ukrainian intent. Also, the build up of Ukrainian troops on the Donbas line of contact was further evidence. The Ukraine's presidential announcement that they would not implement the peaceful Minsk agreememt was apparently to be followed by this Ukrainan initiative. [Update 06/03/2022]: a NATO issued ThinkPad was found by Donbass units at an abandoned neo-Nazi militia base which indicated the Ukrainian offensive was planned for 8th March 2022 and included attacks on the Donbass and Crimea.]

The evolution of economies during the last 75 years involved a significant change in the relationship between governments, their electorates and economic sector business owners. Between 1945 and 1965 the UK saw a growth in real incomes of eage earners, a decline in income disparity and full employment. This all came to an end with stagflation which was caused by a seven-fold increase in the price of petroleum between 1973 and 1983.

The invasion of Ukraine has led to hundreds of deaths and huge numbers of refugees fleeing the dangers of war. The war there must be stopped and Russian troops must withdraw.

Talk of a no fly zone - which will result in much greater military conflict - is only inflaming the situation. The war heralds the prospect of wider wars between major powers and states which have nuclear weapons. While the world’s rulers urge more money for weapons and war, it is the people of the different countries who suffer.

In Russia and around the world people are protesting for peace and a negotiated settlement to the war. We send them our solidarity and do so by following their lead and taking to our own streets to demand an end to this war.

This Sunday (6th March) there is an International Day of Action against war. Around the country and the world people are organising demonstrations, protests and vigils.

In the UK there are already over 40 No to War in Ukraine protests listed for this weekend! Find your local protest here.

If you have an event you’d like us to add to the list please email: now.

Read more ...

While governments are cutting vital sources of information on the actual events in the Ukraine we will rely on "Journalists for Peace" to obtain precise information. So far, the difference between what is in fact happening and what is reported, for example through UK media, is gigantic. The cancellation of truth, a hallmark of Fascist propaganda is notable and worrisome. We have seen this evolution, well before the Ukrainian crisis, at the social media level in the growing epidemic of "cancellations" of those with points of view that differ from the "official narrative". The tyranny which is submerging increasing numbers of the constituency in a cloud of biased propaganda leads to irrational points of view and decisions designed to shape popular support of arbitrary government decisions. The macabre outcome of this situation is that people will increasingly look away from outrages to avoid becoming conspicuous by rebelling against them and risk being "cancelled" by a cowardly populous. We are living through the same Nazi scenario when millions of Germans tolerated the extermination of Roma and Jews so as to save their own skins. The British nation is being encouraged by our media and government declarations and cheap and ridiculous cross-party unity in scenes of support in parliament, to dance on the graves of thousands of Ukrainian citizens murdered by the very government these blind politicians and are supporting. This is the shameful, deplorable and dangerous state that official propagana has imposed on this nation.

The most bizarre and irrational characteristic has been the personalization of the current conflict as being the singular responsibility of Vladimir Putin the president of the Russian Federation. He expressed his concerns, formally he deelivered these in his speech to the Munich Security Conference in 2007, and ever since, concerning the advance of NATO Eastwards in violation of agreements. Over this period, in spite of measured and logical expositions by Putin of the concerns of the people of Russia, the USA State Department and NATO in an irresponsible fashion simply ignored his analysis and requests on behalf of the people of Russia. This, in itself, concerning the vital topic of mutual security only demonstrated that the USA and NATO were not interested in mutual security.


On 2nd March, 2022, the assembled parties of the United Kingdom's government stood and applauded the Ukrainian government which has been responsible for the murder of thousands of its ethnic minorities during the last 8 years.

Russia is the only country prepared to take action to protect them against further genocidal attacks by the Ukrainian government.
This was a danger signal. Russia, throughout this period has been patient and measured in its approach to this topic. In a final attempt to rationalize the mutual strategic security arrangement for Europe, Russia sent proposals to NATO and the USA on December 17th, 2021. As had become their habit, both the USA and NATO refused to take these proposals seriously. As a result, Putin came under increasing pressure from the Russian Duma politicians as well as from appeals from leaders in the Donbas for help. This was because after 8 years of the Ukrainian military targeting civilians in the Donbas, these attacks had increased, as confirmed by OSCE data. Russian intel detected that the number of Ukrainian military and militia building up on the Donbas line of contact had doubled to around 100,000 troops indicating an imminent attack. Since most decisions in the Ukraine are managed by the USA and neo-Nazi elements Putin realized that the slaughter of civilians in the Donbas would increase. His decision was the inevitable consequence of an arrogance that wished to marginalize the security of 50% of the Eastern European population who are Russians and Russian-speaking constituents. Putin's prime responsibility is the security of the people of Russia.

Ukraine has been a failed state since the US 2014 coup as reflected in its enthusiastic shelling and murder of its own citizens who make up a significant minority in that country. Why is it that in the cloud of propaganda press reports concentrate on the civilians recently killed in the current actions but our "free press" conveniently overlooks the 13,000-15,000 Ukrainian citizens intentionally murdered by the Ukrainian regime during the last 8 years? In the current actions the Russian military are attempting to target military assets while in the Donbas the principal targets of the Ukrainian military and neo-Nazi militia are civilians. Why is this fact not reported in our "free press". No, what is more appealing, and helps sell newspapers, or clicks online, is to blame everything on just one man. This conveniently ignores the fact that the main responsibility for this mess is the incompetence of both the US State Department and NATO in not taking the interests of 50% of the Eastern European population into account and being willing to permit insane nationalists continue their campaign of genocide in the Donbas. We do not support violence, ethnic cleansing or war but what option did Vladimir Putin have after 30 years of irresponsible rebuffs from those who inform us that they uphold, "freedom, democracy and the rule of law" or something called, "rules-based order", while managing, with intent, a depreciating state of affairs including the slaughter of people of the Donbas.

Between the fist and second World Wars unfair settlement conditions following the first war and inappropriate macroeconomic policies created the conditions for the rise in Fascism and Nazism in the heart of Europe. The devastating outcome was over 30 million dead Europeans including over 7 million Roma and Jews and 25 million Russians at the hands of Nazis. The most effective fighting force in driving Nazism back was the Red Army of the Soviet Union. However, leading Nazis were allowed to escape, facilitated by the Roman Catholic Church and others.

There is a close relationship between corporate statism, or Fascism, created by Mussolini and arbitrary economic policies that favoured the owners of industry and manufacturing. With the transition from largely agricultural and manufacturing employment to service employment and globalization, the power centres have shifted from industry and manufacturing to finance and an array of financialization spin-off activities involving physical and financial assets. This trend was consolidated between 1973 and the present day. As in the interwar period, macroeconomic policies have favoured those who deal in assets over wage-earners, whose real disposable incomes have been declining over the last 30 years as reflected in the "cost of living". The rising levels of income disparity and rises in poverty amongst constituents in the UK and Europe are tending to approximate the trends observed in the interwar years. As economic conditions get worse corporations will not seek to support a better income distribution but will impose increasingly austere policies on governance which will include the inevitable drift to authoritarianism, clamp downs on justified protests and increasingly arbitrary decisions to favour corporations. In the meantime the tyranny of groups of constituents being blamed for the policy-induced economic ills risks transitioning into conditions that help the rise of Facist and Nazi extremism. Europe's failure to understand these dangers has led to a blindness with respect to the danger of the de facto existence of Fascist and Nazi elements in Ukraine, the Baltic States and other Central European countries. There is a failure to understand that the EU's current enthusiastic drive to apply arbitrary sanctions on Russia are likely to backfire on European constituents. This is likely to force the lower-income European economies into a state serious instability terminating the freedoms of these constituents. This puts at risk the rest of Europe and the UK.

Sky broadband has removed RT from their program list leading to an arbitrary corporate censorship of information reaching UK consumers. This action has taken place, as far as we are aware, before Ofcom has reported back on its assessment of impartiality of RT. This is regrettable and reflects a problem with corporate media in this country not wishing to allow the constituents of this country see all sides of the current crisis. Sky has now joined the corporate media in carrying biased news coverage which is not impartial. Our ability, as constituents, to base our judgements and decisions on the free uninhibited flow of objective information is being undermined by a group that is part of the Comcast organization. It is notable that Comcast, an American organization, has been criticized for a variety of reasons. Its customer satisfaction often ranks among the lowest in the cable industry in the USA. Their "internal" note observed that RT had been banned in the EU while ignoring the fact the UK is no longer part of the EU. So much for the new liberties gained under BREXIT, according to the government. The concentration of media ownership in this country has become an increasingly critical issue because it is suffocating free expression, vistas and the prospects of the constituents; this is killing off participatory democracy and the government does nothing about this. This abuse of corporations deciding what information constituents can and cannot access, and by-passing parliamentary approval, is a typical act of what is known as corporate statism. This is the diplomatic term used to describe a tyranny whose origins arose in Italy under Mussolini as Fascism. Just another negative outcome of BREXIT.

On Tuesday, 1st March, the Russian Defense Minister, Sergei Shoigu, announced at a domestic conference, that Russia will support the First International Anti-Fascist Congress as part of the 8th International Military-Technical Forum "Army 2022" to be held on August 15-21, 2022. This will involve around 129 countries and delegates. This is an interesting strategic step in providing a well-supported forum for the international community to review and organize the fight against the more virulent version of Fascism in the form of neo-Nazism. The problem of Fascist variants has been growing for some years now and the main mechanism for such groups rising to power, a la Nazis in Germany, is that they take advantage of social and economic crises to drive agendas that include extreme measures including genocide.

Hitler and other Nazi legal theorists were inspired by America's institutional racism and saw it as the model to follow. In particular, they saw it as a model for the expansion of territory and the elimination of indigenous inhabitants wherefrom, for laws denying full citizenship for blacks, which they wanted to implement also against Jews, and for racist immigration laws banning some races. In "Mein Kampf" Hitler extolled America as the only contemporary example of a country with racist ("völkisch") citizenship statutes in the 1920s, and Nazi lawyers made use of the American models in crafting laws for Nazi Germany. U.S. citizenship laws and anti-miscegenation laws directly inspired the two principal Nuremberg Laws: the Citizenship Law and the Blood Law.

According to Minister Shoigu, the congress aims to unite the efforts of the international community in the fight against the ideology of Nazism and neo-Nazism in any form of its expression in the modern world. So far the scope and content has not been announced but this topic is very relevant to the whole of South and Central America, South East Asia and other regions. It is also of increasing relevance to Europe in the light of Ukraine. The arbitrary and reckless application of excessive sanctions on Russia is likely to backfire on the EU economy. Given the already precarious state of the European economy, the resulting social instability will be blamed on governments providing the ideal conditions for Fascist factions to attempt to gain power by any means.

© Stone Image

Oliver Stone the award winning film producer, includes in his production an outstanding documentary on the recent developments in Ukraine. There is a considerable amount of misinformation and propaganda relating to the current crisis leading to some confusion. Oliver Stone has therefore suggested to his Instagram followers some recent articles which he considered to offer "helpful and honest analyses" on the Ukraine crisis, these are produced by various informed individuals which he thinks are worth reading. This move is to counter the "hysteria of Western media" and its tendency to "omit key facts when they are inconvenient". The recommended articles are the following:

It would seem that Ofcom, the Office of Communications, is the UK government-approved regulatory and competition authority for the broadcasting, telecommunications and postal industries, is reviewing the output of Russia Today (RT) to make a judgement concerning impartiality in the current crisis in the Ukraine. Many have accused RT of being a propaganda instrument for the Kremlin. is a member of the APEurope network which has reviewed alternative media now for 20 years and have found RT to be surprisingly objective. The majority of the programs are not anchored or managed by Russians and we understand RT does not impose editorial constraints. Of the 20 regular programs just 2 are anchored by Russians and in both cases these are women. The RT News channel is interspersed with these shows on a half hourly basis and on this channel several field journalists are Russian. We provide a recent pdf copy of our own short review of RT. We believe that Ofcom would have little reason to refuse continuation of RT broadcasts and posting because they are the only medium which has reporters in the Donbas and their reports are purely factual. Allowing RT to continue to operate in the UK would be a confirmation of the country's belief in the importance of freedom of expression.

Some background on content of Russia Today (RT)


The Fascist and Nazi rise to power and the maintenance of popular support, at least for a period, depended on the mind control of the population through propaganda and by maintaining a level of fear of any alternative proposed states of existence. This was witnessed in Italy, Germany and Spain. The combination of propaganda and the stoking up of dramatically negative images of some other countries has been able to turn populations in the USA, UK and Europe into willing participants in supporting government decisions linked to the precarious nature of economic existence for many. Better to remain silent and in an unsatisfactory state than to complain and become conspicuous in rebelling against a rising popular consensus. This is also the origin of the rising intolerance of anyone who disturbs peoples' fabricated "Hollywood" view of the world. Today, on social media the ease with which individuals with opposing viewpoints are "canceled" is a sign of this social malaise. Now, most private and government-sponsored media censor or provide biased news coverage even when purportedly providing impartial coverage; the opposing view are normally only provided with a passing reference. The only media providing some semblance of objectivity are some alternative media. At least, some of these raise points that are left uncovered by most corporate media. For example why is the West in denial of the fact that the murder of civilians in the Donbas region of Ukraine has been progressing for over 8 years and why has this usually never covered in corporate media? What, one might call a general consensus on the part of European governments, is their reticence to call attention that the country that brought this violence to the heart of Europe is the US government's "foreign policy". So European politicians across the EU, and most in the United Kingdom, fear calling attention to the fact that the USA regime change in Ukraine in 2014, incentivised nationalistic neo-Nazi contingents in the Ukraine to initiate a campaign of genocide directed against Russian speakers. No corporate media in the UK, for example, weigh up this fact in pondering their coverage of the current military actions in the Ukraine where Russia is attempting to defend civilians in the Donbas. They also intend to confront the nationalist neo-Nazi groups who have an inordinate control over the Ukraine government. The current Ukainian president, who was elected on the basis of peace and reconciliation, has not been allowed to deliver on his mandate. Indeed, as we have mentioned before, his personal security is at risk if he attempts to secure a peaceful solution to the Donbas crisis. These forces want to maintain a campaign of genocide of Russian speakers. Unfortunately this elephant in the room has increased in size becoming increasingly soaked in the blood of innocent civilians and yet it continues to be ignored. The latest UN security Council, and now General Assembly, meetings see the "West" maintaining their demonization of Russia and avoiding any mention at all of the culpability of US foreign policy in precipitating this crisis. Now offering all kinds of military assistance to the Ukraine will only prolong fighting and death. On the other hand, while never offering such assistance to the people who needed this most, the people of the Donbas. This grotesque inaction was made possible by the purposeful ommission of facts and keeping the populations in the "West" ill-informed about this creeping massacre. Our governments and the media operate an effective mind control machine of the populations.

The Second World War was initiated by the rise of neo-Nazi and Fascist elements in Europe and appeasement by "Western" nations of the regimes that grew up with their support. Leon Trotsky, a Ukrainian-Jew, was on of the few intellectuals who, very early on, understood the lethal danger of these elements. He demanded the Russian authorites take action. Stalin didn't like this criticism. Although he avoided the Gulag, Trotsky was murdered in Mexico in 1940. Stalin ignored Trotsky's advice and the world paid a price. Russia lost around 25 million citizens and most of Europe, the Roma and Jewish population suffered as a result. Today this real danger for Europe is the weak and open appeasement of a government controlled by neo-Nazis and the close-to fanatical support of this regime by the US government. Russian actions make a lot of sense from this standpoint. Military action could have been avoided if the "West" had governments who were genuinely concerned about the security of their constituents, had reacted to the creeping genocide in the Donbas and intended genocide in Crimea by these elements who have no place in Europe or anywhere else. But no, today our government openly supports and arms these people.

Although now a very bad habit of largely US foreign policy, economic blockades and sanctions are acts of war. Therefore in their panic Western leaders have gone far too far in attempting to threaten the economic future of Russia over what had become a de facto creeping genocide in the Ukraine. Unless there is a more rational management of this flood of declared intents to maximize the negative impact of sanctions on Russia, the effects are likely to be very far the expectations of bureaucrats. To threaten a nation in such a fashion is to invite warfare against one's own people. Sanctions provide no defence against this and any reaction is likely to be swift. It is essential to begin to roll back all sanctions on a worldwide basis. As has been expressed, there is a need for a genuine mutual strategic security architecture that includes, not only Europe and Russia, but also all other countries in the World. Many have suffered deaths amongst their populations as a result of Western sanctions. Don't expect Russia to tolerate this form of abuse. The current sanctions drive will not augment security it is undermining security.

Most governments and leaders in Europe are grandstanding and chasing media coverage in a way that seriously endangers their own constituents. They have simply not thought through their decisions in strategic security terms. This is both reckless and irresponsible.

The Guardian Newspaper carried a story of Ukrainian border guards on Snake Island were all killed by a Russian attack. The facts are that all of them surrendered and they were taken in safety to Sebastopol. The Ukrainian authorities are posing numerous fake messages and videos which UK media failed to verify. The Ukrainians are atempting to use missile launchers too close to civilian structures when they are supposed to be operated from more open sites. This has resulted in at least 2 impacts on civilian buildings in Kiev which they have attempted to blame on Russia.

26th February, 2022: Today, APEurope Correspondents' Pool is holding a workshop to analyse why Western intel and military establishments support training provided by neo-Nazi and Fascist extremists. We provide a narrative feedback on the exchanges.


The new global terrorist hub: The CIA has been secretly training anti-Russian groups in Ukraine since 2015. Everything we know points to the likelihood that includes neo-Nazis inspiring far-right terrorists across the world. The US government has a well-documented history of backing extremist groups as part of a panoply of foreign policy misadventures, which inevitably end up blowing up in the American public’s face. In the 1960s, the CIA worked with Cuban anti-Fidel Castro radicals who turned Miami into a hub of terrorist violence. In the 1980s, the agency supported and encouraged Islamic radicals converging in Afghanistan, who would go on to orchestrate the September 11 attack. And, in the 2010s, Washington backed Syria’s not-so-“moderate” rebels who ended up cutting a swath of atrocities through civilians and the Kurdish forces that were meant to be US allies.

Russia has by far the best intelligence coverage on what is going on in the Ukraine so why were the Russian government's concerns not taken more seriously. The propaganda on the Western media side has had the effect of keeping the public ill-informed of the simmering danger arising from the work of these extremist groups in the Ukraine. Up until the Russia actions, white supremicist groups from the USA and European countries were receiving training in Ukraine. Why is all of this inadequately covered in our "free press" and why do our politicians ignore this danger?

This inrresponsibility of the European, US, UK and NATO leaderships has driven the situation to one of military action which could have been avoided if they had taken Russia's concerns, expressed clearely for over 30 years, into account in an informed and responsible fashion.

Also, from Adara Press:

Ukrainian Neo-Nazis train far-right American White Supremacists — with the training they received from the CIA:

Posted on February 24, 2022 by Adara Press

"General Milley - I want to understand white rage General. Mark Milley, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff: "I want to understand white rage". Seems he should understand better than most:

"A number of prominent individuals among far-right extremist groups in the United States and Europe have actively sought out relationships with representatives of the far-right in Ukraine, specifically the National Corps and its associated militia, the Azov Regiment,” states a 2020 report from the West Point US Military Academy’s Combating Terrorism Center. “US-based individuals have spoken or written about how the training available in Ukraine might assist them and others in their paramilitary-style activities at home."

A 2018 FBI affidavit asserted that Azov "is believed to have participated in training and radicalizing United States–based white supremacy organizations," including members of the white supremacist Rise Above Movement, prosecuted for planned assaults on counterprotesters at far-right events, including the Charlottesville "Unite the Right" rally that Joe Biden later co-opted as a rationale for his presidential campaign. To stop what US hawks classify as the next Hitler and Nazi Germany, Washington has been backing literal neo-Nazi militias in Ukraine, who are in turn communicating with and training homegrown white supremacists, which Washington in turn is ramping up a menacing repressive bureaucracy at home to counter. It's what some have called the "self-licking ice cream cone" in action — the US national security establishment creating the very threats that justify itself."

The realities of the relationship of both Europe and Russia with Ukraine involves dangers that have become difficult to escape from. There is an entanglement which the USA and Europe have not admitted and Russia has. This is the fact that the Ukraine has become, since 2014 a hub of training of fascist and neo-Nazi elements from all over the world creating the rise in armed elements who are willing to overthrow governments be they in the West or the East. In collaboration with Western intelligence who consider these extremists to be useful terrorist elements in assisting them force through regime change there is the danger of these assets carrying out attacks in the countries of those supporting them. Typical acts to which the current Russian actions are exposed is the creation of "martyrs" by attacks on civilians and then seeking to blame Russian military. These tactics coordinated by US intelligence were evident in the Maidan with the simultaneous shooting by snipers of police and peaceful demonstrators so as to create confusion and antigovernment sentiment. The obvious danger is the organization of the destruction of high profile civilian apartment blocks occupied by families and then blaming Russia for the event. Of course military systems are not perfect an sometimes such accidents occur. However, such false flag events are a powerful tool in the hands of the unscrupulous in a gullible social media world.

The APEurope Correspondents' Pool ran a workshop to review the concept of mutual strategic security arrangements in the context of the disagreement between Russia, NATO and USA concerning a perceived lack of such a state of affairs. The decision by Russia to support the Donbas against creeping genocide is justified but the more general aim of demilitarizing and de-Nazifying Ukraine, through military means, although seemingly a need, is a difficult quest given that the existence of these creeds and their activities are openly tolerated in Europe today. Russia's objection to this trend, given that the 2nd World War was justified largely to rid Europe of this scourge, is that Europe and the USA are permitting this creed to re-emerge in the heart of Europe. Such extreme and violent elements survive because they are used by the USA, UK and NATO as proxies to achieve foreign policy objectives including the intimidation of populations and regime change. In terms of exclusion of populations from security arrangements, such as Russian interests, Russia is correct. It is self-evident that the current system is imbalanced and has excluded over 50% of the Eastern European population from equivalent protection. Unfortunately, Europe, the USA and the UK have ignored this serious state of affairs of life and death, in spite of Russian appeals for them to address this issue, over many years. It is this, and the failure of the "West" to acknowledge the creeping genocide in the Donbas, that has precipitated the current crisis. This does not mean military means are the best way to resolve the situation but what were the options when all reasonable appeals were arrogantly ignored? We have created a narrative article to cover the contributions to the workshop. We believe the workshop's tentative conclusions are of significance.


After a considerable amount of time ignoring Putin's advice on European security matters the USA's arrogance has caused problems for Europe. The exercise of regime change on an open stage in the Ukraine by the US State Department proclaimed in Victoria Nuland's evidence to the USA Congress that it cost $ billions, made her cookies handed out in a cynical fashion in the Maidan the most expensive cookies in the world. Victoria Nuland exemplifies the neocons who have led US foreign policy from one disaster to another for the past 30 years while evading accountability. It was a bad sign that President Joe Biden nominated her for the third highest position at the State Department, as Under Secretary for Political Affairs. It is pretty obvious that making little of the security concerns of Russia or 50% of the Eastern European population's security needs so blatently for some 20 years, was going to have the sort of response witnessed today (24/02/2022)

Ben Aris, editor-in-chief of BNE IntelliNews, discusses Vladimir Putin’s motivations for recognising the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, NATO expansion causing major security concerns for Russia etc...
Peter Lacelle's Crosstalk, below, provides a different perspective.

22/02/2022: William James observed, "Truth, is what happens!" On this current question, ignoring rhetoric, what has happened in the Ukraine is as follows. In November 2013, on reviewing a proposed European Association agreements the democratically elected government decided the costs involved to carry out the transition in standards required under European legislation were excessive and beyond the capacity of the country. An alternative offer from Russia with whom Ukraine had a large trade, was preferred. Agitation began with the Euro Maidan demonstrations involving activities supported by US-funded NGOs. These led to violence by February 2014 with State department and CIA backed agents leading to the murder of police and protesters to create confusion. Victoria Nuland later admitted this all cost around $5 billion. With the imposed regime change in the heart of Europe, the new "government" with exceptionally low ratings, hand picked by the US State Department permitted Neo Nazi militia attack Russian-speakers including murder. Both Crimea and the Donbas with the highest concentrations of Russian-speakers as well as Russians, freely decided to become independent from an increasingly violent Ukrainian government. In 2014 and 2015, the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine, which consisted of representatives from Ukraine, Russia, and the OSCE agreed to the Minsk Agreement as a peaceful basis for settling this situation. This included providing the Donbas with relative autonomy or local governance while remaining within the Ukraine.
  • To ensure an immediate bilateral ceasefire.
  • To ensure the monitoring and verification of the ceasefire by the OSCE .
  • Decentralisation of power, including through the adoption of the Ukrainian law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts".
  • To ensure the permanent monitoring of the Ukrainian-Russian border and verification by the OSCE with the creation of security zones in the border regions of Ukraine and the Russian Federation.
  • Immediate release of all hostages and illegally detained persons.
  • A law preventing the prosecution and punishment of people in connection with the events that have taken place in some areas of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts.
  • To continue the inclusive national dialogue.
  • To take measures to improve the humanitarian situation in Donbas.
  • To ensure early local elections in accordance with the Ukrainian law "On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts".
  • To withdraw illegal armed groups and military equipment as well as fighters and mercenaries from the territory of Ukraine.
  • To adopt a programme of economic recovery and reconstruction for the Donbas region.
  • To provide personal security for participants in the consultations.
Although the Donbas did not agree to this, President Putin went to some lengths to convince them, to accept this peaceful settlement. For eight years the Ukrainian governments never honoured its part of the agreement, stymied by lobbying from the USA. In the meantime the death toll from this conflict has steadily increased consisting largely of non-combatant men, women and children. The main agents for this violence are uncontrollable militia who have been trained by US and British military and whose creed sets ethnic cleansing and genocide of Russian-speakers as their objective. Irrespective of what the Ukrainian governments have stated they cannot control these militia because they have representation within the Ukrainian government and a fanatical minority support in Western Ukraine. This instability makes Ukraine a bad deal for NATO because this risks an intentionally orchestrated events by militia in the hope of creating a war between NATO and Russia.

The recent attacks on the Donbas, largely by uncontrollable militia and the failure to implement the Minsk Agreement and the abandonment of the people of the Donbas, who have expressed their wish for self-determination in referenda, by the Ukrainian government came to a head as a failure of the "West" and NATO to seek a peaceful solution.
The establishment of the security of the people of the Donbas by peaceful means rested on the diligent implementation of the Minsk Agreement. The Ukraine and the USA did not take their right to self-determination seriously, Russia did.
Therefore, in the last 2 days the government of Russia has decreed the Donbas to be independent and has offered humanitarian assistance as well a peacekeeping support if Ukraine continues to attack civilian areas. This is a lot more than the West or NATO has done in the face of the Ukraine not exercising their duty of care to their own people, in spite of their desire not to be subject to government decisions.

Russia has always insisted on the government of the Ukraine honouring its commitments under Minsk so as to avoid further violence but the Ukraine has steadfastly refused to comply with the conditions of the agrreement.

It is interesting to observe the continued hysterics in the West and NATO, talk of sanctions and a sort of fanaticism in the face of a logical action designed to preserve the peace. The USA and NATO having failed in Afghanistan and most other recent "campaigns and humanitarian interventions" that have left hundreds of thousands dead, fail to understand that their support of violence to get their way has also failed in the case of Crimea and now in the Donbas. Ukraine, in terms of its democratic credentials not only was attacking its own countrymen, it has since 2014, closed down 5 opposition TV channels and has imprisoned opposition leaders and politicians. All of this is the follow up of the illegitimate bloody US-coordinated regime change imposed on Ukraine and yet the West and the State Department speak of their concern for Ukrainian democracy and freedom.

On the other hand, the people of the Donbas celebrated with gratitude yestrday that they now possess the confidence of having the support of a government with a duty of care. Something denied to them for over 8 years of hardship and suffering.

As usual, Oksna Boyko's program, "Worlds apart" contains an interesting and informative interview, this time with Nelson Wong, vice chairman of the Shanghai Center for RimPac & International Studies. He is also an expert at the Valdai Discussion Club which involves experts from most countries and Russia.

Although essentially concerning Chinese and Russian development of mutual trust and collaboration, the conversation ventures, on several occasions, into the current affairs surrounding European defence and the "Ukrainian crisis". One of the interesting observations is the current hysteria emanating from the West concerning a Ukrainian non-crisis, is providing the Chinese with an opportunity to learn about the tactics deployed by the West under such circumstances and which will weaken the effective's of such tactics in future scenarios, if these involve Chinese affairs. Wong has a clear explanation of what has given rise to this theatre. There is also an interesting coverage of the futility of a single country, the USA, in continuing to attempt to impose its will on the rest of the world; in reality a ludicrous idea.

Munich Coference, 2022

Good and bad has many shades of grey betwen these extremes and these alternatives cannot be classified as being less bad or less good or even worse or better. The more the number of factors that are taken into account, the less the good and bad extremes appear to have any value because in reality they end up as unatainable ideals.

In 1854, George Boole the English logician explained how the human being arrives at logical conclusions based on binary or Boolean mathematical logic. In the 1960s, Ronald Howard at Stanford Research Institute and later at Stanford University, created the discipline of decision analys in which formalised Boolean logical procedures by applying computer-based decision analysis models. These were used to evaluate the options available in making decisions so as to select the best option according to decision-maker preferences for monetary reward, minimization of risk, levels of security, minimization of hazard risks, the extent of community impacts and a range of other possibilities. What is notable is that a simple logic based on "1"s and "0"s is sufficient to design highly complex integrated circuits and computer programs, coordinate the Internet and develop AI algorithms on a range of higly productive and beneficial "topics in the grey zone". In other words the simple binary (black and white) elements enable the rational evaluation of topics of any complexity. Therefore any decisions related to human wellbeing and security require the intervention of decision analysis and clear decision-maker preferences.

The former "strategic balance" which NATO had entered into with the Soviet Union after the Cuban missile crisis approximated a genuine consideration of the interests of both sides so the situation remained in a more secure dynamic but beneficial grey area. This was because the decision-maker preferences were shaped by both the USA and Soviet Union in collaboration.

Following the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of the Russian Federation, there has appeared a procedure where the decision logic at NATO changed under USA pressure from a dynamic mutual security position towards a "winning strategic position". The security strategy is no longer international and not even European because Russia has been excluded from participation in any analysis or decisions. Considerations of the potential of beneficial positions within the "beneficial grey zone" in any decision-maker preferences were removed. There is a desire to maintain a single preference considering any other options to be unacceptable without exposing this single hypothesis to any rational decision analysis. This is, in essence, the reason for Russia's concerns. Therein lies the danger of the current position of the government in not taking into account alternative interpretations of matters of international security. In taking such an absolute position this will, in the end, create a binary fission in Europe's security; this is irrational and dangerous and it is not of Russia's making. Throughout this period of Russia presenting its concers and desires to the USA and NATO on 17th December and now, Russian politicians, representatives, leaders and foreign strategists have been both calm and respectful. At no point have they threatened Ukraine or to invade any country. On the other hand "Western" representatives have worked themselves up into an embarrassing illogical hysterical and paranoid tizzy magnified by offstage unattributed, usually incorrect intel. Rather than hold government to account, a scurrilous media disseminate panic and fan the flames while applying no logical objective analysis.

The needed revolution is to remove hysterical politicians, encouraged by cash and sweetners from arms companies and their financiers, from defining decision preferences and to return to the topic of strategic arms and security negotiations in a more rational fashion so as to reestablish a genuine European security architecture and operational framework, to guarantee a peaceful future for all people, in collaboration with Russia.

While the whole of the Western "leadership", so-called, participate in a irrational orgy of paranoid hysterics they deflect attention from far more vital issues affecting the wellbeing of the people of the United Kingdom, Europe and Russia.

The extreme absolute statements of conviction concerning security don't address the fundamentals of security which are that if there is an imbalance of the reflection of the mutual interests of non-warring factions then there is inadequate security. In the authoritarian regime created by woke cancellations, there is an arrogant blind train of thought that considers anyone who disagrees with a self-interested strategy, on just about anything, must be canceled without any further consideration being given to why opinions differ. Any forum for open discussion is closed or obliterated. Whereas Russia, for example, has bee asking to discuss European security in an open and balanced fashion, now for over 25 years, the West, in an extremely arrogant fashion has simply ignored this request. Now that Russia has called attention to this failure to attend to such a vital question, after 25 years being, at the receiving end of an insulting and dismissive behaviour, the reaction in the West has been, rather than apologizing has been to mount a propaganda campaign designed to justify canceling or hurting Russia. The current hysteria dressed up as "diplomacy" is designed to create a self-fulfilling prophesy by the West believing its own propaganda so to justify extreme measures which are, in reality, not needed. Is logic and a responsible rational approach to security such a threat to the West?

Why is so such energy and media coverage dedicated to hot air when the economy is in such a dire state of affairs, the government has no levelling-up agenda plans that make sense, real wages are falling, the cost of living is rising, poverty continues to devastate the lives on increasing numbers and the survival of the planet is at risk because of inappropriate productive methods and an excessive population. Rather than save energy and sit down with Russian representatives in a spirit of collaboration recognizing the importance of the topic of mutual security, governments divert £millions in tax-payers' funds into arms donations or purchases for no rational reason and shift troops in a performing circus around Europe. In the meantime, the government has failed to provide medical staff and nurses with any real rise in wages when the NHS has saved the economy £ billions in lives saved and enabling people to return to work through their tireless efforts. In the meantime the level of corruption linked to cronyism and failure to follow procedures in assigning £billions to incompetent companies or even fraudsters is inadequately followed up. Such matters of corruption are of more significance that the party scandal which simply reflects the general ethical standards of the leadership, government and administration. The opposition is also at fault in supporting the current diversionary tactics and hysteria and has even had the affront to attack NGOs who are in favour of peace and peaceful negotiation so as to prevent war. The government and opposition are both confused by their own puerile propaganda enabling them to avoid addressing more important topics. The run of economic policies supported by both Labour and Conservative governments over the last 40 odd years, have landed the country in a bad situation and all effort should be concentrated on analyzing why policies have failed in a honest fashion rather than attempting to cancel or ridicule those who raise rational doubts. If this mindset continues to dominate governance it will not be possible to develop better policies because they have weaponized the mantra "There is no alternative" into an intimidating wall of denial, a denial that prevents the people of this country seek a more promising future free of antagonism, lies and instability supported by governance.

Going Underground's Afshin Rattansi interviews Vyacheslav Nikonov the Deputy Chairman of the Russian State Duma Committee on International Affairs concerning the current state of affairs.

Click on the image to access this edition.

My word is my bond appears to have evaporated from the world of financial intermediation quite some time ago; small print and fraud has put paid to that notion. What is in print and especially small print now required a complex translation to identify traps that will ruin clients. Banks such as the RBS and Llyods, which face class cases of allegedly thousands of SMEs fraudulently ruined by their manipulations, avoid serious prosecutions because the government want to sell and profit from their share holdings. This arbitrary authoritarian behaviour of governments is evident in today's "international diplomacy" where written agreements with the USA have turned out to be worthless because so many agreements have been broken ever since those made with the indigenous communities. More recently we have witnessed the 1971 unilateral abandonment of US obligation to exchange gold for dollars, Trump's exit from the climate accords and various security arrangements. All of these actions were essentially cheating and not playing by the etsablished rules. This exposes the mentality of a card sharp, someone who wants to gain advantage by cheating. It also exposes the nature of people who are unwilling to provide agreement partners with the fair opporunity to renegotiate agreements when conditions have become not to their liking. Rank dishonesty is equated with being "smart", misleading behaviour is equated wth being "realistic", doing the other person down is equated with being the name of the game or why we are here. All of this sums up to a fundamentally demeaning, base, arrogant, scurrilous, unethical and immoral approach to others. This maverick ability to break "written agreements" has created a perilous economic and security state of affairs because the trust emanating from mutual respect and agreement has been destroyed. Clearly dealing with countries capable of such rank dishonesty and unreliability presents a situation where actions speak louder than words or solemn written undertakings. This is why the current hysterical propaganda in the West aims to hide actual actions on the ground such as the advance of NATO when the Warsaw Pact was dissolved. Today, in spite of the West accusing Russia of "disinformation" campaigns, the main issue of that in spite of the mantra of "Freedom, democracy and the rule of law", the track record establishes that the USA and UK under the current leaderships cannot be trusted. This is why there is now a serious question related to the overall state of European security. A rising division of Europe and lack of collaboration across Europe and including Russia is the result of an intentional maintenance of insecurity so a to consolidate the influence of the USA on questions that should be resolved by Europeans alone. If this is not the case, why should America extend its "sphere of influence" to include Europe when the the concept of a "sphere of influence" for Russia rejected? The reason is that the environment of mutual respect and trust has been destroyed. Europeans need to reject the concept of competing spheres of influence and concentrate on how to build an integrated sphere of mutual interest of all Europeans including Russians. The question of the community conscience, which possesses notions of what are considered to be normal expectations of behaviour, in any given circumstance, needs to be brought into play. People, armed with the correct information can make very rational decisions on the question of their financial affairs and security. Permitting decisions be taken by political party hacks and politicians in the pockets of wealthily benefactors including banks and arms companies is why we are in such a mess and why propaganda and a weak pliant media substitute for good governance.

The Guardian has an illogical article attempting to suggest that Western intelligence agencies are becoming more "transparent" on what they "know" so that Russia realizes their intentions are known. Given that during the last 7 years all predictions turned out to be wrong all that this "transparency" has done has been to demonstrate to Russia that our intelligence agencies are not very intelligent and are ill-informed. The Catch-22 is that no matter what Russia states, the misinformation is so generalized that they will not be believed. Usually the West prevents Russia from gaining access to evidence so Russia is left with no means to argue their case based on evidence. The Salisbury "poisoning" is a typical example; assertion but no evidence. The other ploy is for Western intelligence to make a wild statements about Russia's intentions or guilt and then demand that Russia proves that the assertions are not true. How can Russia do this is there is no evidence, just hot air? The bottom line to all of this is that intelligence agencies are more aligned to the production of propaganda than useful information. No one stops this irresponsible behaviour because the media and politicians are provided with things to play with and genuine concerns for the security of the people of Britain, always take a back seat.

"..any ideas?"

No doubt our readers recall the disgraceful expulsion of one nation Conservatives from the Conservative government by Boris Johnson and his cronies. If Michael Heseltine had been in government he would have been one of the first to have been expelled. It is therefore refreshing to see Heseltine writing an excellent balanced piece in the Guardian entitled, "Why the panic among Boris Johnson’s allies? Because they know Brexit is unravelling". It is well work reading.

The most telling section, given that Heseltine was an effective Minister handling regeneration of depressed regions, are his comments on the new minister for Brexit opportunities, Jacob Rees-Mogg. For want of any practical ideas of his own, Rees-Mogg has requested suggestions from the public. This is a reflection of the off-hand nature of this government that has had "levelling up"" on its agenda for years but absolutley no plans. Certainly the recent levelling up document issued by the government demonstrated this, with its absense of assessments of specific cost-benefits and no additional funding assignments. Usually, people are given tasks according to their known capabilities and views on a brief. Clearly Johnson has run out of competent human resources, largely because be has alientated those with the most relevant capabilities and notions of service to the constituents of this country.

In the National Security Counsel meeting (17/02/2022) on the Minsk Agreement the Secretary of State of the USA, Anthony Blinken went on a rant, not addressing Minsk, but continuing his hysterical baseless accusations of the intent of Russia to invade Ukraine. Amongst a list of possible provocations to be "invented" by Russia, Blinken included the discovery of mass graves in the Donbas. In making this statement he was in fact suggesting that the already-established existence of about 130 burial places of missing persons discovered since 2014, don't exist. It is not known how many more there are. According to Daria Morozova, head of the commission for the search of missing persons in Donetsk, more than 3,000 claims have already been sent to the International Criminal Court in The Hague. These are the facts. Russia has been aware of this genocide but never used it as a pretext for invasion, so why now? The reality is that there are likely to be more on the Ukrainian side of the division but, of course, these would be covered up or limed. has repeatedly stated that the most significant danger in the current circumstances is the risk that the Ukrainian military will attempt to continue their campaign of genocide against Russian-speaking Ukrainians, which started in 2014 with the assistance of the USA. Soon after the White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki sought to throw doubts on the discovery of mass graves classifying this as probably not true but being used by Russia to justify an invasion of the Ukraine. First of all the mass murder of well over 13,000 civilians in the Donbas at the hands of Ukraine military, but more at the hands of Neo-Nazi Ukrainian militia trained by USA trainers, are establishd facts. The problem for the USA is that they are on the wrong side on this question and therefore have become concerned that the raising of this topic might sully their "image" as champions of human rights. Therefore it is better to deny the facts. Whereas NATO reacted to genocide in Yugoslavia, in the Ukraine, they are keeping mum but speak of the freedom and democracy of Ukrainians but openly deny such rights for the Ukrainian Russian-speaking minority groups in the Donbas. The whole Russian involvement is based on a duty of care to such people, something which the USA, Ukrainian government and NATO does even consider in a warped lack of any sense of equity of treatement of civilians. This problem is an internal Ukrainian problem and has nothing to do with Russia. However the State Department are trying to make it a problem for Russia. There is however a very troubling moral dimension to this in that as time passes we begin to recognise the classic symptoms of a socio-pathological behaviour. This personality disorder exhibits no care about, or attention to, the feelings of others.There is a lack of conscience and empathy. There is an ability to exercise a high degree of damaging behavior yet showing no remorse. The US State Department's involvement in the bloody overthrow of a democratically elected Ukrainian government in 2014 were typical symptoms. Since then, events and feedback on the unfolding reality has evolved into a troubling and blatant denial on the part of the State Department that they are on the wrong side. Given that the fact that the existing mass graves contained the relatives of many still living, this soulless lack of empathy or sensitivity, which in the case of a normal person, would have tempered how such statments were made. Therefore, the whipping up of an international scale Russiagate hysteria is their way to divert attention from their culpability in war crimes. Blinken's denial of genocide, an established fact, borders on the fanatical and raises serious questions.

Jeremy Corbyn has one of the longest and consistent track records in advocating the peaceful resolution of national and international issues, opting for the preservation of life.

Jeremy Corbyn giving his well-received address at the World Peace Congress, October, Barcelona, 2021.
In a period that the United Kingdom has supported disastrous military campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Yugoslavia leading to the deaths of millions of innocent men women and children, Jeremy Corbyn was the only MP from Britain to address the World Peace Congress in 1921 in Barcelona extending his consistent track record in defending the rights of all people to remain free from such violent tragedies.

While both the Conservatives and Labour party and the government and opposition have been running around like headless chickens augmenting or repeating the hysterical and paranoid statements concerning an invasion of the Ukraine, which is not going to happen, Jeremy Corbyn's Peace and Justice Project has joined with the Stop the War Coalition to make a calm rational statement for the way forwards. Readers are reminded that Keir Starmer recently attacked Stop the War coalition, in which Jeremy Corbyn is a leading figure, effectively accusing the campaign group of siding with Russia against Nato. This irrational criticism is out of touch with the mood of UK voters as can be judged by the rapid growth in numbers and the collaboration of the two organizations in which Corbyn has a role. In the meantime the memberships of Conservative and Labour parties are declining rapidly and have now fallen below 1% of the total electorate. They have become tiny unrepresentative factions.

The Peace and Justice Project and the Stop the War Colatiion both place the wellbeing of people before the interests of those who would prefer to resolve matters on the basis of senseless killing.

Jeremy Corbyn has released the following statement:
STATEMENT on behalf of the Peace & Justice Project & the Stop the War Coalition

(17/02/22): "The British media and politicians are struggling to outdo each other on dangerous, bellicose rhetoric on Ukraine adding to the tense and possibly deadly standoff between Russia and NATO.

There is another way. Rather than weakly posture to look tough, we should get serious about robust diplomacy to reduce the tension. We at the Peace & Justice Project are working together with the Stop the War Coalition to urge our supporters to tell those in power "‘we do not want another war". Join me, Zarah Sultanah MP, Sarah Woolley, Jess Barnard and hundreds of others in signing Stop the War's statement, which you can read in full below.

Stop the War opposes any war over Ukraine, and believes the crisis should be settled on a basis which recognises the right of the Ukrainian people to self-determination and addresses Russia’s security concerns. Our focus is on the policies of the British government which have poured oil on the fire throughout this episode. In taking this position we do not endorse the nature or conduct of either the Russian or Ukrainian regimes. The British government has talked up the threat of war continually, to the point where the Ukraine government has asked it to stop. Unlike the French and German governments, it has advanced no proposals for a diplomatic solution to the crisis, and has contributed only sabre-rattling. Indeed, Defence Secretary Ben Wallace has even accused those seeking a peaceful settlement of preparing "another Munich." Instead, the British government has sent arms to Ukraine and deployed further troops to Eastern Europe, moves which serve no purpose other than inflaming tensions and indicating disdain for Russian concerns. It has also declared that Ukraine has a “sovereign right” to join NATO, when no such right exists to join it or any other military alliance. Britain needs to change its policy, and start working for peace, not confrontation.

Stop the War believes that Russia and Ukraine should reach a diplomatic settlement of the tensions between them, on the basis of the Minsk-2 agreement already signed by both states. It believes NATO should call a halt to its eastward expansion and commit to a new security deal for Europe which meets the needs of all states and peoples. We refute the idea that NATO is a defensive alliance, and believe its record in Afghanistan, Yugoslavia and Libya over the last generation, not to mention the US-British attack on Iraq, clearly proves otherwise. We support all efforts to reach new arms control agreements in Europe and to move towards nuclear disarmament across the continent. We urge the entire anti-war movement to unite on the basis of challenging the British government’s aggressive posturing and direct its campaigning to that end above all.

The 21st century has already seen wars across the world including in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen and Ethiopia. These have brought indescribable suffering: death, poverty and displacement for millions. Surely it's time for a change of international policy. Let’s stand together for peace.

In Solidarity,
Jeremy Corbyn

It is notable that during the last 2 weeks, the main UK corporate media were not too active in the "fake news tracker" department. This is because they were all pumping out fake news. Now to be charitable one might assume that, being totally simple folk, they were easily shocked at the nonsense being spouted by Jen Stoltenberg of NATO, President Biden and PM Johnson, Foreign Secretary Liz Truss and the hyperactive Defence Secretary, Ben Wallace and Under-Secretary James Heappey. Before all of this nonsense started, Russia had sent two documents, one to NATO and one directly to the USA on 17th December 2021, setting out details on why the balance of security in Europe was becoming untenable and including requests to balance the nature of security in the interests of both Europe and Russia. Since Russia wished to make its position clear, and to avoid the usual media inuendo and misrepresentation, it published the contents of these documents. In spite of this, since there was no scandal, it is notable that UK's corporate media reported little on this matter. The USA's and NATO's replies were sent back recently but as confidential documents. In a similar exchange during the Cuban missile crisis, again a situation when the media went berserk, the USA insisted on the final resolution being secret. This was because Russia obtained in exchange to removing the missiles from Cuba the agreement of the USA to remove missiles in Turkey pointing at Russia. Russia got what it wanted and the USA was able to say how its action got Russia to back down which, of course, was not in reality what happened. The main problem has been the NATO's operational objectives have not evolved with the changing conditions in Europe. Lord Ismay, the first Secretary General of NATO explained the objective as being, "Keep the Russians out, the Americans in, and the Germans down". For people to understand the current problems it would have been more to the point if Lord Ismay had been less sloppy in his expression and had referred to the Soviet Union as opposed to Russia, since the Soviet Union no longer exists. As once explained by Thorstein Veblen, "Institutions are formed to address the conditions of the past and for this reason are never in tune with the conditions of the present." Clearly with NATO maintaining this out of date approach this organization has moved well beyond its "sell by date". With the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russia expressed the desire to join NATO but of course were refused. Not because this was not a good idea but simply because the Cold War Rhetoric flowing mainly from the USA and the UK created mind sets which were not flexible and with insufficient understanding of the changed circumstances. The USA in particular, wished to drive home that the "West" under their "Leadership" had "won". The continued existence of NATO has maintained a destructive division of Europe and Russia's place in Europe needs to be acknowledged and welcomed. Clearly, closer ties would strengthen Europe. Already the European Union, Germany and Russia combined, have the worlds largest combined balance of payments (BoP) in the world. The Eurozone BoP at $378 billion of which Germany generates a BoP of $280 billion or 72% of the Eurozone's balance of payments and Russia has a healthy BoP of $65 billion. On the other hand the UK has a negative BoP of - $122 billion and the USA has a negative BoP of - $480 billion. In contrast to the united Europe BOP as a world leader the UK and USA together have the worst BoP on th planet. In spite of all of the nonsense of Global Britain and BREXIT and America First, it is very evident that in spite of Germany being in the EU it is the most successful trading nation in the world. Creating panic based on lies is of course a way to bolster support for NATO but no one is reflecting on the real cost of the USA, UK and NATO "policies" to the people of Europe which divide and spoil European affairs. When there is an inability to compete, the US and now the UK threaten economic sanctions rather than collaboration. It is notable that the current energy crisis has deepened because Germany in unable to use North Steam 2 with unit prices around 20% of current European and UK prices, as a result of US "cash diplomacy". Rather than supporting politicians who as a body err on the side of violence and aggression bolstered by a vacuous corporate media to broadcast hysterical paranoid tropes, we should be demanding more responsible polticians and a leadership and statecraft corageous enough to dedicate themselves to truth, justice and the peaceful pursuit of objectives.

The Ukraine is close to being a failed state and is unstable because of a bloody coup coordinated by the CIA and US State department in 2014. The government overthrown has been democratically elected so the declarations of the "West's" interests in defending Ukrainian freedom and democracy is a bad joke. Although Jens Stoltenberg, the Secretary General of NATO declares in broken record style, that NATO is only a defensive alliance in reality NATO carried out disastrous campaigns in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya murdering well over 1 million civilians; hardly the actions of a "defensive alliance". Therefore viewed from the Russian perspective NATO is an aggressive organization which on the basis of flimsy excuses, or in the case of Iraq and Libya, false flag events, is capable of inflicting widespread wanton death and destruction. The Russian hopes of entering into a genuine pan European peace treaty and security alliance following the closing down of the Warsaw Pact was rudely rejected by NATO and the USA. Russia's hopes of becoming a member of a pan-European security alliance was not naivety but rather a realistic understanding of what was required to ensure peace across a wider Europe. Governments, such as that of Hungary, have a duty of care attitude with respect to those ethnic Hungarians who were marooned in many of the countries formed from the Austrian-Hungarian Empires created through the Triannon breakup of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire after the First World War. It is notable that the only MP to warn that the arbitrary and severe conditions of the Triannon Agreement was sowing the seeds for future wars, was Winston Churchill. He was right. Russian authorities have similar duty of care concerns for ethnic Russians marooned and marginalized and living in the Baltic States and the Ukraine. The Ukraine is largely of Russian and mixed ethnic origin. However, the West of the country was previously part of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire and Poland. During the Second World War, the Baltic States and Western Ukraine, were notorious for militia who carried out the Nazi campaigns for "Jew Free" territories by enthusiastically murdering Jews and Roma on a widespread scale. The lesser well known campaign arose from the "Slav Free" mindset established by Adolph Hitler who considered the Slavs to be sub human. The evidence of this ruthless disregard for Russians was witnessed in the widespread murder of Russian civilians who were brutally driven into wooden churches and then burned to death. This madness and excessive cruelty had no military utility whatsoever but was an open expressions of a racism considering genocide as a natural action of a "superior" race. The knowledge of the intent of militia from Western Ukraine which were strengthened by the CIA 2014 coup in the Ukraine shows that this violent mindset is still alive and aligned with a form of rabid nationalism. Following the coup on 2014, militia murdered around 50 Russians in the Union Building in Odessa and then set the Building ablaze to hide their crimes. The fear of the Russian population in the Ukraine and knowing well the nature and intent of these more extreme elements who had been empowered by the US coup, led to the regions with the most Russians, Donetsk and Luhansk regions or Donbas declaring independence from the Ukraine and arming themselves with Russian help to defend their borders. Crimea, where around 98% of the population is Russian also declared independence from the Ukraine as well as voting to rejoin Russia. At first Russia did not respond but as a result of lobbying from the Crimean leadership, Russia agreed to permit Crimea rejoin Russia on the basis of a referendum. On 16 March 2014, a referendum was held in Sebastopol to receive votes on the question:"Are you in favour of the unification of the peninsula of Crimea with Russia as the subject of the Federation?" With a 89.51% turnout and 95.6% majority voted Yes. Sebastopol was annexed by Russia in 2014 with the rest of Crimea and since then has been administered as the federal city of Sebastopol. Accordingly, this was hardly an invasion and not a shot was fired, unlike the US coup in 2014. The "loss" of Crimea as a result of a ham fisted and violent coup organized by the USA on Ukrainian soil and which gave rise to the consolidation of the "Slav Free" militia and attacks on Russians. To date something like 12,000 Russians have been murdered and around 50,000 injured. Russia was in fact constrained in its handling of Crimea but with Crimea being the main location of Russia's main naval centre it is clear that the State Department and the CIA incompetence led to very serious strategic errors.

The rabid nature of the anti-Russian racism in a significant section of Ukrainian military and political factions and their willingness to apply brute force and intimidation makes Ukraine a risky potential member of NATO simply because such elements would like to create circumstances to bring the force of NATO against Russia so as to complete their gruesome "Slav Free" intent.

Russia's expressed concern of Ukraine joining NATO has a long established justification given that this destructive force is alive and well in the Ukraine some 77 years since the end of the Second World War. The current flow of military hardware to the Ukraine is destabilizing the state of affairs because the Ukraine's intent is not to fight Russia but rather invade the Donbas to subjugate the people of these regions. One has to ask why is it that the "West" sides with those wishing to subjugate a minority by encouraging the worst elements in Ukrainian society. The West has no interest in the freedom and democracy of Ukrainians as the 2014 coup testifies. The "West" needs to take into account Russia's concerns which were sent to both NATO and the USA in December and openly discuss them with Russia in a constructive manner. The current grand standing and hysteria is completely counter-productive and serves to hide the real state of affairs in the Ukraine.

Jake Sullivan, the United States National Security Advisor was one of the main promoters of the fake Russia-Gate fiasco in the USA allied with Hillary Clinton in attempting to implicate Donald Trump in being an agent of the Russian government. Although no evidence was ever found against Trump plenty of evidence surfaced concerning the Clinton campaign paying for fake intelligence dossiers attempting to establish Trump's connection. Under Biden, Sullivan, being from the tiny community of Burlington in Vermont, was heavily indoctrinated by anti-Soviet propaganda during the Cold War but has not registered the fact that the Soviet Union no longer exists. Sullivan is using his new-found status and overt paranoia of Russia to continue his ridiculous crusade on an international scale, by making further claims, with no evidence, that Russia is about to invade the Ukraine. No one has yet established why Russia would. The only reason would be, in line with Russia's assumed duty of care for Russian-speakers, if the Ukraine government attempted to attack the Donbas in violation of the Minsk agreement and with the encouragement of the US. However, the Russian action would be purely to defend innocent Russian-speaking citizens of the Ukraine against the Neo-Nazi elements embedded within the Ukraine military. Currently the main military build up is not on the Russian side, it is on the Ukrainian border with the Donbas. Any "invasion" is likely to be initiated by the Ukraine military against the Donbas.

27 April 2010, Russia and Ukraine ratified the Russian Ukrainian Naval Base in Sebastopol, Crimea extending for 25 years to 2042.
23 February 2014, a major rally in Sebastopol protested against the US removal of Ukrainian president Viktor Yanukovych, demanding for self-government and to become part of Russia.
6 March 2014, Sebastopol unilaterally declared itself a federal subject of the Russian Federation.
11 March 2014, the Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol declared their independence from Ukraine.
17 March 2014 the councilors of Sevastopol City Council voted in favour of the integration of the city into the Russian Federation, with the same status as the cities of Moscow and Saint Petersburg.
16 March 2014, a referendum was held in Sebastopol to receive votes on the question:"Are you in favour of the unification of the peninsula of Crimea with Russia as the subject of the Federation?" With a 89.51% turnout and 95.6% majority voted Yes. Sebstopol was annexed by Russia in 2014 with the rest of Crimea and since then has been administered as the federal city of Sebastopol.
2 May, 2014 Neo-Nazi gangs murder many Russian-speakers in the Trade Unions House in Odessa and then set fire to building to hide their crimes. 46 were killed and over 200 people were injured. Without the Crimean transition and protection proffered to the Donbas, the death count would have been far higher throughout the Ukraine.

The crescendo of panic, concerning the risk of invasion by Russia emanating from Washington and transmitted through the UK is just ridiculous. Both the US and UK governments are facing a serious problem linked to their failing economies and failing government ratings so they are looking for scapegoats. The US is concerned that its grip over control of the narrative concerning the importance of NATO to Europe is slipping. The three countries whose economic performance represent a reason for embarrassment of how the USA and UK have managed their affairs are Germany, China and Russia. Thes economies share a massive positive balance of payments of more than $600 billion while the US and the UK take up the two world's worst negative balance of payments totalling -$480 billion.

This dire economic situation has led to base motivations of the USA and UK to try to weaken the economies of Russia and China through existing sanctions as well as to invent excuses to impose further economic sanctions.

In the case of of gas deliveries from Russia at 25% if the current energy prices, through North Stream 2, the objective here is to worsen the state of energy markets in Europe, including the UK, so as to justfy the import of more expensive US and Middle Eastern LPG.

In these extraordinarily irresponsible actions the USA and UK absolutely no consideration is being given to the cost of living implications for German and UK citizens let alone the European population. In the meantime the Ukrainian economy goes down the tube. The images of these failing governments are more important to politicians than the wellbeing of their constituents. Russia has been explaining that it can supply more gas at 25% of current "free market" prices based on long term contracts but the USA in a typical "spoiler" action is "dissuading" European agencies and key politicians and European Commissioners from considering such contracts.

The instability surrounding security threats can also help to raise energy prices. The play book seems to be a theatrical played out conspiracy:
  • to raise panic and feeling of insecurity concerning an imaginary attack from Russia on the Ukraine

  • to make a show of sending armaments to Ukraine;

  • to make a show of sending "NATO" troops all over the place;

  • to state the pre-arranged drills in Russia, Black Sea and Belarus represent Russia preparing for an invasion;

  • the fact that no Russia invasion takes place will be used to explain to people just how "resolute" the West has been in "preventing" the Russian invasion;

  • the "success" of this "resolute" action, will be used to "explain" to people just how important NATO is to peace and security in Europe;

  • the administrations of the USA, UK and the civil servants in NATO will bask in the reflected glory of their success in preventing something that was never going to happen... enabling them to hold on to their seats and look forwards to gaining in the next elections and more arms sales...
The fact that Russia has repeated many times that it has no intention of invading the Ukraine is ignored. In all of this saga no one has yet explained why Russia would want to invade the Ukraine. All of this is so extreme that Russian strategists are having to second guess why the US, UK governments and NATO are prepare to such ridiculous lengths and to ascertain if they are using this as cover for some form of action, false flag or otherwise.

However, the only reason Russia would react is if the Ukraine government threatens the security of the Ukrainian citizens living in the Donbas, most of which are Russian-speakers and many have Russia passports. Russia has a duty of care towards these people just as they did to the people in Crimea. Russia did not initiate the call of Crimeans to become part of Russia this came from the Crimeans themselves who were fearful of a genocide campaign against Russian-speakers following the US-instigated bloody coup against the Ukrainian government in 2014. Such attacks began in Odessa after Crimeans held a referendum to leave the Ukraine and seek the protection of Russia. The most significant problem is that the "West" has sent excessive amounts of arms and funding to the Ukraine which are more likely to be used against their own people in the Donbas than to defend the Ukraine from a Russia attack.


Please note: This leader has been withdrawn by the editorial and a separate more informative article page is in preparation which will be posted soon. The editorial apologies for any inconvenience to the readership.

The absurd paranoid posturing of the UK and US governments is aggressive and "justified" by a misrepresentation of the facts. Russia has no logical reason to invade the Ukraine so "strategists" assign this intent to the Russian president Vladimir Putin as a sort of devil incarnate. Putin has repeated on many occasions that Russia has no intent to invade Ukraine. Anyone wishing to secure stability, security and peace needs to express this intent rather than use the senseless aggressive rhetoric along the lines of, "If Russia invades we will react". Strength comes from the ability to work towards a constructive and collaborative solution to a pan European settlement on future security, cooperation and peace.

The main antagonist is the USA who under Barack Obama and vice president Jo Biden, initiated this instability by organizing a bloody coup against a democratically elected government of the Ukraine in 2014. The USA appears to thrive on confrontation and to favour the maintenance of instability across the European continent to sustain a paranoid regime of fear and insecurity. The current US administration's party, the Democrats have form, they rode out the Trump administration attacking Trump for four years on the basis of a completely fictitious Russia-gate narrative which was proven to be without any merit; in short, lies. And yet they continue, now in government, corrupting the media messages and European governments with the same paranoid and false narrative of imaginary intents of Russia.

All of this is extremely tiresome and unnecessarily unsettling. There is no good reason why the imposition of this sort of behaviour should be tolerated by a free people in a democratic society. If Europeans desire peace and tranquility they need to reject this propaganda and support those politicians who have the courage to advocate for the union of all Europeans, and which includes the people of Russia, in seeking a peaceful and mutually beneficial collaboration on the terms established by the people of Europe rather than a failing alien state.

How to obtain a copy
A free epub or pdf executive summary of the BSR is available for download below. Some browsers do not handle epub downloads well so we have zipped the epub to protect it. Therefore the available epub is in a Zip file which needs to be unzipped when downloaded.

The full BSR document in epub or pdf formats will be available for just £10.oo a copy when a card payment issue is being resolved with PayPal.

A product of the Decision Analysis group of SEEL, the Systems Engineering Economics Lab.

The Labour Theory of Value (LTV) which relates the price of a good or service to the number of hours used to produce or deliver it, is supposed to have died out some time ago. However, most service jobs provided by journeymen are essentially priced as the sum of the number of hours put in, the hourly rate plus materials used. So the LTV holds up here. In industries or large service sections, the margins added my "management" can be excessive resulting in there being little relationship between unit prices and labour inputs. Under globalization, where low incomes workers are common, this disparity is even greater. There is a need to pay those employed a share in the benefit, the organization that employs them, brings to society. Andrew Bailey, the governor of the Bank of England (BoE) recently made a statement discouraging workers from demanding large wage rises to compensate for failures in BoE policies to prevent inflation rising and the cost of living becoming too high for many people. Bailey has an annual salary in excess of £500,000 plus a pension. For some 12 years the BoE obsession with quantitative easing has driven investment away from supply side production and services and driven funds into assets and offshore investment causing a constant decline in real wages. This has prejudiced wage earners so any cost-benefit applied to the BoE would be negative. According to the LTV, if Bailey was paid according to the benefit of his organization to society he would face a significant reduction in his salary because there is no real added-value arising from BoE policies.

UK corporate media support a hysterical and unsettling fear promotion campaign acting as captive, thoughtless stenographers for the military industrial complex and NATO. Currently they circulate serious misrepresentations of the facts concerning the imaginary "Ukraine crisis". does not support this irresponsible nonsense. We live in a country where the national "leadership" has been seriously challenged by handling affairs in an honest fashion. Now that they are on the spot, the government participates in the diversionary tactic of spreading of lies on an international scale putting at risk the security of this country. The unacceptable state of affairs is that, for want of relevant content, UK media from the Telegraph, Daily Mail, Financial Times to Sky and BBC distribute this nonsense with little qualification. This is not journalism, it is thoughtless irresponsible propaganda.

We call the attention of our readership to the latest edition of the "Worlds Apart" a programme, anchored by the journalist Oksana Boyko. In this edition she interviews Richard Sakwa, professor of Russian and European politics at the University of Kent. This programme is balanced and spells out the real situation with respect to the Ukrainian "crisis" and the current concerns of Russia; it clearly is not to invade the Ukraine. Boyko is a rarity amongst journalists in that she does her homework on topics before completing interviews. As a result the content is usually very informative. It is not what Greta might refer to as bla, bla, bla.

Yesterday a complete non-event occurred in Kiev. Boris Johnson who joined Jo Biden and NATO in creating a completely false narrative that Russia is about to invade Ukraine, did his "statesmanship" bit by travelling to Kiev and gravely intoning that if Russia invades they would face terrible sanctions. This underwhelming act was mainly for domestic consumption to hoodwick daft UK voters into thinking Borris was getting a grip on things while the UK media, of course, helped maintain the hysteria about a Russian invasion. Central Europeans, Ukrainians and Russians were scratching their heads because Russia has not had any intention of invading Ukraine. They wonder, why doesnt the UK government realise that? In the meantime, US cash diplomacy in Europe is delaying the authorization of the NorthStream 2 gas pipeline to Germany to keep gas prices high in an attempt to get people to support a switch to far more expensive LPG from the USA or Middle East. These combined antics generate massive profits for US energy commission agents and arms producers. As a direct result the UK government's support of this idiocy, the same government is having to dole out money to subsidise energy bills of UK voters. The UK government sent arms to Kiev more likely to be used against Russian-speaking Ukrainians, in their homes, than any invading Russian troops as a result of "SlavFree" elements in the Ukrainian government and military. None of these tactics have anything to do with the freedom of Ukrainians or security of the UK.

The main problem facing 45% of wage-earners who now are feeling the cost of living crisis, is not cheese and wine parties and naughty rave-ups at the heart of number 10. The problem is the non-stop parties that have carried on for a marathon 50 years. The Conservative and Labour parties are tiny private organizations with a factional membership of less that 1.25% of the total electorate. However, they imposed an increasing financialization under monetarism on the other 98.75% of the electorate to create the regional incomes disparity and a national boom in food banks. Neither party has, in reality, implemented alternative macroeconomic policies in government but both have been following a dangerous addiction to financialization. We now have the grotesque situation of one of them publishing an over-sized tome entitled, "Levelling up" to try and undo the legacy of damage they have both caused. Does anyone seriously think that their track record and this buzz-word filled volume represents anything of practical utility?

Nicholas Kaldor
Today, 2nd February, 2022, the government has rushed out its "Levelling up" proposals. This oversized document contributes very little to the understanding of what has caused the economic decline and increasing inter-regional disparity. It has little to do with the "economic geography lesson" that fills up most of this document.

In 1966 Nicholas Kaldor, in his inaugural lecture as Professor of Economics at Cambridge University, spelt out the basis for economic growth for the United Kingdom. Kaldor was an advisor to the Labour government and party. Labour and Conservative governments had delivered a period of unprecedented growth between 1945-1965 with falling inter-regional and income disparity, rising real incomes, full employment and a healthy balance of payments.

Kaldor was a pioneer in introducing the role of technology and innovation into macroeconomic models along with the economists Arrow and Solow in the States. In essence Kaldor explained that it was essential to maintain industry and manufacturing, at all costs, since all of the equipment, devices and communications technologies used by all other sectors come from industry and manufacturing and therefore the engine for economic growth was a constant investment and focus on supply side production of goods and services by national producers.

Concerning the significance of Bank of England Independence, the "Levelling up" document states,

"The Bank of England Act (1998) gave the Bank of England’s Monetary Policy Committee (MPC) operational independence for setting interest rates to meet a mandate for price stability set by the UK Government – an infation target of 2%. By delegating to an expert, independent institution, decisions about monetary policy became significantly more transparent, anchored in data and analysis, and focused on a long-term price stability target. In response, infation expectations have fallen and remained close to the target, consistent with much improved policy credibility."

The Bank of England's "experts" "managed" quantitative easing for over 12 years which directed investment away from the supply side and into assets. This helped drive the government austerity losing 20,000 police and 50,000 nurses from the NHS for ideological reasons. The "Levelling up" document now has an intent to add back 20,000 police and 50,000 nurses to fill in the gap created intentionally by the government and Bank of England policy.

The Lords Economic Affairs Committee published their report on quantitative easing in October 2021 with the title of, "Quantitative easing: A dangerous obsession?" - the response to this query is a definite "Yes!"
Although, Kaldor did not refer to Jean-Baptiste Say, who recognized that entrepreneurs have the role of identifying better ways of doing things by raising productivity and paying higher wages. With higher productivity, prices remain competitive thereby raising consumption based on rising national real disposable incomes generating national economic growth. Say was "canceled" by the likes of Keynes and monetarists who sought to blame the Say model for being unable to prevent the New York Stock Exchange Crash in 1929 and the following Great Depression. This was caused by inappropriate monetary policy and lax financial regulations associated with an inexperienced Federal Reserve. The monetarists and Keynesians, rather than understanding Say's model which saw productivity and innovation as the governor of economic growth (as later confirmed by the work of Kaldor, Arrow and Solow) chose to invert this logic to say injections of money and debt can be used to generate "demand" to be "managed" through monetary policy.

In reality, the 1945-1965 success of the UK economy was a case study of the Say model in action, since with full employment, Keynesian policies were not deployed. This fact was established by Robin Matthews of Cambridge University, in a detailed research paper published in 1968.

In 1975 Denis Healey, a Labour government Chancellor, abandoned Keynesianism and an incomes policy and launched the UK on a disastrous cascade under monetarism that lasted almost 50 years, with monetarism becoming the new paradigm of all governments both Conservative and Labour throughout this time. Nicholas Kaldor withdrew his services from the Labour government in 1976 and became one of the strongest critics of monetarism. At that time he predicted the decline in the balance of payments, deskilling of manufacturing workers, regional and income disparity and falls in real wages. Kaldor turned out to be proven right and yet it is notable and regrettable that this having been the cause of the current state of our economy, including regional disparities of income, absolutely no reference to this reality is contained in this oversized "Levelling up" document. The solution, it seems, is to throw yet more money at the problem.

Nevit Turk, the Senior Economics Correspondent for Agence Presses Europeéenne has written an overview of the British Strategic Review, based on an advance copy. The BSR has now been released and it coincides with the government's "Levelling up" proposal. However, the BSR provides a more transparent explanation as to why the economy is in the state it is in under the subtitle, "Monetarism and the Real Economy". The BSR can be obtained through the PayPal link on Nevit Turk's overview page (link below).

One of the most remarkable sections in the BSR document refers to evidence given to the House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee which contained the statement that,

"Quantitative easing is a policy without a theory"

The Review confirms this statement by proceeding to dismantle monetary identities to show that quantitative easing and monetarism in general have no relationship to reality and are in fact seriously flawed.
Based on this piece it is apparent that the Review contains a lot more than might have been expected from the normal run of "strategic reports" produced by the think tank bubble. It would appear to be timely in that it points out the ongoing errors in the current macroeconomic paradigm theories and practice based on the evidence and it proposes better ways forward. There is a surprising amount of hitherto undisclosed information concerning events in the past which created a fixation on financialization which impaired real growth in Britain so that for 50 years we have never realized our full growth potential. The overview provides some hope that the Review provides some orientation which could contribute to a practical means on initiating the long awaited actions of integrating the Northern "rust" zones through real growth to reduce the currently unacceptable levels of income disparity. Apparently not showing any particular partisan bias, this Review criticises both Labour and Conservative governments for not being particularly good with the economy.

Click here to access the BSR overview

Recently, some newspapers put out that Jeremy Corbyn was being encouraged to form a political party of his own since Keir Starmer has resisted reinstating the whip. Not that the whip ever meant anything to Jeremy Corbyn who has been one of the most consistent in this views which were never swayed by the types of moral compromises the party sometimes demanded. Starmer's excuse is that Corbyn has not apologized for stating the truth about the exaggerated EHRC report and the political nature of the purposely engineered crisis concerning antisemitism "in the Labour party" with the intent of removing him from the party leadership. In the case of Jeremy Corbyn this is an entirely immoral request on the part of Starmer. The medium is posting a 3-part article on this new party concept, 2 parts are already posted. This sees Corbyn is a valuable national asset in his successful campaigning capabilities and his courage in giving space to John McDonnell to develop an internationally supported quest for the "New Economics" as an alternative to failing economic policies. As a result Corbyn swelled the ranks of the Labour party and its bank balance when he became leader making Labour the largest socialist party in Europe. The Corbynista article suggests that he can do more good for the country and gather substantially more support, by distancing himself from the drab soulless "party machines". The population has become highly disillusioned with political parties and Corbyn might be best advised to remain an independent and to head a groundswell "movement". The article suggests he could attract large numbers of people, from all walks of life, who want a positive change away from sleaze and dishonest rhetoric. has no connection to Jeremy Corbyn and articles posted have not been endorsed by Jeremey Corbyn.

Visits by foreign dignities to Kiev are in little danger from agents from Russia or the Donbas but rather from rogue elements within the Ukraine military who were former members of the Neo-Nazi militia responsible for murdering Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens. The still maintain a "SlavFrei" (Russian-free) fanatscism. Since the US State Department coordinated the bloody coup in 2014, around 14,000 Russian-speakers have been murdered. There is concern that these elements want to coordinate a false flag event to blame either Russia or Donbas separatists to justify attacking the Donbas so as to provoke Russia that has a duty of care obligation to protect Russian-speakers many of whom hold dual Russian-Ukrainian passports.

Over the last 50 years the rust belts of decaying industries and manufacturing in the mid-West USA and industrial zones on in the UK can be linked to the permanent high cost of energy which was the result of Arab nations in OPEC intentionally raising the international price of petroleum in 1973; rising seven-fold within a decade. Rather than encourage petroleum substitution, the IMF Managing Director, Murshid Karimbakhsh a Moslem and otherwise known as Johannes Witteveen, supported the price of petroleum by recylcing petrodollars back through Western economies to be distributed by banks, agents and lobbies who "encouraged" decision makers and political representatives to not to become too fussy about the price of petroleum. This corruption took hold effectively and it is still with us. The IMF's action caused slumpflation to remain the principal cause of economic decline for over 20 years, up until the mid-1990s. It was the most significant motivation in accelerating the decline in UK industry and manufacturing where the high costs of energy were to be compensated by investment, making use of recycled petrodollars, in offshore production in very low income countries. These same petrodollars initiated the growth in financialization flowing into onshore assets rather than onshore industrial investment. As a result real wages fell and the cost of living for wage-earners rose. What we witness today is a confirmation of the durability of this corrupt system maintained by both the Conservative governments and the Conservativelight Labour "opposition".

Far from believing in honest competition based on entrepreneurship and innovation, the US resorts to threats of or the imposition of sanctions. All of the countries affected, including European "allies" are getting fed up with this constant interference in their affairs. But fortunately this mindset and those who promote such aggression will soon be forgotten. China has established an alternative international payments system currently running in parallel to the SWIFT system. The number of countries joining this system is rising rapidly and they include those currently barred from SWIFT. At the same time there has been a displacement of inflating dollars by the more stable Chinese Renminbi (Yuan). There is a slide in the international holdings of the US$ as a reserve currency .

China has emulated the concept of SWIFT but made it many times more efficient by clearing payments almost instantly without a dollar in sight. In the meantime SWIFT, creaks along, taking days. Each time the US imposes sanctions the affected countries have reacted by substituting whatever is being banned in terms of commodities or technologies by stimulating national production. This is why, for example, Russia has replaced the USA and Canada as the largest exporter of wheat and other agricultural commodities and how Huawei's new operatiing system, Harmony OS, is ready to replace Google's Android OS. Clearly the USA's strategic foreign policies are irrational and out of sync with reality; they might try cooperation and a less aggressive approach to diplomacy.

The frenzy of disinformation being circulated by UK corporate media concerning the Ukraine is completely irresponsible. The situation is as follows. In 2014, the USA staged a violent coup taking over the democratically elected Ukraine government putting in power ultra right wing nationalists who set about mounting a campaign of genocide against Russian-speaking Ukrainians. The main agents were militia aided by CIA who had Nazi roots going back to last war. The population of Eastern Ukraine, the majority being Russian-speaking panicked and Russia who had a duty of care for these people (many hold dual citizenship) sent aid, most of which was voluntary, for these people to defend themselves. In Crimea with 98% of the population being Russian-speaking they asked to be annexed by Russia for safety. Therefore Russia was reacting to a situation arising from a USA interference which spilled over into a civil war. Russia never had and still does not have any intension of invading the Ukraine; its only concern is the safety of the Russian speaking population in the East. Anthony Blinken the Secretary of State has realized that there is a major split in the EU concerning relations with Russia. Germany and France are fed up with US meddling and its sanctions imposed on Russia and want to secure a normal relationship with Russia. NATO, basically an arms bazaar for US armament companies does not want this split to undermine its survival and high paid salaries. Therefore, the USA and NATO are purposely exaggerating the threat of a Russian invasion of Ukraine. They are whipping up fear in the general populations in the EU and UK to justify NATO's existence and US arms sales. The gullible UK corporate media, instead of analyzing the motives behind this sham, simply broadcast the US and NATO propaganda. This "sending of arms" to the Ukraine in response to the self-generated tension means arms re-assignments will result in some marginal additional sales for the USA and perhaps the UK but any arms sent are more likely to be used against the Russian-speaking Ukrainians in the civil war than against Russia. The aid funds sent will end up in dodgy bank accounts. Russia has sent documents with proposals on a general European security framework which is lacking but NATO and the USA do not wish to entertain these proposals but wish to maintain the image of Russia as an aggressor as a way to prevent Europe asserting is sovereign rights.

In a frantic effort to fill the media with topics that smother the stories appearing on booze ups and naughty cheese and wine parties, the government, in its panic at the spectacle of losing their bouncy cheer leader to a men in grey suits replacement, has resorted to issuing a cascade of displacement activities in an effort to show what a serious government this really is. From one hapless MP announcing a change in BBC funding to another hapless Health Secretary throwing away our last protection against a new surge in Covid, and a Defence Secretary announcing the delivery of anti-tank devices to the Ukraine, wasting tax payers' money. In a further indication of extreme incompetence following court opinion that many Covid deals were illegal and the Treasury has revealed that it expects its anti-fraud taskforce to write off £4.3bn in Covid payments lost to fraud during the pandemic.

All of these displacement activities were made to appeal to the Conservative party's BREXIT fanatics who also seem to be the same group pressuring the Prime Minister on these issues, some of whom oversaw the dodgy deals referred to. However, none of these issues aligns with the wishes of the majority of voters in this country. So the country is going to pay a high price to please a loopy Conservative faction in terms of poor media coverage, more unecessary deaths from Covid and an expensive waste of tax payers' money to contribute to the destabilization of European security.
Done for: to be about to die or suffer very much because of a serious difficulty or danger:

In the meantime, Boris Johnson, in his best Churchillian act, advised Russia, who have no intension of invading the Ukraine, that they would pay dearly if they invaded, it would be, he gravely intoned, another Chechnya. It was this same individual who, as Foreign Secretary, funded the bogus White Helmets to work up false flag incidents in Syria to facilitate unjustified attacks on Syria. No one believes anything this man says anymore. As a result his command and his stage has shrunk to Lilliputian proportions. In fact it gets worse, he is advising Russia not to do something they have no intention of doing!... so this statement is no more than a man from a country greatly diminished by BREXIT, attempting to assure the USA that he is on the right side. Oh, but don't forget, we sent an aircraft carrier loaded with airplanes purchased at a extortionate prices from the USA - another waste of tax payers' money - off into the South China Sea on the look out for Junks or was it to reintroduce the Opium Trade to China as part of an innovative trade deal? The performance of these carriers planes is a disaster, we understand that they have a very poor manoeuvrability - they are far too heavy, placing our pilots at risk in an operational situation. Just the other day one plopped into the ocean for no known reason, obviously something didn't work. Hardly a convincing show of force.

China and Russia in the meantime, go from strength to strength. In this context, the UK constituents continue to suffer, waiting in vain for the UK government to come up with a convincing "levelling up" strategy to deliver on the apparently already "delivered" BREXIT deal which is, however, still under negotiation with the EU. Yes, Boris got it "done" which isn't really true, is it? Nothing has happened since with most things fraying at the edges. Maybe replacement is less costly than displacements.

Theatrics: behaviour that is intended to get attention

In a vain attempt to convince the public opinion that the State Department and British government actually believe their own propaganda, we now have the theatrical announcements that diplomatic personnel are being advised to leave Ukraine. This ongoing coordinated theatrics is so amateur that only those with the vacuous intellectual abilities of UK corporate media editors dutifully allows this nonsense to be put into print or broadcast and disseminated to the UK population without any objective analysis.

The main reason for this crescendo in idiocy is the fact that Blinken, who dwells in the Washington Beltway swamp, has only just realized that European nations are getting fed up with American directives concerning their "security" and aggressive attitude towards Russia, an important trading partner for strategic resources such as energy and an outstanding investment option for European companies. On a cultural level people actually find Russians to be an attractive people with an amazing cultural heritage and shared experience in the last war. Increasingly people question why is the USA seeking to entrap these wonderful people, who have the same aspirations as all other Europeans, in the middle of all of this aggressive nonsense. The question is why does the USA wish to threaten the people of Russia? Or are they contemplating a humanitarian intervention, such as in Iraq, which resulted in the murder of between 500,000 and 1,000,000 innocent men women and children. But European nations who are having second thoughts at just how "helpful" the USA is, we refer to voters in Germany and France, the two leading countries in the EU. We should add that increasing numbers of UK constituents are beginning to see through these sham announcements. The arms sales generated by NATO for US and UK arms manufacturers far exceed the so called 2% of defence spending targets to support NATO. This is why Trump backed off from his, "you need to pay us for your protection ..." like a Mafia boss trying to justify a protection racket. Increasing numbers of voters realize that no American president is going to press the button to save any country in Europe if it needed to. They might send some drones only to kill the wrong people. The USA is so accustomed to increasingly breaking international treaties, starting with Nixon's escaping the US obligation to exchange excess dollars for gold in 1971 by simply abandoning the system, and the enormous mistrust generated by Trump's walking away from several vital international agreements. This is why so very few have faith in anything Blinken says. He continues in his silly out of date cold war rhetoric of the 1960s. Someone needs to inform him that the Russian Federation is not the Soviet Union and the European voters are far better informed. Most do not believe that Russia poses a threat to European security. NATO needs to begin negotiations to include Russia so as to establish a true security alliance as was proposed by the Russians when the Soviet Union collapsed. But such strategic thinking is quite beyond the intellectual capabilities of US "strategists" who are bent on bullying and aggression.

In the meantime NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, like a broken record, keeps repeating that it is a "defensive alliance". He overlooks the fact that Henry Kissinger observed that the NATO attacks on Serbia and Libya creating death and mayhem resulted in the biggest migration from North Africa to Europe in history and which continues and these NATO actions helped launch the entry of Al Quaeda and ISIS into Africa. NATO is not a defensive alliance and under USA tutelage and cash diplomacy has become increasingly a tactic to weaken European security because of its geographic advance that threatens the people of Russia. Why do we in the UK and Europeans tolerate this insane behaviour sanctioned by our leaders, so-called?

In two recent UK intelligence releases as sorts of carbon copies of US intelligence briefing statements linked to unattributed sources stated that the danger of Chinese international development projects was that countries become entrapped in debt and dependency on China.

Lovely to be back - everybody!!

Well, the gov and clever Borry have produced a very big book called "Levelling up".

All rather, well, boring but lots of maps of the country in Conservative blue

None of that red stuff here!!

Now, I really dont understand all of the complicated language so I got a friend to tell me what it says.

He said that Denis Healey a Chancellor way back when, was told by the Treasury that there was a big borrowing requirement - but in fact this was a mistake.

Denis panicked and asked the International Monetary Fund for some money.

The IMF boss a fellow called Witteveen said OK as long as Denis cut back on investment and thrashed the unions and pay packets

Denis was already doing this anyway but this Wit fellow wanted him to be even meaner.

So from then on all of our governments have imposed something called monetarism.

So instead of making stuff we have been sending money to far away places from them to make stuff for us while most of our indutries closed down

No more work, less money, and we ended up with places getting poorer

Most of these people spent their time building red walls...very odd.

Since I was getting very confused I asked my friend if this is what this "Levelling up" book said - after all I needed to tell my wonderful readers something.

He said oh no, you won't find any of this in the book because this is really what happened!!

But why doesn't the book say this then? I asked

Well then the people reading the book would realise the government is to blame.

Well since I think Borry is the Max I am certainly not going to say that!!!!

Anyway must rush, going to listen to a speech brave Borry is going to make about how we are going to bash those Ruskies if they invade YouCrain.

Strange, their President, PooTin has said many times they have no intention of invading YouCrain.

So ""Well Hello,

Delighted to be back!!

I was at a semmi - you know.. a seminar .. the other day .. quite fascinating.

It was all about sorting out these wicked people who live in China and Russia.

Well, it seems the people who inhabit the White House (I would prefer a gaugy pink..more fun) thought the fact that Russia protected the peeps in Eastern YouCrane from certain genocide that they decided that the best punishment was to stop them making bread. So they stopped exporting wheat to Russia. Well, these Ruskies thought "b*gger that for a lark" and so they planted some wheat. Now Russia has too much wheat so they export it only to become the world's biggest exporter of wheat. Now everyone in Russia is baking bread and are seriously into bread recipes from white, through to wholemeal. Since now other grain crops have also expanded and are exported, Ruskies are heavily into multigrain bakes!!

The other terribly interesting thing is that those same people in that White House didn't like what some naughty countries were doing and so they stopped them using SWIFT that international payment thingimy. Well, the fiendishly clever Chinese peeps thought "b*gger that for a lark", it is strange how this is exactly the same phrase thought by those Ruskies, and set up their own system which doesn't use the US$ but national currencies and all those kicked off the SWIFT sys are using this clever Chinese thingimy.

Oh, and the last one. Yes, it is those clever Chinese peeps again. Again those White House people decided to stop a Chinese company Hoowhawee - I can never get this name right - selling its 5G technology (whatever that is) and threatened to ban this company's mobile phones which use something called Android OS apparently produced by Google, or is that Gargle? Well, Android sounds like a disease, I just don't understand why the Chinese would have used that anyway. Anyway, this clever Chinese company produced something to replace Android and they gave it a far better, rather lovely name, "Harmony". Maybe, that is a message for those people in the White House to think about.

Just for fun - this is an example of some colour concepts I thought up for that boring White House....I think perhaps they need something to cheer them up because they keep getting things wrong .. maybe they should get out and meet people or get a hobby or something ...

Thanks for reading my stuff - it has been such fun!

Ana xx

Hello everyone, Ana Bolic here. This is my very first contribution to this medium. Am delighted to be doing such an interesting assignment keeping people informed about really important happenings .... well no time to lose, let's get on with it!

A very febrile Question Time in the old House today. Good old Borry had to respond to a question from one of those, well, you know, awful Labour people, about anti-islamic tendencies in the Conservative party. Borry looked her in the eye and said there was no such thing and there is no discrimination. Between you and me, I had always thought the over 500,000 Iraqis who disappeared during our alliance's humanitarian interventions were mainly of the Islamic faith. But then, I stand corrected, we did nothing to stop Christians and others, such as the Azeris, from being killed by ISIS. So, I'm with Borry, we don't disciminate.

On the non-discriminatory front, the other part of the evidence is that Borry, Oh, he is just so clever, when he was in that Foreign thing position in the Tereza gov, he helped to fund that wonderful theatre group who called themselves the White Helmets. I mean, what super name. These Thespians ran around in Syria putting up with those dreadfully hot spotlights to produce scenes emulating chemical attacks in their production series ...Oh dear, I have forgotten the name... Oh yes, .. I think someone told me it was, False Flags. Quite catchy really but I dont real know what that has to do with chemicals. But anyway these creative souls worked on behalf of ISIS and Al Quaeda spending our hard earned tax payers' money in exchange of their sending their superb video productions to YouTube and other outlets. So there you are, we helped all sides, hardly discriminatory. Borry really is a star.

Must rush, I am going to have a tete a tete with a colleague who sent me some photos of some cheese and wine parties and assorted get-togethers, a dreadful business. These people have such a gauche taste combing M&S wines with Lidl nibbles, really!

This has been such fun!

Ana xx
The second, and latest one, is that Russia is preparing to place a puppet regime in Ukraine that favours Russia. The Chinese debt claim is simply accusing China of the same behaviour witnessed concerning the behaviour of the IMF, the World Bank and large private banks and hedge funds in their dealings with developing countries and, of course the sequestration of Greek assets. Concerning the Russian claim, this simply describes the behaviour of the US State Department, under Barack Obama and Vice president Biden, which promoted a bloody coup of a democratically elected government, with paid violent goon squads in the Ukraine in 2014 to install a puppet regime that favours the USA.

The first victims of the Nazi holocaust were the Roma (Gypsies) followed by the Jewish population. This was part of a specific strategy to create a "Jew Free" (Judenfrei) Europe. But in the wider scheme of things, Hitler's rabid racism was also directed at the Slavs, or Russians, which he considered to be another inferior race. Hitler found support in elements of the populations in many countries and in particular the Baltic states and Western Ukraine where Nazi collaborators shot, gassed Roma and Jews in specially-designed vehicles using the exhaust fumes to gas people locked in the back. The extent of the genocidal intent against Slavs could
Russians within population
be witnessed in the completely unnecessary extent of the slaughter of innocent men, women and children in Russia accomplished by burning whole communities alive in wooden churches or community halls, and shooting or bludgeoning to death anyone attempting to escape, were common sights in the Nazi "military campaign". As a result the death tolls worked out at something like over 1 million Roma, 6 million Jews and around 25 million "Slav" or Russians sacrificed to the genocidal campaign of a maniac. Even after the war Russians were badly treated in the Baltic States of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. In the strategy of divide and rule, the most effective means has been to make use of the guilt of the Nazi collaboration and to invert that guilt into a nationalism focussed on attacking the current Russian-speaking segments of these populations. This has been the CIA and State Department strategy in destabilizing Europe. The other half of this story is to turn today's Russia into a demon that threatens the survival of these countries so as to feed upon the paranoia of the political class who have embarked on the nationalist crusade. They fear some sort of retribution from Russia, not because Russia has this intention, but rather because of the complexities of paranoia - you cannot trust anyone. This scenario is the one built up by the USA through NATO and corporate media. The Ukrainian Maidan was a coup engineered by the USA making use of the same "Slav free" paradigm from the Nazi era and the Russiagate bogey man. This is why the subsequent Ukrainian governments have been so extreme. Following Maidan the Ukrainian government embarked on a genocide campaign against Russian-speakers but Russia, with a duty of care for Russian-speaking Ukrainians, many of whom hold dual nationality and passports (Ukrainian-Russian), stopped this in its tracks by annexing Crimea and assisting those in the Donbas East where most Russian-speakers live. Although Russia's action constituted a significant and courageous humanitarian act, saving a potential of around 5 million lives and raising the death total of Russians killed at the hands of Nazis from 25 million to 30 million. One has to ask, was Russia really expected to do nothing while the slaughter took place? The State Department insist in calling this act an "invasion" in order to hide its own violent intent of supporting a campaign for a Slav free Europe (Slavfrei) and total incompetence as well as to maintain the nationalist support of paranoid Neo-Nazis in the arc of countries surrounding the Eastern edges of Russia.

In a case of overt-interference in German military affairs by the USA, Vice-Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach, head of the German navy resigned after explaining to a workshop that Crimea "... will never come back", that Russia has no interest in a narrow strip of land (Donbas) and he also stated that Putin and Russians probably deserve some respect.

Schoenbach was responsible for Strategy and Operations at the German MoD and with some 38 years professional experience. This event is a major loss to the German naval establishment. He has an in-depth understanding of what amongst seasoned military strategists consider to be the true state of understanding of reality. With close to 98% of Crimeans being Russian-speakers and who requested the protection of the Russian government because of a genocide campaign against this population, supported by the US-installed government, the loss of Crimea was an obvious conclusion to a badly managed US violent coup of a democratically elected Ukrainian government. This cohesion and support of Russians of the people of Crimea did indeed earn Putin an enormous amount of respect because this action saves thousands of lives.

Rear Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach became Chief of the German Navy at the end of March 2021 upon the retirement of Vice Admiral Andreas Krause.

It is notable that once in the hands of politicians and corporate media, the facts become distorted and the ramping up of unnecessary tensions are used to justify arms sales and to sustain the salaries of NATO staff. At the same time, this diminishes the democratic sovereignty of European countries reducing them to vassals of a failing regime, the USA, bent on domination. In the end, although the narrative is that of NATO is a defensive alliance for European security in reality what we observe is an offensive alliance designed to manage affairs, against the interests of individual European nations, according to the whims of the US State Department and DOD. Germany, as a leading European country, should have resisted this interference and kept Vice Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach in place.

Footnote: To obtain a better picture of the background to this story, asked the APEurope Correpondents' Pool to provide some feedback. It would seem that Vice Admiral Schoenbach's statements accord with the understanding of a sizeable proportion of Germans. There is a significant difference in opinion amongst constituents concerning relations with Russia. The majority are in favour of better relations and wish to resist being forced into unjustified compromising positions as a result of "international economic pressure and security concerns" with respect to Russia because these are considered to be exagerated. Most German's do not want to impose sanctions on Russia because these have too large a negative impact on the German economy.

Max Keiser interviews Jimmy Song a Bitcoin programmer and author of several books on the subject, concerning the impact of Bitcoin on the people of El Salvador.

The most significant effect seems to be a rise in focus of people and a return to a sitation where people are making things again as opposed to the fiat monetary chaos where everything is imported. Song makes a moral case for Bitcoin. Jimmy Song is interviewed in the second part of this show starting at time slot: 12:30. The first half includes the normal coverage where Stacy Herbert covers some of the latest news on inflation.

The 22nd January edition of Going Underground, sees Afshin Rattansi interviewing the legendary journalist and filmmaker John Pilger. Pilger makes many of the observations this medium has made with respect to the "Ukrainian crisis", in the previous articles on this page, but he covers a wider range of additional issues. One issue of significance, echoed by Mark Drakeford, the First Minister of the Welsh government is that Boris Johnson's intended liberation of restrictions with respect to Covid precautions is an attempt of a desperate man to satisfy some of the extreme elements in the conservative party as a desperate bid to save his skin. The point is that this act of selfishness will result in addition deaths of British constituents.

"The surge of power"
Marc Quin"
As Pilger reflects, Johnson's behaviour is akin to the offhand behaviour and puerile humour in an Eton College common room.

What is very clear is that the so-called "mainstream media" hide too many facts from the people of the United Kingdom.

Unlike the decisions imposed by government and in the Julian Assange "trial" where there is no place for the community conscience to guide processes of decisions on what is reasonable and what is not, the court cases concerning the pulling down of a statue in Bristol of a tyrant who became wealthy on the proceeds of the slave trade, the four accused depended upon the decision of a jury to decide is they were guilty of "criminal damage". The jury decided the four accused were not guilty to the protestations of the government.

Although no decision appears to have been made with respect to a replacement statue we feel that the black resin statue of Jen Reid, called "A Surge of Power" - see right - created by the artist Marc Quinn, and designed to be a temporary installation to continue the conversation about racism, should be used. He said he was inspired to create it after seeing an image of Jen Reid standing on the plinth with her fist raised during the Black Lives Matter protest on 7 June, 2020.

People who are inspired by the simple actions of others can do amazing things but inspiration needs to be guided to what is feasible and good. Unfortunately the antics of our political class imprisoned within their party machines and fed by lobbies and having to deal with whip enforcers, are not inspiring for there is no leadership or vision. This seems to be a reflection of deprived childhoods, an empty upbringing and dry education moulding individuals that lack empathy and serve their own interests. There is a definite lack of a practical bent or vision of their obligation to the electorate. As a result, the Westminster gaggle does not touch people's imagination and never inspires. Juries, that simple collection of citizens, have been the source of inspiring changes to the law in most important fields such as human rights, freedom of speech and religion, simply be declaring "not guilty" in the face of government oppositions. Such changes were never inspired or brought about by party politicians.

While most of our national corporate media just trot out what Anthony Blinken the US Secretary of State stated after his meeting with the Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, we beg to qualify what he stated. Blinken more or less stated that the US and their "allies" would react if Russia interfered in Ukrainian political affairs. Blinken appears to have forgotten that under the presidency of Barack Obama, holder of the Nobel "Peace Prize", and with Jo Biden holding the Ukrainain brief, his current Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, Victoria Nuland, was directly involved in the financing and coordination of a violent coup against the previous Ukrainian government that had been elected as a result of a normal democratic election. She hand-picked the new leader at the time and is notorious for her mobile conversation where she was discussing the "new government" with the US ambassador to Ukraine where she stated her feelings for the relevance of the EU in her phase, "Fuck the EU". Later, avoiding the use of expletives, she gave evidence to US respresentives spelling out the fact that this bloody campaign only cost US$6 billion.

Blinken completely skirted around the fact that the CIA good squads, supporting all of this chaos, and private US military contractors appeared to have been involved in coordinating the shooting of both police and protesters to create confusion and intensify feelings against the government. The direct support of Neo-Nazi, rabidly anti Russian militia, supported by private security personnel set about carrying out the initiation of a genocide campaign against Russian-speaking Ukrainians. It should be registered that a large proportion of the Ukrainian population, in the East, speak Russian and have dual Ukrainian-Russian citizenship with many holding Russian passports.

The aggressive stance of the US State Department towards Russia needs to stop and there should be more consideration of the Russian side to this argument. The USA has invaded more countries since the end of the Second World War, than Russia, and has caused around 20 million deaths of largely civilian populations. To prevent ISIS completely taking over Syria with the help of the USA and UK, Russia prevented this by destroying the ISIS illegal oil trade through Turkey and driving most of ISIS out of Syria. If they had not done this the migrant crisis to Europe would have been worse. However, as is always forgotten, Russia saved many lives in Syria, including those of Christian and other sects which the UK and the USA had abandoned to their fate at the hands of ISIS. Russia's initial response in the Ukraine also saved many lives but as always Russia is accused of being the aggressor.

The constant demonization of Putin reflects a complete ignorance of the hopes and interests of the people of Russia, which, in general, is to live in peace. In a recent BBC programme, Global Questions held in Kiev the "experts" largely repeated the State Department agenda and narrative stating no one knows what is in Putin's mind and stating that he is a 19th century leader and somewhat passé. There is a criticism of Putin's constant referral to history without any sensitivity to the fact that Europe is freer today as a result of Russia's sacrifice of around 25 million people in helping win the war over Nazi aggression. Russians do not forget and they remain more aware of the impact of war on families. It is their constant reference to this intimate experience that creates a nation that seeks peace. This ignorant dismissal of Russian sentiments is dangerous because it encourages people to discount the Russian nation. This allows the State Department to ignore the carefully prepared documents sent by Russia to NATO and the USA on Russian concerns (see below). People should read them and reflect. Most corporate media in the UK and certainly in the USA are essentially stenographers who simply put out State Department narratives with almost no analysis.

Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation: 17 December 2021 13:36

Press release on Russian draft documents on legal security guarantees from the United States and NATO

Ref: 2621-17-12-2021

During the December 15, 2021 meeting at the Russian Foreign Ministry, the US party received a draft treaty between the Russian Federation and the United States of America on security guarantees and an agreement on measures to ensure the security of the Russian Federation and member states of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO).

The US party was given detailed explanations regarding the logic of the Russian approach, as well as the relevant arguments. We hope that, the United States will enter into serious talks with Russia in the near future regarding this matter, which has critical importance for maintaining peace and stability, using the Russian draft treaty and agreement as a starting point.
Accordingly, Russia has a duty of care towards these citizens. The scale of the genocide began to grow with the clubbing to death of Russian speakers who had attempted to escape from an administrative building set alight by those targeting Russian-speakers in Odessa in May 2014. These were the same tactics used by the German solidiers in Russian villages during the second world war - placing families in wooden churches and burning them down with the added detail of bludgeoning to death, or shooting, those who attempted to escape. Russians have maintained their memories of the horrors of war to this day. This is why the Odessa events only confirmed the dangers amongst the Russian-speaking population and the Russian government, of the roles of the Neo-Nazi militia and the danger they had represented to Russian-speakers in Southeastern Ukraine known as the Donbas, and Crimea, where the highest population of Russian speakers live. This is why Russia had made rapid decisions to protect these people by agreeing wih their request to annex Crimea. Since they already had personnel in Sebastapol, where the main Russian Naval base was located, they were in any case in a strong position to protect people there. However, the rapid loss of any trust in the new Ukrainian government which was actively pursuing a policy of not protecting the Russian-speaking population, Russia responded to requests from Crimeans for Russia to annex Crimea. Russia only did this after a snap referendum to check on the degree to which the population desired this switch. Given the circumstances it is very clear that Russia's action saved many thousands of lives but such a sequence of events took the US by surprise. This exposed, on the world stage, the completely bungled and violent incompetence of the State Department's involvement in this overt interference in the politics in the form of an illegal regime change in the Ukraine. This is why, ever since, Russia has been in the sites of all Secretaries of State. Blinken, with a straight face referred to this episode as an aggressive Russian invasion and the Western press simply repeat this. In terms of the Donbas there were certainly volunteers from Russia assisting their relatives and as far as we know military supplies from Russia. These were able to stop the incursions from the West and this was facilitated by a large proportion of the Ukrainian military refusing to serve to fight their fellow Russian-speaking country folk. In spite of all the talk about Russian aggression, the majority of deaths in these conflicts have been on the Russian-speaking side but the total deaths now probably exceed 15,000 and round 45,000 people injured. Russia's main concern, it seems to our correspondents's pool, is to be ready to respond to any extension of attempts to increase the genocide on the part of the Ukrainian government and proxies that include US-trained militia. Talk of false flag events being used to draw Russia in relate to threats to the Russian-speakers who are not protected and are at risk under the current Ukrainian regime. Russia has no intention of invading the Ukraine as Sergei Lavrov has stated. The irresponsible handling of the Ukrainian situation by the State Department and misrepresentation of the developments there since 2014 has encouraged the current Ukrainian government to cry wolf and exaggerate the "danger of a Russian invasion" and concerning Russia's intentions as an attempt to have the country become a member of NATO. Since there is a territorial conflict that is maintain by this government and Neo-Nazi nationalists it cannot become a member of NATO. The NATO Secretary General, Jens Stoltenberg, who took up his position in October 2014, carbon copies Blinken's statements attempting to find roles for this defunct organization beyond being an arms bazaar for US military equipment sold at extortionate prices. A lot of the current build up of tension is a mirage created by the States and NATO to sell more arms to European countries and create a fuss. Then within a few weeks all business having been done they will back down and state that this "resolute" action by NATO caused Russia not to proceed with its intended invasion. All a marketing ploy to raise the profile of NATO to justify its existence and very high paid salaries. However this theatre has the purpose of justifying arms sales to those countries who treat Russian-speaking citizens badly such as the small Baltic states, all of which have, like the Ukraine, a very dubious history. In most of them, national militias who helped Nazi Germany in their death camps and open murder of Jews in the Second World War proudly declared their countries had become "Jew Free". Today, many of the leaders of these atrocities are being held up as national heroes in the rise of nationalism, actively encouraged by the State Department who attempt to assert that their interest is to uphold Ukrainian democracy.

In 1960, Walt Rostow published his book, "The Stages of Economic Development" which used the case study of the development of the United Kingdom to illustrate his stages of economic development. This book completes the stages with a peak referred to as ,"high mass consumption" and this implies a final stable state of existence. However, the latest edition of the British Strategic Review points out that in 1960 the UK was transitioning towards its final hegemonic phase. In world systems and hegemonic cycle theory, based on several previous historic cycles, this final phase is marked by financial speculation, characterized by excessive issuance of money, rising insecurity and the decline in the national economy in relation to global competition. World systems is a multidsiciplnary approach to economic development and is seldom included as part of most university economics courses. Therefore, the oversight by Rostow is understandable. The main association with the national decline is a tendency towards aggression towards other countries who are in the ascendance both culturally and economically.

In the case of Britain, the phase of monetary speculation started when Denis Healey abandoned Keynesianism and an incomes policy in 1975 and embraced the fledgling ill-thought out monetarism and whose impacts were intensified by the conditions imposed by an IMF loan Britain received in 1977. Since then monetarism has become an increasingly dominant in UK macroeconomic policy. The Bretton Woods agreement of 1944 set out a strategy to bring the benefits of the British Imperial Preference model that had benefited the UK to a US imperial preference model favouring the USA. The IMF, World Bank and GATT became the enforcers and those not accepting their conditions became isolated as a problem and subsequently subjected to election interference, regime change, sanctions and warfare. Since 1945, the numbers of deaths resulting from American instigated conflicts totals more than 20 million people. During this period the British governments have haplessly appeased the USA by siding with and participating in an alliance to support warfare. More recently the active participation of the UK military in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and Syria, not only gave rise to ISIS but also created the most serious asylum and economic migrant crisis into Europe and the UK. The absurd recent suggestion that the Royal Navy should be pushing migrant craft back to Europe when our air force and army helped generate the flow in the first place.

Whereas the Rostow model sees UK as "the" example of development and Obama, of course, referred to American exceptionalism, hegemonics, the repetitive historic reality, see the USA and the UK as failing states. Past hegemonic cycles ended in countries that did not have universal suffrage. But in spite of the USA and UK having gained universal suffrage, politicians are not responding to constituent needs. In failing economic circumstance the "financial sector", as in the past, fund the political factions, the media and political decision makers. As a result of so many scarce resources feeding into military equipment and financial speculation driven by monetarism, today we find the USA and the UK taking up first and second world rankings respectively as the countries with the largest negative balances of payment.

Many of those who voted in the Conservative government in "Red Wall" constituencies are beginning to acknowledge that the Johnson and Conservative party hype misled them into the false belief that things would change. They have not. Things are worse and so far people are waiting to a coherent and credible "levelling up" policy. Monetarists have no expereince in levelling up, given that 50 years of monetarism has increased income disparity and depressed the real incomes of wage-earners and hollowed out the industrial and manufaturing activities in the "Red Wall" areas. This is why the government cannot work out a coherent practical levelling up agenda because so-called aggregate demand macroeconomics is so destructive to the real economy. Policy makers only look at monetary injections and asset values as their measure of success and "economic prosperity". But these criteria, assets, are the very things people in "Red Wall" don't possess and are unlikely to ever possess under the Conservative government. So we are left with a blank policy agenda for the "Red Wall". This is why the government's "Levelling Up" plans have not yet appeared because none of the economist advisers, Cabinet or anyone in the Conservative party know how to design such a policy.

50 years of hype and assertions such as .."we are good with the economy" has produced a series of depressed Eastern Germanies dotted around the North and North East. But Germany, having lost the war, has today the highest positive national balance of payments in the world, larger than China's, in spite of having unified with East Germany at a very high cost. In the meantime Britain has the honour of having the world's second largest negative balance of payments. The USA that has also followed monetarist fanatacism, has the world's largest negative balance of payments. Britain needs to reunify and integrate the Red Walls zones with the rest of the country. But do people really believe this government knows how to achieve this? Unfortunately the track records of the Conservatives suggests not. Unfortunately, the Labour party, having abandoned John McDonnell's investment in new economy developments advanced under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, is just as lost.

In spite of the rhetoric, Russia has always observed long term gas contract conditions with Europe, delivering on time and to specification and volumes. This was also true in Soviet times. The current "energy price crisis" is caused by the decision by politicians to purchase gas in the free market where prices are 3 times higher than Russian long term contract prices. This of course makes a lot of money for traders who happen to povide financial support for political parties, but this excerbates the cost of living crisis for wage-earners throughout Europe and the UK. Since 1973 the "West" has been unable to manage energy prices, ever since Johans Witteveen, the Managing Director of the IMF, supported OPEC blackmail in rising petrolrum prices seven-fold within a decade by recirculating petrodollars into the free market economies and political party coffers. A recent report explains that this bizarre behaviour by the IMF was the result of the fact that Witteven was a Moselm. Since this recylcling has expanded, politicians have become reluctant to take actions to lower enery prices. The US and EU pressure not to authorise the delivery of gas via the Russia-Germany North Stream 2 pipeline is all part of the same corruption. Polticians in most countries have well-above average earnings and a series of perks. Energy prices are of no concern to them.

Recent statements by government point to a desire to distance the conduct of government from judicial oversight and judgement. In a recent BBC Hard Talk interview with Stephen Sackur, Baroness Helena Kennedy maintained her ability, as always, to deliver a clear exposition on vital topics. She stated that, "It's only in authoritarian states and totalitarian states that they try to punish our thoughts.” But she qualified this in the context of misogyny, by stating (paraphrasing), "Thoughts become a legal issue when actions, resulting from a particular mindset, prejudices others - in his case women.”

This has a far broader significance. An advance notice on the report, "British Strategic Review”, to be released this month, states that an important part of this Review dismantles monetary theory to expose it as being flawed. Monetarism is shown to be demonstrably biased towards asset holders and traders making up less than 2% of the constituency and acts against the interests of wage-earners who hold 98% of the votes. If, as Helena Kennedy inferred, “Thoughts become a legal issue when actions, resulting from a particular mindset, prejudices others”, then this is the case where there is undeniable evidence of prejudice affecting increasing numbers of wage-earners. Clearly insufficient due diligence was brought to bear in assessing the likely impact and yet only benefits are declared to justify this policy. If it can be established that the mindset that applies a flawed policy logic, albeit a political ideology, creating an imposed prejudice in the form of clear evidence, surely such decisions on policy, based on this mindset, should be subjected to legal oversight for approval? A central tenet of constitutional economics is public choice. This depends on the full facts relating to any intended legislation being available to the voters as part of due diligence procedures that need to meet minimum standards. As in the case in law as minimum standards of evidence, it is necessary to have contributions of a legal character covering these aspects. In this way, placing all such evidence before the constituents as part of a process of participatory policy development, which would be subsequently voted upon, would help improve transparency and would prevent governments from distancing their conduct from judicial and public oversight and judgement.

Most corporate media wait agog for the release of a report concerning parties and booze ups to post their earth-shattering headlines, they ignore the fact that the economy and wellbeing of the people of this country continues to decline. The issue, in reality, is that it is of no significance whether the Prime Minister remains or is replaced by a coffee machine, the same inept economic policies, hatched some 50 years ago, and maintained by both political parties will continue to devastate the British economy and our prospects for recovery.

A major strategic report will soon be released which explains the damage imposed by the government's cancellation of the 5G Huawei contracts under pressure from Mike Pompeio on the completely spurious grounds that their kit represented a security threat. Huawei was to introduce a range of very advanced socially important artificial intelligence applications through this network and all of this has been lost to British development engineers putting the UK even further behind in the technological applications innovation race. The negative economic implications are significant. Meanwhile the rest of the world is moving ahead. While the UK has wallowed in an environment witnessing the hollowing out of our industrial and manufacturing base, over the last 45 years, we witnessed innovations such as iMac, Power Mac G4 Cube, iPod, iPhone, iPad, MacBook were nearly all designed by the British IT engineer Jonathan Paul Ives. Currently, the Central American Republic of El Salvador, with a populatiomn of nearly 7 million, has recently made BitCoin legal tender and they are launching a US$ 1 billion "Volcano Bond", 50% of which will be used to purchase BitCoin and the rest will go into infrastructural projects such as a tax free Bitcoin City. Experts expect it to yield a far higher return than any other national bond issue. The name Volcano arises from the fact that El Salvador aims to use thermal energy from their volcanic structures to generate energy to mine BitCoin. In terms of operational infrastructure for the people of El Salvador to use BitCoin, which is too complicated for many potential users, a proposal by Blockstream, a Canadian Bitcoin Technology company founded by the British IT designer, Adam Back will be adopted by the El Salvador government. The El Salvador network is using Blockstream's Lightning Network, largely developed by Christian Decker, which helps avoid the Bitcoin Scaling issues concerning the number of transactions and latency (delays) in confirmation, as well as greatly facilitating the use of the system by non-techies using a mobile phone. So market traders and housewives can use the system for small daily transactions. This is accelerating the return of BitCoin to its original objective of being a medium of exchange rather than a store of value. The rise in value of Bitcoin ensures that cash holding do not lose value under the inflationary impacts of central banks monetary policies.

The other evolving frontier developed by the British systems engineering economist Hector McNeill, is the Real Incomes Approach to economics. This has the same aim as BitCoin but can operate with or without BitCoin. This makes use of Locational-State Theory (LST) and Accumulogs, both identified and developed by McNeill in 1986. Accumulogs are similar to blockchain which appeared a decade later. LST is designed to preserve the quality of information for purposes of constituent decision analysis in the political sphere as well as improving the quality of business decision making. The Real Incomes Approach development work started in 1975 to respond to the slumpflation crisis caused by rising petroleum prices, an issue which conventional policies were never able to solve, as today's energy crisis confirms. By combining these advances into an operational infrastructure it will be possible to monitor and manage a new approach to macroeconomic policy which provides a direct incentive to innovation to reduce costs and inflation while slowing down monetary injections by the Bank of England. This is, according to some economists, the only way to escape the current predicament created by the Bank of England's quantitative easing where interest rate increases will crash the massive private debt overhang facing the economy and impact asset values. These problems are the result to close-to-zero interest rates under quantitative easing. It is evident that QE was a mistake.

By remaining ignorant of the advancing state-of-the-art in technologies and economic theory, Britain remains with no economic strategy, with "levelling up" and "building back better" passing for not more than catch phrases.

It is notable that the Conservative government has not followed the basic principles of project and policy design which are there to ensure efficiency, policy traction and delivery effectiveness and, of course, lowering of costs to the state and to the constituency of the country. Politicians seem to have a tendency to confuse this process with one of working out how their benefactors can get their hands into the till. However, basic principle number one is to involve the principal stakeholders, those who deliver and receive services, to guide the design of policies from the standpoint of guaranteeing rising standards of practice and outcomes. Such stakeholder have accumulated valuable experience and capabilities and they know how and what can disrupt services. However, by regarding the stakeholders as the "enemy within", the top down nature and the imposition of health service, police and social service "reforms", over the last 50 years, have only exacerbated the ability of these services to operate effectively. This has cost country dearly in terms of diminished security, wellbeing and avoidable deaths.

The enemy within, it would seem, has been the string of incompetent governments knocked up by our arbitrary first-past-the-post electoral system where the tiny factional Conservative and Labour parties, whose total membership does not surpass 1% of the total number of voters they "serve", have run the economy and essential services in a way that has not served constituent interests. Having run down services and staffing numbers in police, the health service and social services intentionally, as a result of an economic policy emanating from an ideological fixation, we are all now witnessing the results.

The facts stare us all in the face. But for a government, in an unreal state of denial, it cannot recognize the truth. As William Janes observed, "The truth is what happens" and we have all seen and feel what has happened. It is undeniable. The results are so bad that even this aloof government senses something is wrong, not as a result of empathy and sensitivity to constituent concerns, but rather they have been advised that their poll ratings are plummeting. So, they have focused on becoming concerned with the agitation, they have in fact caused, in the form of protestors and other scruffs who are telling them what is wrong. Besides their complaint about people pulling down and rolling away a statue of a grotesque individual who profited from the suffering and death of countless slaves, calling it "criminal damage", they do not ask themselves, in that particular context, "Damage to whom or to what?" Whether is criminal or not is, under English law, a matter for a jury of constituents to decide and not the government. And yet they continue, as is their habit, not to engage with people's concerns or with protesters to seek genuine lasting working solutions. No, they know best. Their current legislative drive is to brand protesters as the enemy within by starting with introducing harsh convictions and sanctions and the denial of the basic democratic imperative of encouraging freedom of expression and peaceful protests. The government fears that protests can lead to wider campaigns that amass rising constituency support against the government which is, after all, the way democracies work. Surely, those who are acting against democratic expression of the people become, in their blind arrogance, the enemies within.

The forthcoming British Strategic Report (BSR) contains a section that addresses ways to increase productivity within public services including care services and the National Health Service. An engineered decadence and falling capabilities of the NHS, assisted by a Bank of England's quantitative easing has supported the government's 13 years of an ideologically driven austerity. The fixation with monetarism and "market mechanisms" is a tactic designed to frustrate the public into demanding change. The change governments expect to introduce, as an "oven ready" solution, is a US-style medical insurance system. Based on the track record of this system, average and lower income wage-earners will pay high fees and yet suffer from being denied the full complement of necessary treatments. The government has no concern about the deaths caused by their crippling of the NHS and over-worked staff, as has happened under Covid, they see this as the price to pay to in the preparatory "stages" to introduce their preferred solution. (see previous piece below)

The BSR is able to explain why monetarism is a policy without a theory. It is largely ideological and it is biased towards the wellbeing of wealthy asset holders. In the section covering care services a macroeconomic policy is proposed which is generally applied across all sectors but also within the care sector. It provides incentives to medical staff from nurses to consultants that help improve predictability and the quality of health care on a professional and expanding basis. At the same time it avoids the type of manic "management performance indicators" introduced by the Blair government. This solution creates an operation that remains as a pubic service but delivers results more effectively and efficiently than is possible within the private sector or under any private insurance scheme. The BSR will be available as from mid-January, 2022. We will provide links to the online access point when we receive the details.

The British National Health Service is the nation’s proudest achievements, lifting burden from the sick, copied across the world. But it has been under sustained attack over decades by successive governments. This attack is based on a proposal by Oliver Letwin and John Redwood published by the Centre for Policy Studies in 1988 with the title of, "Britain’s Biggest Enterprise: ideas for radical reform of the NHS." This document is a top down analysis of what the authors imagine to be the problem with the NHS. There are not even any back-of-envelope calculations concerning any of the justifications for their proposed ways in improving the service, in terms of likely costs, savings and benefits. Indeed their initial reference model is what people, going to a holiday camp, would expect to have available as paying consumers. This ridiculous reference model forms the basis justifying out-sourcing to the private sector and for writing this whole document. They refer to a system free at the point of delivery as being "puritanical"; most would acknowledge that this is as it should be in the name of economy. It is very evident that they did not consult medical practitioners in preparing this light weight paper. The main thrust is allowing the private sector to get part of the action. It really is no more than some ideas. The authors set out a somewhat threadbare blueprint on how to privatize the NHS based on a series of "stages".

Increasing number of voters have become concerned with the extent of lying which is attributed to Boris Johnson but in comparison with the prolonged and insistent lying and obfuscation of all goverments over an extended period concening their plans for the Health service, Johnson's sins end up in comparison as porkies. Peter Oborne, has set out the issue succinctly in his books,

"Truth has been captured by the government and turned into a political weapon. For centuries we have had an area of public discourse which belonged to everybody, a common ground where rival parties could exist."

"Its extinction (truth) is a disaster. Political lying is a form of theft. Voters cannot make fair judgements on the basis of falsehoods. Johnson's culture of deceit is stealing our democratic rights."

What is very of concern is that consecutive governments has followed the stages set out in this flimsy document. There has been very little effort put into producing fully costed Decision Analysis Briefs. However, realizing the explosive nature of the privatisation objective and knowing it would be rejected by the constituents of this country, the Thatcher Government started a hidden and dishonest strategic program initiating the process following the "stages" proposed by Letwin and Redwood, by starting with out-sourcing some NHS services to private operators. The basic blueprint was continued and expanded enthusiastically under the Blair "New Labour" government which subjected the NHS to cripling financial conditions imposed by private operators on excessivly long contracts. What is notable in this whole saga has been the marginalization of medical practitioners, nursing and care practioners from the policy decisions. Like the original document the whole process has been top down. It has continued ever since to the present day under a cloud of misrepresentations and repetitive statements that there was no intention to privatise the NHS. But the truth, which is exposing the dishonesty of Conservative and Labour parties alike, is that this strategy has advanced with each government. As William James observed, "The truth is what happens." This intentional undermining of the NHS has required very careful planning and a series of legal and covert structural changes spanning over thirty years to prepare for the NHS to be passed over to largely American corporate insurance companies and banks. The NHS will end up as a corporate funding stream and a pretty logo. An incredibly docile and complicit UK media have failed to explain this horrendous corruption or hold the Conservative and Labour governments and their factional parties to account. They have failed to inform the public about what is really happening to the NHS. Over 13 years of quantitative easing has supported austerity and chaos over Brexit and lowered the hampered the ability of the NHS to handle Covid leading to a poor service all round in a covert engineered failure of services. The objective is to manipulate events to as to make the public to become frustrated with the NHS and demand the changes that the government will bring about with a very expensive US-style system.

The last 50 years has seen monetarism undermine the economy (see previous article below) declining real wages and create a cost of living crisis affecting most wage-earners. Most will be unable to afford the expensive US-style private insurance system and this will result in death rates rising as a direct result of denial of medical treatment in the UK. The NHS was never created to deny health care to anyone. It is notable that the US Healthcare lobby in the UK has been effective and it is notable that none of our political parties or mainstream media call attention to this scandal or are prepared to stop this monstrous attack on the people of this country.

The most apparent current impact will be on the voters in the so-called "Red Wall" constituencies who put their faith in the government to improve their situation. However, it is exactly these constituents who have been hoodwinked and who will suffer most if the government's pet US-style health service is introduced. It is already more than apparent the government has no levelling up plans that are workable. The political class consisting of an ideologically-driven clique and there being no opposition combine to project a reality of a lack of concern with the wellbeing of the population but only in maintaining asset values for themselves as individuals and their benefactors.

It is worth seeing the video on this topic by Bob Gill a GP campaigning to put a stop to this madness, this can be accessed here: The NHS Heist

In the final BSR Brief on 8th January, 2022, for the APEurope Correspondents' Pool the Decision Analysis Group at SEEL presented some findings that will appear in the British Strategic Review (BSR) expected to be released next week. At the time of the cancellation of the Gold Standard in 1971, the UK and the USA had healthy balances of payments. In the intervening years under the weight of monetarism, financialization and finally quantitative easing, the USA and the UK have both ended up at the bottom of the world's balance of payments league table with the world's largest negative balances of payments of -$US 480 billion and -$US 122 billion respectively. This was just before the Covid pandemic started.

On the other hand, the worlds highest positive balances of payment included Germany ($US 280 billion), Japan ($US 186 billion) and China ($US 171 billion) followed by all the EuroZone countries. The Eurozone alone has the world's highest balance of payments ($US 387 billion), more than twice that of China. All of the world's low income countries, economies in transition and all other developed nations have balances of payments exceeding those of the UK.

The BSR explores the specific causes of 50 years of decline of Britain's industry and manufacturing base. The specific reason for Germany's extraordinary success is explained as are the mechanics of how monetarism undermined UK industry and manufacturing and the economy. Most strategic reports point out problems but are usually light on specific solutions. The BSR raises questions of hitherto unexposed structural issues in the British economy that have remain unaddressed by both main political parties (Conservative and Labour) over the last 70 years. The BSR is unusual in including a tightly argued case for an alternative approach to macroeconomics, containing as yet unpublished details of altenative theories and policy options, to help Britain's recovery.

Correspondents' questions raising the topic of BREXIT received some interesting replies although BREXIT hardly features in the current Review which is largely concerned with the impact of monetarism on the real economy. One issue is that in the past too many trade arrangements are between countries with little to exchange. Because of this emphasis is placed by negotiators on identifying "products with export potential" rather than identifying imported products where there is significant national potential for import substitution. As a result, quite often the outcome is a decline in the balance of payments associated with rises in unemployment. BREXIT will feature in the next edition of the BSR concerned with detailed descriptions of specific policy options for all sectors for national economic recovery.

The current "protests" in Kazakhstan are far too similar in staged and organized events by well-armed and organized elements to represent a "popular" protest. What appears to have happened is a carbon copy of the CIA/State Department-inspired coup in the Ukraine centred on the Maidan in 2014. At that time the same tactics were applied by murdering both police and peaceful protesters in an attempt to intensify the public opinion against the government. This time Russia has reacted quickly but is being criticized, naturally, by the State Department expressing its concern with Kazakhstan democracy. Russia's reaction is related to its obligation under the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO), which is a defense alliance for six former republics of the USSR, including Kazakhstan. The Russian peacekeeping force was sent to help maintain order as unrest spread across the vast Central Asian nation. Strategists suggest the raising of tensions by NATO and the State Department is linked to the strategy of maintaining an image of Russia and an aggressor with intent to invade the Ukraine. The only reason this would happen would be if the Ukraine government proceeds with its plans to carry out genocide for the Russian-speaking population in the East. This genocide had began towards the end of the Maidan chaos, with the USA assisting mercenaries who advanced East had already initiated murder campaigns directed against Russian-speaking civilians by clubbing them to death or burning them alive in administrative buildings. However, Russia had reacted quickly in Crimea where it already had troops linked to the major Russian Naval base in Sebastapol and where 98% of the population are Russian speakers. Since the Ukraine government was not going to protect them, Crimeans requested Russian protection by becoming part of Russia. This decisive action was a direct Russian response and unexpected and was a direct result of a major strategic blunder by the USA. However, this action saved thousands of lives of thankful citizens. It is felt that this "Russian Southern Flank"" operation in Kazakhstan is to undermine Russia in the forthcoming USA/Russian meeting next week or an attempt to justify canceling these meetings.

Following the appalling behaviour of the UK media in amplifying disinformation about Jeremy Corbyn it is to be expected that he would have a thing or two to say about the UK media. He gave an interesting speech at the Media Democracy Fetival last year which can be accessed here: Media Democracy Festival

Supportive data (pdf) to his speech can be can be found in the document "Who owns the UK Media?" on the right.

As we have repeated many times, the capture of Keir Starmer by a wizen Neo-Blairite (Neob) clique has killed any chances of the Labour party going anywhere. The recent YouGov poll and petition against Blair receiving a knighthood is evidence of how much this person is considered to be a national embarrassment. But Starmer and his advisers have been attempting to convince themselves that the "Blair way" is the future of Labour. Nothing could be further from the truth.

Since Starmer took over, the Labour party has sank to a low level doing nothing to discipline fanatical members who accused Jewish members of being "Kapos", the ultimate insult since Kapos were the Jewish people who aided th Nazis in death camps through brutal means being themselves at risk of death if they did not do this. Jews whose families perished in the Holocaust, when they have raised any concern about Israel's treatment of Palestinians in Labour organized meetings have been shouted down with screams and heckling so as to intimidate them and prevent others from hearing what they had to say. Other Jews have been threatened with such asides as "we know where you live" or "you will end up in a wheelchair". However, this blatant antisemitism is not uttered by the anonymous weirdos or trolls on Twitter or other anti-social media such as Fakebook but rather quite openly by Labour's preferred, paid up members, who are in fact Jews who set about manipulating events to expel the "wrong type of Jews" from the party. They have already ruined the image of the Party by constructing a false image that the party was antisemitic. This started as a tactic to get rid of Jeremy Corbyn in support of Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign against Corbyn. These fanatics now rule the Labour party's Jewish representation roost. There has been lately, a theatrical and coordinated attempt to draw a line under this corruption by claiming that with the departure of Jeremy Corbyn, antiseminist in the Labour party has been brought under control. But this type of intimidation of the "wrong types of Jews" continues. This is tolerated under Starmer's leadership while a "zero tolerance policy on antisemitism" is "in operation".

The so-called, free UK corporate press fearful of reprisals, has shamefully abandoned their role to keep the voters in this country fully informed about such facts. On the other hand alternative media have provided coverage. In our own case, rather than write more, we recommend that our readers listen to a coherent Jewish survivor of Labour's House of Horrors by clicking on this videolink: :"Meet, 'The Wrong Type of Jew' the Media doesn't want you to know exists"

The petition opposing Tony Blair's knighthood has surpassed 1 million signatures and a recent YouGov poll indicates around 20 million opposed this also (41% of the electorate). For details click on this link: "Recognition should relate to accomplishments".

Keir Starmer's strategy of attempting to reconstruct the image of Blairism from the bleak reality of over a million murders of innocent men women and children is a suicide mission. His defence of Tony Blair receiving a knighthood is just as ridiculous as has been the orchestrated programming by BBC concerning the series on the Blair "revolution". The cynical appointment of Blair as the Middle East envoy following such atrocities was an affront to all in the Middle East. By defending Israel's continued violent repression of Palestinians, including widespread extra-judicial murders, is not criticised by the Labour party for fear of being branded by the Israeli government as being antisemitic.

A blood-stained Starmer wishes to take advantage of Labour's lead which is the result of the incompetence of the current government as opposed to anything Labour has to offer. Labour had a more courageous leader who steadfastly stood against the killings cited but a particularly visceral and dirty Israeli government campaign was permitted to interfere in UK politics. This was aided by remaining Blairites within the Labour party and the widespread dissemination of misrepresentations by our pliant corporate media, to brand Corbyn as an antisemite. Most of the country knows that this accusation is completely ridiculous. Israel knew no one would defend Corbyn for fear of being "cancelled" by being branded as an antisemite. Labour needs to learn how to stand up for humanity by denouncing extra-judicial murders, including those continually metred out by Israel. The Labour party has tolerated the expulsion of Jews who by their nature have a natural tendency to support the oppressed and the plight of the Palestinians. They have been expelled because they are the "wrong type of Jew". But Labour supports atrocities in the name of their version of Judaism. Labour is contributing to a strategy of forcing the large number of older Jews, who oppose Israel's tactics, to defend the indefensible or being treated in a shabby manner in an attempt to shame and reject them. Labour is supposed to be a British political organization. It is not a Jewish organization and has no right to interfere in Jewish affairs. However its antics have contributed to an unwelcomed intensification of a split in the Jewish community in Britain between those more aware of the damage Israel does and whose conscience causes them to voice concern, and those who simply do not care and participate in a tragic denigration of members if their own "community" and support the unacceptable violence perpetrated against Palestinians. This sets an atrocious example. Labour's involvement in such matters does no good with its "leadership" turning a blind eye to this overt discrimination against part of the Jewish community and to the rising tide of antisemitism in this country. Most non-Jewish constituents in this country have no problem with the "type of Jew" being rejected by the Labour party but many are increasingly concerned with those who behave abominably in the harsh and unacceptable treatment of their fellow Jews; and yet they have no shame. This decadence is a very serious question offending the principles of religious unity and our secular constitution. This promotion of a divide and rule action of discriminating against sections of the Jewish community, by a Bitish political party, is worse than antisemitic. Naturally, our cowardly corporate free press have not called attention to this savagery considering it to be acceptable. The reality is that Jeremy Corbyn never participated in the cancel-culture that has since enveloped the Labour party. No one doibts that he would have taken a principled stand against such discrimination. But ethics is an alien concept for the fanatics who manipulated events to remove him with the help of the media. This intolerable behaviour needs to be rejected by the constituents of this country.

This week's Renegade Inc throws a lot more light on the Gig economy, both in terms of its scale and its negative impacts on those employed in this labyrinth of large, so-called, "platform-economy" companies. Ross Ashcrof interviews Shannon Walsh to discuss her new film, "The Gig Is Up".

Ashcroft quotes the Federal reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan's remarks concerning the optimum conditions for workers as being a "healthy economy" owing its success to growing worker insecurity. The implication being that if workers are in a precarious economic situation they are not going to make demands which might compromise their situation, even when facing falling wages. This unfortunately, Shannon Walsh makes clear, is the operational model of the expanding Gig economy.

To access this excellent show, click on the image on the left. For a short trailer of Shannon Walsh's film click on the image on the right.

Scratch ratio: A scratch ratio is the percentage of a group with a specific opinion on a topic who sign petitions. It is calculated by comparing the number of signatures in the petition to the number of that opinion gathered from survey and polling data in the general population.

Analysis so far: This is already a very significant result for this petition because the conservative estimated size of the constituency represented by the number of signatures already exceeds the sum total of all of the majorities won by ALL parties in the last General Election.

Confirmation: Separate polls suggest that around 20 million constituents are strongly against Blair obtaining a knighthood.

The Commons Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle has called for all former prime ministers to be knighted with the highest possible ranking, just as Tony Blair was in the New Year’s Honours. His absurd Liliputian logic is that being a PM is "one of the toughest jobs in the world". This is a ridiculous position given that after 20 elections over the last 50 years the Conservatives and Labour governments have jointly undermined the British economy by maintaining monetarism ever since Denis Healey abandoned Keynesianism in 1975. These governments and their assorted Prime Ministers have not served the country well. Besides Blair leading us into a campaign in Iraq on false pretences resulting in the murder of around 1 million people, Cameron, also on false pretences, led us into the Libyan fiasco which turned the richest country in Africa into a failed state and the introduction of slave markets. This initiated the economic migrant, asylum seeker crisis combined with migrants from the Middle East following our support of the Syrian invasion. In all cases our governments contributed to the spread of terrorism across the Middle East and Africa and across into Europe and the UK. Many servicemen lost their lives on the basis of dishonest and poorly informed leaders supporting an "alliance" that sees warfare and murder, such as that in Afghanistan and Yemen, as being good for business and party coffers. No "leadership" should be honoured without recognizable accomplishments that have benefited the wellbeing of the constituents of this country. "Defending our liberty" at the cost of a million deaths of innocent foreigners can only be ranked as an accomplishment by psychopaths.

A petition was initiated on the Gov Petitions web page to request the removal of this award from Tony Blair. However, by the time 10,000 signatures had been registered it was prematurely rejected by the government reflecting a complete lack of interest in the free expression of preferences by the constituents of the United Kingdom by stating petitions cannot be run on this type of honour or appointments since these are decided by the Honours and Appointments Secretariat in the Cabinet Office and this advice passed on to the Queen. This is simply stating that the voters should not be allowed to pass an opinion on what they consider to be inappropriate decisions by the Cabinet Office. This step would appear to have been to avoid embarrassment of those in the Secretariat concerned. The arrogance of this cancellation is somewhat typical of this government and reminiscent of decisions taken by the Soviet Politburo to terminate anything that might disseminate the free expression of the people of this country.

Another petition was started on the site. Within day three of its launch this new petition had already gathered over 500,000 signatures, approaching the highest respose to a petition on the site. On Friday, 7th January, just a weeks since its launch, the number of signatures surpassed 1 million. Based on an average petition scratch ratio in a campaignless petition of 7%, the 1 million signatures would represent the opinion of at least 14 million constituents. A YouGov poll arrived at a quicker result and estimated that around 20 million people strongly dispprove of Blair receiving a knighthood (see the box on the left). Given that the total electoral turn out in the last general election was 33 million this is an astounding result. If more signatures are added to the petition it is likely to result in a similar estimate. Clearly the very bad advice of the Honours and Appointments Secretariat in the Cabinet Office has dragged the image of the Queen, on this particular topic, into a highly compromised situation.

Anyone interested in adding their signature to this petition can do so by clicking on the button on the right. For clarity, APEurope Group and have no association with and this link is provided as a public service in support what we consider to be a valid expression of preference by the constituents of this country. Whereas the government is not concerned with voter's opinions, we take them seriously.

This week headlines have proclaimed, "David Lammy apologises for nominating Jeremy Corbyn to be Labour leader" and the like. This declaration was made to a Jewish gathering as a step towards drawing a line under Labour's "success" in vanquishing "antisemitism". This theatre comes after a vicious coordinated completely undemocratic attack on Corbyn promoted by the government of Israel and supported by fanatics in the Labour party bent of resuscitating Blairism. Labour under Blair supported a campaign leading to the deaths of close to a million people in Iraq alone. The rump of this disgraced government, the Neobs (Neo-Blairites) manipulated so-called antisemitic complaints by stonewalling and doing nothing to respond to the few that appeared so as to create an image of the Labour party not taking antisemitism seriously. Their manipulations were designed to make Corbyn appear to be supporting this corruption. Corbyn has a management style of delegating in good faith but the people concerned were not to be trusted. This does not reflect badly on Corbyn, it reflects badly on the dishonesty of those involved and who have the arrogance to aspire to high office in this country. The theatre of some leading Jews being welcomed back into the Labour party by Starmer, is all part of this act. Labour has always had a lower antisemitism streak than the UK population as a whole. However, it would seem antisemitism is rising amongst the population as a result of the extremes the Israeli government is going to in continuing its, now over 70 years of, dispossession of the people of Palestine in their own land. But Labour under Starmer whole-heatedly considers criticism of Israel's violent occupation as antisemitism. The hypocrisy is astounding. David Lamy once appeared to be a substantial representative of a minority of citizens in this country but his shabby rejection of Corbyn is a disgrace. It simply confirms that he and the Neob faction were eventually willing to undermine the results of an open and fair election. For many, Lamy's obsequious groveling before a Jewish gathering insults the constituents of this country and, indeed, Judaism, by sullying the image of this community by associating it with Labour party corruption and the support of a brazen interference by an alien state in British politics in an open and well-publicized fashion. This undermines Starmer's claims to be patriotic; to whom? Antisemitism has been moulded into a weapon by Israel as the leading exponent of cancel culture. But Lamy did not need this. He just canceled himself with this bizarre act of a self-inflicted political hari kiri, he has imploded and disappeared.

In the meantime the non-mainstream press and media have witnessed a wave of support for Jeremy Corbyn in response to Lamy's absurd antics and statements. Corbyn still has the support of millions of UK constituents, in fact his support appears to be growing, while Labour stumbles sideways under an increasing control of a tiny souless clique who should never be allowed to gain power; they cannot be trusted and they are disloyal.

The British Strategic Review (BSR) contents list has recently been updated as a result of a reconfiguration of Section 8. The Review analyses the impact of monetarism on the British economy, identifies the gaps in monetarism's theories and proposes solutions to regain sustainable economic growth. Now very near completion we expect it to be released within the next couple of weeks (mid-January, 2022).

In a morning mid-week seminar for the APE Correspondents' Pool, Hector McNeill, the coordinator of SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab and heading the editorial committee of the British Strategic Review (BSR), stated that, "UK policy-makers need to become more concerned with the mechanics of how companies, like Lidl, can lower or maintain their unit prices for consumers while succeeding in paying their work force higher wages than the competition". He emphasized the word "mechanics" as the critical factor. Higher wages translate into higher potential consumption or demand. The mechanics element is advances in human capabilities through learning and raised productivity through the rational selection of technologies and refinement in their use through adjustments in the techniques applied. Monetarism's failure to provide incentives to encourage this transition has resulted in a 50 year decline. Policy continues to attempt to raise potential consumption or demand by injecting more money into the economy based on debt. This never created real economic growth. The policy-induced destruction of UK industry and manufacturing has resulted a UK trade balance of -$12 billion, while Germany enjoys a trade balance of +$87 billion (OECD-Q2 2021). Germany's average per capita income is higher $52,000 against UK’s $42,000; they pay higher wages, and have a positive balance of payments and remain in the EU. The USA apply the same monetarist paradign as the UK has a trade balance of -$190 billion while China has a trade balance of +$55 billion. The BSR, out around the end of this month, explains how this happened and how to resolve this issue.

The current European and UK energy price crisis is a direct result of our craven and obsequious obeying of dictates from the USA. We have paid a heavy price for supporting US sanctions against Russia leading to an undermining of real incomes of wage-earners and breaking of COP26 pledges. The current gas crisis is blamed on Russia but the opening up of the North Stream 2 pipeline has been delayed now by various sanctions imposed by the US and supported by our government attempting as a result of cash-diplomacy from the US to slow down Germany receiving this gas. Commercial energy brokerage agents are having a field day gaining massive commissions. Already, because of gas price increases, the UK "fuel allowance", paid to older people, has already been spent before winter; many could perish as a result of inability to pay energy bills. This incompetence has resulted in coal being opened up across the world to compensate for the high gas prices imposed on our constituents by political irresponsibility in supporting a so-called "alliance" which is causing a widespread undermining of COP26 objectives. In the meantime, this US strategy has succeeded in forcing UK/European gas prices above the already expensive US Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG) from the US and elsewhere as a strategy to impose this product on Britain. Does this government really have any concerns at all about British consumers? In the meantime the USA and our own government are "warning" Russia not to use gas as a political weapon, which Russia, including in former Soviet times, never did. However the US market manipulations, with the support of the UK government, are using gas as a political weapon which is harming the constituency and economy of the UK.

A simple fact that is often obscured in the left-right arguments concerning economic policy is that if all constituents had enough income there would be less of a need for many of the social provisions of government. By avoiding economic policies that increase differences in income levels, it is possible to lay a foundation to achieve this more ideal state. Often the left-right argument boils down to the left wishing to assist those with the most current dire social needs while the right emphasize growth and prosperity to promote a rise in the general level of incomes. It is as if the two sides consider their positions to exclude those of the opposition. The British Strategic Review (BSR), to be released end of this month, covers the key policy developments since 1929. Following a remarkable period of recovery both in the UK and the USA between 1945 to 1965 things took an unfortunate turn with the blackmail of OPEC Arab nations in raising the price of oil something like seven-fold within a decade starting in 1973. Paradoxically those seeking a military solution were dissuaded through, largely Saudi Arabian cash-diplomacy, initially proposed and fine-tuned by IMF and then taken up by private sector interests to benefit political leaders, their parties and governments in the West as well as the financial and military-industrial complex based on recycled petrodollars. Those involved became less concerned with rising petroleum prices. A wealthy business-political faction who benefited from this behaviour grew in wealth and power while the majority of wage-earners, worldwide, initiated a long term decline in relative incomes. Largely arising from an IMF initiative to provide petrodollar finance for low income countries to purchase every-more expensive petroleum, the evil of slumpflation continued well into the 1990s and the regimes of Reagan, Thatcher and Clinton leading to further deregulation of the financial sector, acceleration of financialization and increasing rate of increase in income disparity worldwide.

Denis Healey, supported by the IMF initiated the UK's embarkation into monetarism. Gordon Brown made the Bank of England independent and he later embarked on quantitative easing as a "solution" to financial sector excesses. The combination of an irresponsible decision by Labor in 1976 to take up monetarism and the extension of that policy and intensification of financialization by the Conservatives was followed by an irresponsible decision by Labour in 2008 to embark on a temporary quantitative easing and extended by 12 years by the Conservatives to intensify austerity and the running down public services. These disastrous Labour-Conservative combos have exacerbated income disparity and investment in the real economy. Bank of England "independence" has been used by the Conservatives to distance any effective Parliamentary oversight of monetary policy, including quantitative easing.

At an APE Corrrespondents' Pool briefing on the recent Monetary Policy Committee decision to raise interest rates to 0.25% was reviewed. While holding off on implementating this decision to observe the likely impacts of Omnicron, it is worth pointing out that the rising inflation is a direct result of the Bank of England's prolonged imposition (12 years) of quantitative easing (QE). In particular the flow of QE funds into land, real estate and commodity futures driving up prices by between 20%-40% and which are now leaking into supply side costs in the form of prices and rents of houses, offices, commercial premises, industrial and warehouse units and other logistics infrastructures creating a structural cost-push inflation. This same process is contributing to the commodity and energy price crisis. One of the recent providers of evidence to the Economic Affairs Committee, referred to quantiative easing as a policy without a theory. This is correct. The drain of resources, lack of investment and fall in real wages is because the theoretical model used by monetarists to predict inflation under QE does not contain the long list of variables that represent the many different classes of assets that have undergone rapid inflation as a direct result of QE and drained funds from the supply side investment. As stated, "quantiative easing is a policy without a theory". A O.25% interest rate would have no impact on this cost-push inflation but could unravel (crash) some private debt situations.

The latest episode of Going Underground, speaks to the former Pink Floyd frontman Roger Waters. He discusses attempts to prosecute Israeli Defence Minister Benny Gantz for war crimes against Palestinians, his classification of Israel as a "terrorist, apartheid, racist, colonialist regime," the withdrawal from Afghanistan, the persecution of Jeremy Corbyn by Israel and Keir Starmer's destruction of the Labour party, Julian Assange being subjected to a travesty of justice, and Steven Donziger, and much more...

The persecution of Christians in Israeli Jerusalem has risen to intolerable levels resulting the joint Christian churches complaining openly about this menace. The Palestinians have suffered this type of treatment for over 73 years and now the attention of the same groups, bent on the dispossession of people adhering to different religions by intimidation is in train. Many of the Palestininan Christians are descended from families who inhabited the Holy Land at the time of Jesus.

We have the honourable duty of calling attention to such unethical and brutal behaviour to call attention to the mistreatment of people who practice other religions, including the Christian community, in Israel.

We have posted the complaint and appeal made by the Patriachs and Heads of Churches in Jerusalem on the left.

The outcome of the North Shropshire by-election was predictable for the Conservatives but it also demonstrated that Labour was given scant attention by the voters in its emerging Neob Conservative Light reformulation under Keir Starmer. It is normal for the Liberal Democrats (LDs), or the Greens, to pick up protest votes but a more strategic approach pursued by the Liberal Democrats could help them hang on to those votes and in fact increase them nationally by the time of the next General Election. There are something like 160 Conservative and Labour MPs whose "majorities" are so thin they could easily lose their seats by just a quarter of the swing the SD's achieved yesterday.

Labour's Neob transformation towards the same conventional macroeconomic theory and derived policies applied by the Conservatives only reduces any fundamental difference between the two parties;the electorate will end up with no clear options. However, it is this off-hand macroeconomic paradigm and confused Bank of England decisions that are continuing to be the source of most economic and social woes in our country. Neither of these parties has presented convincing "ways out" of our current crisis.

A member of APEurope Correspondents' Pool who has attended most British Strategic Review analysis sessions, has informed us that the current scenario was foreseen. The Liberal Democrats have an excellent local constituency operation and have an acceptable ethical image relatively free from the levels of dishonesty submerging the Conservatives or the enduring and acrid stench emanating from the purposeful fabrication of the extent of antisemitism in the Labour party by Neobs, aimed solely at framing Jeremy Corbyn to the satisfaction of Benjamin Netanyahu's campaign against Jeremy Corbyn for his lifelong support of the Palestinian cause. However, the LD's main current weakness is the lack a clearly alternative macroeconomic policy framework offering a practical solution to the current economic woes. The LD's prospects could be greatly enhances by coming up with better macroeconomic solutions to the lack of solutions that characterize Conservatives and Labour parties.

The Q4 edition, of the British Strategic Review, entitled, "Monetarism & the Real Ecomnomy" sets out the evidence and logic of why conventional policies are no longer effective and it also provides both theoretical and policy propositions for an alternative solution. This might provide Ed Davey, the leader of the Social Democrats and who has degrees in economics, with an "oven-ready" and important optional policy framework ready for the next General Election in May 2024.

This week's Alex Salmond show reviews the declining prospects of the Prime Minister and the Conservative Party. Alex Salmond interviews Peter Oborne and Baroness Claire Fox concerning Boris Johnson and the Conservative party. Their prognoses are quite bleak for both. To access this video show, click on the image on the right. It seems that, if the Conservative party considers itself to have a future, Boris Johnson needs to go, preferably sooner than later. The problem is who can lead the party. Much quoted Rishi Sunak and Liz Truss are mentioned but they are both complete light weights. Peter Oborne pointed to Jeremy Hunt and David Davis as possible contenders.

From the constitutional standpoint, the APE Correspondents' Pool find that Davis' understanding and past stance on a range of negative impacts of many constitutional provisions makes him by far the best qualified. Emerging from these exchanges, the Labour party does not come off well which under Keir Starmer has faded into the background from which Jeremy Corbyn had extracted it only to be unjustifiably attacked with untrue accusations by Pro-Israeli government fanatics and co-ordinated with its own Neob (Neo-Blairite) membership to destroy the future of Corbyn and the party as this Neob minority has reasserted their influence over Starmer. Claire Fox does express the hope that new more representative parties will emerge from this current morass.

The constant ramping up of tensions in Europe is a characteristic of a worn out strategy to justify NATO and enable the USA military hardware manufacturers to sustain their turnover. The current tension being built up in the media and in US and UK government declarations and dire warnings need to be viewed from this standpoint. The Ukrainian crisis is a domestic civil war arising from a CIA-provoked coup in the Ukraine in 2014. This included the Maidan massacre in Kiev where protesters and police during were both shot on February 20, 2014 by agents designed to create a series of controlled events the main one to overthrow of the Ukrainian government and start a civil war in Dombas. The war started because of the excesses of Neo-Nazi militia from the West of Ukraine murdering Russian-speaking civilians. Most Russian-speaking Ukrainians have dual citizenship and have relatives in Russia. As a result the mainly Russian-speaking Dombas began to organize to protect its Russian-speaking population. Regular Ukrainian troops refused to attack Russian-speaking Ukrainians but the US military and CIA began to consolidate the Neo-Nazi militia through the provision of training and arms. Since the extreme elements in the new government clearly aimed at genocide of Russian speakers many volunteers came from Russia to help the Dombas. The highest concentrations of Russian-speakers in the Ukraine are in the Dombas Southern Eastern region, on the Russian border, and the Crimea where the Russian fleet has a major naval centre in Sevastopol. The build up of largely covert military support by the USA presented two major challenges for Russia. One was the question protecting Russian-speakers many of whom had joint Ukrainian-Russian citizenship and secondly to protect Russian naval assets in Crimea. The somewhat disorganized Ukrainian forces were attempting to reach Crimea and since this was a US-inspired unconstitutional coup followed by an attempt at State Department-inspired proxy military action including targeted genocide, it is self-evident that Russia needed to take defensive action. The main step taken was to annex Crimea following a referendum of the Crimean population. This permitted Russia to protect both their naval assets and the people of Crimea from genocide. This short leader has not been issued to side with Russia but rather to clarify how the Ukrainian "crisis" came about. This ongoing civil war has entered its seventh year, with no end in sight. By mid-February 2020, the death toll had climbed to almost 14,000, with more than 30,000 people injured. Ukraine is now home to almost 1.5 million registered internally displaced persons (IDPs), the ninth-largest number in the world. The economic impact, measured in lost output and trade, and destroyed or damaged assets, almost certainly runs into tens of billions of dollars.

The West's cynical talk of "freedom" of the people of Ukraine and the threat of a "Russian invasion" need to be placed into the context of the violent invasion-by-proxy by the USA coordinated to the US State Department which gave rise to this unstable situation and virtually destroyed the Ukrainian economy.

Also the threats to further sanction the NorthStream2 gas pipeline, like the prejudice imposed on Europe through agreeing to US sanctions against Russia following the Crimean annexation, only prejudice the European economy. But in all of these strategies the USA does not show any practical interest at all in the plight of European wage-earners but maintains tensions in order to benefit America. This highly insecure "security strategy" is supported proactively by the British government as recently expressed by the Foreign Secretary; all of this is misguided. It is not in our national interest to support the sorts of underhand assassinations and murderous acts carried out in Ukraine while much of the population remain in danger of genocide at the hands of a government supported by the West and to idly talk about reacting to Russian "invasions" while ignoring the fact there is an unacceptable state of affairs maintained in tension by the West. Russia has supported the Minsk Agreements along with France, Germany and after 7 years the Ukrainian government still refuses to provide autonomy for the affected regions agreed to under the Agreement.

At a short SEEL presentation to the APE Correspondents' Pool the role of the IMF in initiating the ramping up the financialization of the world economy in a crucial period between 1973 and 1977 was reviewed. Following the 1971 decision by Nixon to abandon the Gold Standard, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) lost its role. Many assumed it would be closed down. However, its prospects changed with a reshaping of the international finance paradigm centred on decisions taken by Murshid Karimbakhsh a member of the Sufi Islamic sect who happened to be the Managing Director of the IMF. Murshid is better known to economists as Hendrikus Johannes "Johan" Witteveen (1921-2019) a Dutch economist. As IMF Managing Director, Witteveen had the habit of handling negotiations personally; decisions taken rested with him. With the 1973 international petroleum price crisis Nixon and Ford wanted the IMF to criticize the largely Islamic OPEC members for applying blackmail against countries who supported Israel in the ongoing warfare. Witteveen agreed with the petroleum exporters, whose income had increased enormously, for them to lend IMF funds so as to permit the IMF to lend on to lower income countries to support the purchase of petroleum in a regime of constantly rising prices. IMF interests aside, Witteveen's strategy resulted in the largely Islamic petroleum exporters being able to continue to raise prices and prejudice world economies while seducing the "West" by recycling the excess dollars through institutions close to, or supporting leading politicians and parties, so as to avoid the likelihood of military interventions in the petroleum exporting countries. This "recycling" took off within the private banking system following the IMF example. Western politicians and corporate media publicised Witteveen's decisions in terms of him being the "saviour of world trade" to providing vital "survival assistance" to lower income countries. The reality was, however, that such decisions resulted in the USA and UK with substantial financial service sectors becoming rapidly aligned with the managers of expanding and increasingly respectble Middle Eastern "Sovereign Wealth Funds" and a perilous growth in political party funding to gain influence of national policies. The additional reality was that this removed much of the pressure on exporters to lower prices. As a result the slumpflation crisis, which appeared in 1973, continued to prejudice wage-earners well into the early 1990s. The outcome was increasing debt for low income countries through the IMF, the World Bank and private bank operations all closely linked to the recycling of petroleum dollars. As a result, the development of essential petroleum-substitution technologies was pushed into the background in place of "financial performance" for some 50 years. This created a new role for central banks the world over creating a new constituency in control of national macroeconomic policies and in support of the IMF.

In 1976, the Labour government, through a misguided Chancellor Denis Healey, applied for an IMF loan because of the plummeting balance of payments crisis. Healey had already abandoned wage and productivity agreements and Keynesianism. However, Witteveen insisted on conditions imposing yet more severe austerity. This initiated the UKs long drift into increasing financialization of the economy, declining supply side investment, falling productivity and real wages. Because this loan structure had been accepted by Britain this gave Witteveen and the IMF the misguided confidence to repeat this model repetitively on a world wide basis.

This new paradigm of seeing the balance of payments as a purely monetary phenomenon as opposed to one linked to selective supply side investment and productivity led to the publication of the book, "The Monetary Approach to the Balance of Payments" by the IMF in 1977, with a Forward by Witteveen. This excruciatingly theoretical work, with little relation to the real economy, attempted to add an academic gloss to what started out as an overtly political decision favouring the interests of petroleum exporters to the detriment of the wage-earning constituents in importing countries. However, in terms of economic policy the book is stark evidence of the shallowness of the decision making processes that continue to shape decisions in international finance raising the levels of debt in a world which has remained with an unresolved energy crisis for over 45 years.

The amateurish, parochial, unworldly nature of those in command of governance and policy decisions has seriously eroded the stature and image of Britain as a serious independent country. The tragic outcome of people whose upbringing causes them to consider politics to be about leadership as opposed to public service has resulted in a worrying rise and projection of individuals with doubtful competence. Such people confuse leadership with status and the power of patronage of servile party clerics branded as Secretaries of State or Minsters, all of whom show an embarrassing delight at receiving, what they consider to be status and salary breaks as opposed to reflecting on the onerous nature of the job serving the national population. In this unseemly arrangement, leadership fails to reflect the enormity of the challenges facing our country and the global population. Party politics trumps all. It even trumps national governance. As a result we have no responsive national leadership.

Concerning the so-called "levelling up" we are still waiting, some 5 years following the BREXIT referendum in 2016, to obtain sight of any serious decision analysis on options, plans and policy options for levelling-up. In the meantime quantitative easing has eroded public services, supply side productive investment, it has stalled productivity and depressed real incomes and exacerbated the housing crisis. Such a macroeconomic policy is no foundation to levelling up. The government needs to identify a sound alternative. It is doubtful that the individual charged with "levelling-up" and "housing" will come up with anything to meet this challenge because he would have to challenge the Bank of England's policy, the financial sector and the interests of the main party benefactors.

The chaotic incompetence of the Afghani exit was caused by concern over the unexpected rapid "take over" of the country by the Taliban, when "alliance" troops withdrew from the country. In any normal strategic analysis of outcome options, what occurred would have been set as the expected scenario in order to ensure a timely comprehensive response. But no, the alarming open admission by intelligence officials was that "no one expected" the Taliban to advance so quickly. This is completely ridiculous. This only confirmed the parochial incompetence of our "intelligence" services where the public image of the all-think-alike-and-state-alike Five-Eyes system has been severely dented. The knock on effect of this disaster showed up in the degree to which ministers and civil servants relied on invalid intelligence resulting in a failure to prepare for this event. As the allied departure drew nigh, at a date known the months before, no one should have been on "holiday". Chaos and avoidable deaths occurred as a result. The trail of deaths of our military personnel on unnecessary wars remains a topic requiring an investigation and criminal prosecutions of people with the affront to generate dodgy "intelligence" dossiers to commit our military to pointless interventions on the basis of the equivalent to "false flag" misrepresentations. Pointless, because none of them has improved our state of security. The prize of our military alliance's interventions has been millions of dead civilians in the countries invaded. But such potentially embarrassing detail remains out of sight and therefore, out of mind, with the dutiful assistance of our corporate media. But no, the image of the party and power is all that such tragic figures see. This searing incompetence and fixation on personal status and party power is so extreme that the vital issues affecting the majority of the constituents in this country, let alone those in countries we have invaded, remain out of mind. This country faces a crisis of government competence.

The majority of migrants, refugees and asylum seekers are part of the collateral damage created by our country's military escapades that have devastated many countries in the Middle East. Many of those who remained, over a million people, are corpses. They remained uncounted by our military whose alliance contributed to their death. The government, in wishing to turn fleeing families back, has created a market for people smugglers whom they now blame for the transport of far fewer people than are ending up in other European countries. The reality is that the government does not wish to adhere to International Law; their creation of difficulties for such people smacks of a visceral racism. Priti Patel has expressed concern for the safety of migrant families largely because they are alive, we can, to some degree, see them on the media. It is notable that she and the government have expressed no regrets for previous our actions that led directly loss of life and devastation creating forced migration. She has been a strong supporter of Israel's continued deepening violent occupation of Palestine which has remained the key historic cause of the Middle Eastern turmoil. She is actively assisting Israel's intent to prevent exposure of its violence by proscribing the main political party in Gaza and making no comment on Israel's recent classification of leading well-known quality NGOs as terrorist organizations. Israel's objective is to minimize the size community recording and reporting in their atrocities. The troublesome aspect is the degree to which both the Conservatives and Labour helped create this shameful legacy but avoid actions and words that might call attention to the wanton destruction and deaths metered out to over a million individual members of Middle Eastern families. Their principal grubby and amoral interest is to "protect the image" of their tiny private parties. This dreadful legacy imposed on the people of th Middle East has a serious collateral damage for the constituents of this country. This is the decline in the moral standing of our governments and their contribution to widspread deaths and in their ongoing asphyxiation of truth, peace and justice.

As usual, Afshin Rattansi's latest edition of Going Underground does a better job than mainstream media, so-called, by interviewing leading Special Rapporteurs on migrants and Israel's occupation of Palestine. To access the programme click on the image on the right.

The poor transparency of the recent Bank of England's evidence, concerning quantitative easing, given at the Lords Economic Affairs Committee contributed to the Committee naming of their report, "Quantitative easing: a dangerous addiction?".

This, together with the forthcoming BSR report, seriously questions the value of the Bank's independent status.

This weekend (27/28 November, 2021) the Agence Presse Européenne Correspondents' Pool was addressed by the editorial of the British Strategic Review (BSR). The next edition is entitled "Monetarism and the Real Economy". Although not revealing too much, what was revealed is somewhat earth-shattering. A major confusion exists in the discussion surrounding inflation. Inflation in assets favours those who deal in and receive their incomes from the proceeds of asset transactions or indeed in the form of financial assets such as share options. Inflation in the prices of goods and services is bad for wage-earners, most of whom do not receive any of the proceeds from asset transactions. This results in those dealing in assets to have diametrically opposed interests to wage-earners, the majority of the constituency of the United Kingdom.

The worrisome part is the role of the Bank of England (BoE) in supporting a prolonged period of quantitative easing (QE) in the knowledge that this was augmenting inflation in asset markets and befitting a minority of constituents. At the same time this diverted needed funds away from productive investment. The aggregate demand model, the darling of Keynesians and monetarists, has become inoperable. This is because monetary decisions are justified and "fine tuned" applying the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM). However, QE has rendered the QTM inoperable because QE brought variables that do not exist in the QTM, into dominance in determining the outcomes of QE. The BoE has yet to catch up on this simple fact. The QTM only refers to the prices of goods and services but does not include the asset prices for land, real estate including housing, offices, retail and industrial units and other infrastructure, precious metals, commodities used as asset positions, financial assets including shares and rare art objects, nor does it include outflows of funds to offshore assets and investment. In other words all of the areas that have absorbed the majority of QE funds did not feature in monetary policy planning. This massive flow of QE funds into assets has diverted funds from essential supply side investment necessary for higher productivity production and facilitaing the payment of higher wages. As a result the BoE policies atomized the real growth of our economy supporting the government's ideological drive for austerity and directly prejudicing wage-earners. The constant asset price rises have impacted supply side input costs through rises in the prices and rentals of premises. QE has created a cost-push inflationary pressure, a cost of living and a widening housing crisis.

This was the last BSR update before publication at the end of December 2021. The BSR editorial confirmed that the report will present the evidence supporting these statements.

In the latest edition of Going Underground Afshin Rattansi interviews Alfred de Zayas covering the scopes of his book, "Building a Just World Order". Based on first hand experience in this field de Zayas is able to summarize in less than half an hour a range of leading problems facing the global constituency. He makes the fundamental requirement for constituents as being the full truth. Our corporate media use selective omissions of facts to misrepresent and rob constituents of essential information. An important term of interest to British constituents under the current regime is "Lawfare" the corrupt use of ad hoc law manipulation to corrupt a range of constitutional provisions to achieve ideological and often violent objectives. The "Right to Protect" clauses are used to exercise regime change and destruction of countries under the guise of "humanitarian intervention". He points out how misrepresentation in the media and wrong priorities destroy the concept of " being human rights in practice" and the extent by which many years of sanctions by the USA and collaborators [such as UK governments] have ruined and continue to prejudice the livelihoods of millions of innocents.

Both Boris Johnson and Keir Starmer addressed a CBI meeting this week. In the first the attendees learned something about Peppa Pig and in the second that Labour wishes to support business. The problem is that the Conservatives have no policy for levelling-up and Labour is aspiring to emulate the Conservatives by singing from the same economic theory song book. Neither, in reality, presents a transparent alternative pathway towards sustainable growth. Labour tried this tactic before. The conversion of Blair and Brown to the same economic theories as the Conservatives, only intensified financialization undermining NHS viability. Gordon Brown's introduction of quantitative easing, which the recent BBC documentary series considered to be a "revolution", only intensified the hollowing out of industry and falling real wages.

At a dinner in Hampshire in late 2002 Margaret Thatcher was asked by a guest what her greatest achievement was. She replied, "Tony Blair and New Labour. We forced our opponents to change their minds."

Clearly Starmer's tutelage by remaining Neobs (Neo-Blairites) encouraging him to tread the same path as Blair and Brown will only repeat their disaster by providing the electorate with no relevant alternatives. As leader of the Labour party, Jeremy Corbyn provided John McDonnell with a free reign to explore alternative economic policies in costed form over the period 2015-2020. This was a transparent open process involving a wide range of leading international policy and economics experts; for many this was an inspiring effort. Unfortunately the Neobs were the instigators of the go slow in anti-semitic case resolutions and feeding the media to create a fabricated crisis. This dishonest manipulation of public opinion undermined Corbyn. However, given the state of the economy and policy-making on the hoof, it is becoming a matter of extreme concern that this sort of initiative is clearly lacking in the current Conservative and Labour camps.

In the BBC Question Time on Thursday, 25th November, one question referred to the people drowning in the Channel. The fundamental cause of the plight of these people having to flee from their countries as a result of the death and destruction wrought in several Middle Eastern countries by a military alliance of which the UK is a leading member, was not mentioned by anyone on the panel. A single member of the audience raised this question but there was no panel response.

In his evidence to Parliamentary Committees, Dominic Cummings pointed out the levels of incompetence surrounding decision making in the government. Since they got rid of him, it is notable that the number of more visible cock ups has increased with several U-turns with this latest care vote being the next likely contender. The fact that many Conservative MPs voted for this Bill without having had the opportunity to review a preparatory analysis of options and associated impacts, is a disgrace and a reflection of the slapdash amateurish approach this government has on issues which are highly sensitive to the majority of the constituents of this country. This is yet another example of the ingrained preference of the government and Conservative party MPs to ignore basic standards in public life. The weakest link, contrary to the evolving consensus and discussions, is the deficient economic analysis served up by the static zero-sum national accounts approach by the Chancellor and those in the Treasury and Bank of England bubble. This TINA joy ride is ruining the prospects of this country because policy propositions are so inept.

The only thing the current government appears to "understand" is assets. The latest, poorly-explained cap on care costs linked to a means test including the value of a family's house is a typical example. Those in the so-called Red-wall regions and those who have just been informed that HS2 will not serve them are damned to have their accumulated assets being stripped away while those in the rest of Britain suffer less. This is hardly a levelling up agenda. This government needs to apply far more imagination and serious analysis to identify alternatives that are fairer. This approach of cannibalizing assets is no different from asset stripping to avoid having to introduce more permanently-based social care system that is economically viable. This appears to be a challenge beyond the intellectual capacity and understanding of economics of this government. QE resulted in close-to-zero interest rates, robbing wage-earners of the ability to save for their futures. As usual, the policy bias continues to be a shabby and prejudicial treatment of the interests of the majority of the wage-earning constituency of this country.

The countries where "our alliance" has inflicted economic harm and death include Iraq, Libya, Afghanistan, Syria and Iran and we continue to arm Saudi Arabia carrying out it's bloody campaign in Yemen and Israel carrying out a similar campaign in Gaza. These irresponsible acts have increased the global expansion of Al Quaeda and ISIL. The direct inevitable outcome has been millions of refugees, economic migrants and asylum seekers escaping the terrible conditions we and our "allies" have created.

The rank hypocrisy of the Conservative and Labour Parties on the question of refugees, economic migrants and asylum seekers is their ability to avoid dwelling on the responsibility of their respective governments that willingly collaborated in aggressive economic and murderous campaigns rampaging through countries in the Middle East. Along with our "allies" sanctions, military action and drone strikes killed more than a million innocent men, women and children, completely ruined economic infrastructures and the productive capacities eliminating the economic prospects of millions of remaining and fleeing families. The fundamental lack of concern for humanity on our part in being unable to encourage so-called "allies" to terminate permanent war is lamentable as is the continued export of armaments to delinquent states such as Saudi Arabia and Israel.

The Prime Minister stated that he was "appalled" at migrants drowning in the  Channel for such events are an embarrassment, but no such concern has been expressed concerning the millions of men women and children blow to bits by drone strikes or allied actions causing the people who drowned in the Channel to flee their countries devastated and turned economically unviable by "allied" brutality. There is a need for the people to question the NATO and UK's destruction of the economic prospects of countries in the Middle East, all of which are countries that are "coincidentally" not to the liking of Israel. The strength of the Israeli lobby running roughshod over British democratic procedures can be seen in the recent initiative of the Home Secretary on a foreign policy question of Hamas. Israeli Intel has a good grasp of the profiles of convenient idiots, such as individuals with intense personal ambition. Candidates include those with ethnic or religious minority status in a country where there is an adequate level of prejudice. The resulting mindset in the political domain tends to be individuals with personal points of view that sometimes are exposed in the form of little concern for the less fortunate, prone to domineering and forceful disrespectful relationships with subordinates and favouring extreme forms of punishment. Things almost went wrong when Patel, when serving as Secretary of State for International Development was found to have not followed standards in public life by attempting to hide her repeated secret meetings with leading Israeli politicians and business leaders by classifying this Israel-based activity as a ""family holiday". Because of the possible Intel exposure she was hurriedly removed from this post to allow things to "blow over" but she has maintained the support of the PM. Many consider her to be out of her depth but she clearly serves a purpose as far as the PM is concerned being part of his extreme right guard.

Poland demonstrated its ability to beating down and attack people in the Middle East but that also, when people fled from this brutality, the Polish sense of humanity was revealed in their sending riot squads and military contingents to beat those escaping from this aggression in an unashamed fashion and in the full sight of the world. A glorious example of the humanity of Europeans. Our defective foreign and military policy, which seems to be run from the Home Office, has been marred, not only by the fact we have willingly sent troops to support this Middle-Eastern mayhem but we have also sent British military to assist the Poles in "their border crisis". This crisis is exacerbated by our government's repeatedly irresponsible and inhumane decisions to go to war which have resulted in millions of deaths of innocent men, women and children. Our continued support reflects a serious lack of constructive leadership within the Conservative and Labour parties and the decay in the image of this country on the international stage.

In the beginning...

Palestinian Nakba

Palestinian family recover
items from their
destroyed home

Palestinian child
in rubble of
former home

Some representatives have better things to do ...

In contrast to our political scene dominated by sleaze allegations, corruption and permanent aggression, Jeremy Corbyn had spent time on the world stage addressing the World Peace Conference in Barcelona. In an outstanding speech he called attention to the 70 million refugees who are unable to return to their homes as a result of warfare.

As the nation duly observed the remembrance of the those who perished in wars past, the result of the wars in which we participated since 1945 can be witnessed lapping at our shore in the form of economic migrants and asylum seekers. These people are the price imposed by irresponsible political decisions and failed military and Intel strategies. The tendency to see the resolution of problems through warfare not only results in the needless death of our military personnel but also in the murder of millions of innocent men, women and children, largely in the Middle East. This has, in no way increased our security, it has made things far worse and our continued involvement increases the risks. Tactics deployed have included the deployment of terrorists to help change regimes but this tactic has backfired with terrorist attacks in the UK and France carried out by such Intel "assets". President Obama increased drone attacks which, backed by imperfect intelligence, murdered increasing numbers of innocent families. The military leader who was most effective in getting rid of ISIL was the Iranian General Qasem Soleimani who was assassinated by the US based on Israeli intelligence. Russia also effectively prevented their spread in Syria, thwarting the West's regime change objectives. Since this intervention, Russia has become the object of blame for everything from Trump's election, cyber attacks, invasion of Ukraine, energy prices, and now, the migrant crisis. Rather than spend time insisting on demonizing leaders of other countries, our own politicians need demonstrate some leadership by demonstrating a practical concern with the sanctity, value and rhythm of life of the people in this country and, by extension, people in all other countries. Until they do this our general state of security will continue to decline.

The UK's tendency to follow the USA's aggressive foreign and Intel strategic policies and tactics resulted in millions of refugees tracking their way to our shores. Much of the Middle Eastern "policy" has led to the destruction of countries on a list drawn up by Benjamin Netanyahu when he was based in the US. The aggression inflicted by the State of Israel on Palestinians since 1948 and its continued occupation of Palestine and construction of illegal settlements and refusal to allow Palestinians driven out by Israel to return to their homes, is not held to account. Today, any reference to this excessive aggression is immediately dubbed "antisemitic".

Today, 19/11/2021 in Washington, Priti Patel will state the UK government's intention to proscribe the Palestinian political party Hammas, who hold the majority in the government of Gaza, as a terrorist organization. This will bring satisfaction to the US and only encourage those facing anti-Islamic aggression to intensify their fight. This is because this only provides Israel even more "justification" for its particularly violent military attacks on the people of Gaza. The United Kingdom requires a more independent and productive strategy, under a more mature leadership, to liaise with Hammas on social and economic development issues to agree on projects to help their people and, at the same time, try to encourage Israel to stop destroying development projects through missile attacks. Jewishness, antisemitism has nothing to do with this discussion. The issue is a growing aggressive anti-Islamic apartheid state of Israel which, by extension, is aligning other governments into policies affecting Moslems and a rising aggressive form of anti-Islamism which is a root cause of increasing terrorist attacks including those in the UK. The intent of Israel by imposing this compliance on the UK government is to eliminate public discussion on the resolution of the injustices imposed on Palestinians continued dispossession (the act stealing of property, buildings, land and resources) of the Palestinina people by making it a criminal offense to "appear" to support Hamas. But discussion on this issue, of which Hamas is an unavoidable element, is not geared more towards "support" for Hamas but is rather an identification of what Hamas might do, with Israel's help, to improve the state of affairs of the people of Gaza so as to promote peace and justice through the return of Palestinian refugees to their homes. The goverment's intent, to be expressed by the UK Home Secretary, Priti Patel, will please the US State Department and the Israeli leadership whose track records indicate no practical interest in assisting the Palestinians. However, from the standpoint of the Palestinians and the security of people in Britain, it reflects an extreme incompetence and irresponsibility.

In order to lobby on behalf of a company does not require an MP to be employed by the beneficiary company. They can benefit from money in cash or in kind, such as a luxurious vacation, to the same effect. An innocent investment by an MP can mysteriously pay back high return. The purchase of shares, at a time indicated can also pay back high dividends, especially in the current quantitative easing environment. The purchase of a house at a low "plan price" using a normal mortgage can reap advantages when "someone" comes along and purchases the house for an elevated price. Companies in specific sectors can organize meetings and get togethers where executives can decide who will win a "competitive tender" and who will get the subcontracts. The politicians overseeing the process, of course, can be "unaware" of such proceedings, will receive their benefits once the tender has been won by the "right" company, in cash or kind. School and college fees are another payment in kind in support of MPs' children or grandchildren. The mechanisms for corruption are many. The best way to tone down this practice is to only permit MPs to serve in a single parliament and then to only return two elections later. During the parliamentary service they should not be permitted to be involved in second employments or tasks. This was one of the devices early written constitutions included to prevent the formation of political parties and the corruption associated with such power centres. Following this procedure would permit them to maintain their professional involvements and standards while not being tempted to sully them while acting as an MP.

At a side event at the SEEL Strategic Report session last week it became clear that the likely strategy of the main petroleum producers and exporters exercise a mild blackmail by raising petroleum prices so as to slow down the immediate economic growth in the countries attempting to introduce the green agenda. This would buy time for petroleum producers to transition. However, such a self-defeating policy will slow down the transition and "agreed timeframes" will never be completed. This is likely to create a suicidal embrace leading to a failure to reduce temperature rises at the required rate.

The government's penchant for scoring repetitive own-goals will come to a climax with the announcement of the cut backs on HS2 as the cherry on the cake made up of a heap of embarrassments. This circus is an affront to the electorate.

Although we can justifiably point to very bad party organization under a leadership that regards all of this as a personal power game, under current circumstances of Covid and climate change this is playing with survival and human lives. In our power-by-proxy political system, a wealthy elite, including financial services, hydrocarbon producers and asset holders, use their financial support of political parties to manipulate policies in their favour. It is this compromised position of the Conservatives which is exposed each time we witness these events that demean the whole notion of "representation". The political party system does not provide an effective basis for serious representation of the majority. This is why the opposition paradoxically support legislations which favours their own prospects when they have to deal with the same benefactors in government. As long as the electorate tolerate this political party system and do not organize to bring about change, the more likely it is that our children and grandchildren will suffer as a direct result of our inaction.

Although working as President of COP 26, on a permanent basis, for less than a year, Alok Sharma was able to coordinate a relatively trouble-free COP 26. This was quite a feat considering the number of nations involved and the need to arrive at a consensus. Certainly Sharma now has a definite presence on the world stage. Domestically his image as a serious, diplomatic and effective politician has been greatly enhanced.

There are still "details" to be worked out concerning delivery and the questions of finance in general, finance for adaptation and the management of the loss and damage issues which are likely to become significant in the next decade and beyond.

The APE Correspondents' Pool will be holding workshops on these topics with the intent of providing propositions on these topics. The justification for this is that the financial services sector and including the international development agencies such as the World Bank, to date, do not have a good project performance record. There is an unacceptable level of project failure linked to poor design, inadequate oversight and weak performance evaluation execution.

The notion that $100 billion/annum is sufficient to support projects to address climate change when all projects need to be sustainable is somewhat odd given that this is less than the current international transfers. Early next year the world population will be 8 billion so $100 billion is equivalent to about $1/person/per month. The existence of $100 trillion is also an odd figure given that it was cited at the Davos meeting as the investment requirement for standard growth with no reference to climate change. It is linked to a 30 year transition period this is around $9/person/month. What has happened is that COP26 was an opportunity to use this as a green wash statement. Oversight and due diligence of investments by the financial services sector is so poor that the project failure rate is around 35% (45% for agriculture) so in real terms these figures drop to $0.65/person/month and $5/person/month. If we then take into account inflation approaching 5% then the $100 billion will be worth $20 billion in 30 years time.

SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab has stated that 60% of the weight of biomass dry matter in forests comes from water molecule atoms reconfigured into a new solid molecular structure. Following deforestation (such as Amazon) the water balance declines and as a result the areas that need to be reforested exceed the areas deforested because of the lower availability of water. A 40% decline in water accessibility resulting from deforestation requires a reforestation of an area at least 160% larger to gain the same level of carbon capture at a far slower rate of growth as the water cycle in re-established. However, it is very unlikely to reach the equilibrium flow that existed within the virgin forest removed. Clearly this has not been thought through.

The blasé attitude towards the high rate of avoidable Covid deaths in the UK continues as a direct result the lackadaisical and irresponsible decision making of this government. Throughout this pandemic amongst the most informative sources of information has been the Alex Salmond Show. The latest Show (11/11/2021) provides a good summary of the state of play on treatments as well the reasons for the continued high death rates. In this Show he interviews Professor Hugh Montgomery of University College London who outlines the new treatments spreading fresh hope in intensive care wards, while Dr. Bharat Pankhania of Exeter University warns about the dangers of relying on vaccination programmes alone and neglecting basic infection-prevention measures. Most of Pankhania's predictions in the past have been correct.

On 8th November, all of the MPs debating last week's disaster concerning the government's bungled attempt to attack parliamentary standards, were very careful not to address the main problem. This is because the prospects of each one, especially Labour and Conservative MPs, depends upon the degree to which they follow the party line in voting. There are those who can claim not to follow the party line while not wishing to admit that parties fund their campaigns to get elected.

The "Standards Debate" was the subject of a recent PWP (Politics without Parties) workshop (morning of 10/11/2021) where is was noted that several MPs during this debate, had somewhat indignantly, claimed that their allegiance was to their constituents, distancing themselves from the unseemly symptoms of their own party machines in action.

However, the workshop participants agreed that the reason MPs have their role of "looking after constituents" is the result of a failure of our system to have devolved many of these functions to local independent agents. This country is considered to have a very poor record of provisions of duty of care for constituents as a result of a lack of:

Local ombud functions: "a designated neutral individual who is appointed or employed by an organization to facilitate the informal resolution of concerns of constituents"

Constituent defender: " a designated lawyer, with no party affiliation, who defends the interests of constituents wishing to appeal against governmental, legal and statutory decisions that have gone against their interests".

It was suggested that these should be established with their numbers depending upon the size of communities (villages, towns and cities) and these should not constitute low fee "aid" but rather the individuals concerned would have the normal salary so as to attract outstanding individuals able to provide a far more expert, efficient and timely service than MPs. MPs, because of overloaded "case files" are extremely inefficient in this function both in terms of the speed of resolution and often their lack of expertise in the specific case subjects.

These proposed services should not incur any payment on the part of constituents but could be paid for out of a neutral community fund, set up for this purpose, and over which local government political party representatives have no influence. In their usual bent, political parties would be likely to oppose such a proposition.

It was further suggested that MPs should concern themselves with improving the relevance of national legislation, albeit coloured by the knowledge of their constituency gaps and needs.

The fact that MPs have problems with their volumes of emails is largely a result of this poor provision of adequate devolved services for constituents.
They cannot separate their current status as MPs from this basic fact. That some Conservative MPs declared they were not under any pressure to vote in any particular way, others, off the record, admitted that they had been. In general, there is no need for pressure simply a realization on the part of an MP that their prospects for survival, especially those in marginal seats, depends upon party machine supporting their election campaigns or deselecting them.

This debate should have been about the corrupt political party machines. The whip system is used to ensure MPs don't vote in ways that undermine the ability of the "senior" ministers to ensure votes go the way party financiers want. Indeed this whole debate, in reality, was about the degree to which the desire of benefactors impact government behaviour. At least some MPs did refer to the contracts-for-chums and the cash-for-peerages scandals which in fact link directly to the mindset of the particular MP around which this scandal circulated. The issue being MPs lobbying for companies who pay them. This issue is fundamentally linked to operation of the political party machines in seeking money and this has nothing to do with MPs who imagine they are elected to represent and serve their constituencies. The party machine does not see it this way. MP numbers are there to gain power for the party and to support the government so the elections serve to legitimize the party in government and which will deliver the electorate to agendas and policies shaped by party benefactors. MPs are, indeed, caught in the middle. However, no matter what wonderful speeches MPs make with all apparent sincerity, they are all sullied by their intimate connextion and dependency on their party machine.

All have witnessed how the main parties are quite ruthless as a result of decisions taken by Johnson and Starmer. They are fixated with party power.

The issue of considerable amounts of money being received by the Conservative party from Russian oligarchs, some of whom gained the money from the corrupt privatization schemes that swept Russia and Eastern Europe after 1989, did not appear to temper the statements of the Conservatives MPs in this debate and whose election campaigns, they should be reminded, were paid for by party money. When the oligarch no longer has a company to contract but is just sitting on a load of cash, then a peerage is a way to provide such people with an undeserved status to participate in legislation of this country. MPs want to claim their only interest is serving their constituents but do not want to admit they are part of a fundamentally corrupt system run by political party interests. There were some impressive speeches and, indeed, there are many MPs who do not need a party machine behind them to get elected. However, few have the courage to try independence.

The Speaker expressed his desire that this debate should be, "...parliament at its best.", but this will always be a vain hope when the speeches and MPs fail to address the elephant in the room, the modes of money seeking by political parties and modes of influence through political parties by factional benefactors. It is these machnes that support all MPs while at the same time serving first and foremost their financial benefactors.

Donations to political parties should be limited to individual donations and capped. If this was the requirement the political parties might attempt to build up their numbers over and above the current pathetic numbers (in total less that 1.2% of the electorate). Similarly MPs should not be allowed to have separate paid employment. £80,000+ is plenty enough and in some cases too much. Additional employment has the problem of possible compromises and temptations this can create. MPs need to be independent of other sources of income and free from pressure of political parties bent on serving their financial benefactors; "politics without parties" would be an excellent solution.

Trying to fix standards of behaviour in a flawed system of representation based on the party system is a waste of time when the Nolan principles already exist but are clearly not applied. This is not something that should be left to MP Committees but rather by a jury made up of constituents who are fed up with the self-obsession of MPs with their own public image.

Our whole electoral system is deeply flawed. This was pointed out by the Power Commission in 2006. This Commission, ably Chaired by Helena Kennedy, completed a detailed analysis of the main shortcomings in our system and made sound proposals for reform. However, the mistake made was to expect the leading political parties to act on what were clearly reasonable proposals in the interests of the electorate. However, political parties have many advantages under the current system under the power-by-proxy structure that favours powerful factions who are party benefactors. So they will not support meaningful change. They probably did not like the Report subheading, "Power to the People". Both the Conservative party and the then Labour government essentially ignored the Power Commission Report. This report is quite long but worth reading. A convenient PWP executive and recommendations summary can be accessed here

Until the political parties become concerned with representing their constituents as opposed to the party line which follows the interests of party financial benefactors we will continue to endure sham sincerity, and show time parliaments and whips who keep it that way.

There is an assumption, promoted by political parties, that they are the solution when it is abundantly clear that they are the problem. As Greta Thunberg observed in relation to the politicians' latest fest, COP26, democracy is something that comes from the people here and now. This is what protests are about. As long as we hand over our future to political parties and their carbon dioxide generating and financial benefactors, there can be no worthy future. This is why serious consideration needs to be given to England's original constitutional proposals which consisted of politics without parties. All should contribute to the shaping of a peaceful transition to that state. This would at least get us to the state of the Power Report's subheading of "Power to the People".

It is more than evident that the politician's habit of making promises to be delivered at a date beyond the duration of their own mandate is, as they say, kicking the can down the road. All political party systems are guilty of this because most are captured by the very corporations who not only fund the political parties but are also the main causes of greenhouse gas emissions. It is very notable that there do not appear to be any plans for immediate tangible action which constituents can actually see. Mostly it is all talk. For example in the UK we keep hearing about a green revolution, levelling up and bulding back better but absolutely no concrete transparent plans. Knowing that things will get difficult and not acting to manage our affairs is highly irresponsible. Coming up with credible solutions appears to be beyond the capacity of this government. Since we are clearly beyond the tipping point such decisions over which political parties have no genuine management control, given the stark predictions, is already bordering on a crimnal act. Already people are dying as a result of flash floods and starvation caused by drought. This behaviour resulting in such political indecision or putting solutions off is to condem more people to death; clearly a criminal act. There is a need for immediate actions to stem this evolution.

The haughty attitude of the clique around Boris Johnson combined with their evident lack of concern for the pubic and international reputation of the country was exposed by the attempt to change politicians' behavioural standards last week. Surprised by the negative public reaction the government reversed its decision. However, this was too late. This move by government only exposed the mindset of these people who only focus on the interests of a prime minister who is their patron and who is intent on seeking revenge against a Standards Committee decision concerning a colleague. This also exposed the unacceptable nature of the party whip system that robs politicians of both their independence and freedom to act in the interests of their constituents rather than a mendacious prime minister. Their groveling and twisted statements to parliament justifying this attempt to change oversight conditions will live with each one. Each now carries an indelible brand of a weakling who is fearful of their patron, an undeserving prime minister. Their main intent was to maintain their income, status and prospects by slavishly supporting the part line. They used parliament to act out a disgraceful parody of the mindset of those who serve at the behest of a tin pot dictator.

It would seem that this government, as a whole, is concerned about the public securing more information as a result of investigations into a range of possible corrupt activities related to jobs-for-the-chums involving £ multi-billion contracts under the shadow of Covid-19. No doubt such companies have made contributions to the Conservative party. The prime minister, it is alleged, wants to get rid of the head of Standards, a person with an outstanding reputation, because there is likely to be an investigation into where he obtained funds for his apartment refurbishment and a lavish holiday. It seems Johnson wishes to live a lavish lifestyle that is not questioned, while he presides over an economy marked by rising income disparity and poverty. After all, Johnson is on the record in declaring that the economic success depends on personal greed. A fitting comparison seems to be with Nero who is said to have "Fiddled while Rome burned". This expression has two meanings: Not only did Nero play music while his people suffered, but he was an ineffectual leader in a time of crisis. Like the oft repeated scene in Rome, compromised senators tended to get rid of leaders who had cause them discomfort. Therefore, like Rome, many Conservative MPs will be mulling over the value of a rear guard action to salvage their reputations and political future by seeking to get rid of Johnson as the prime minister. Increasing numbers are likely to be realizing that by applying a more ancient Greek solution could bring a breath of fresh air to parliament by cleaning out the overflowing dung washing around this Augean Stable. These politicians are so engrossed in their self-adulation and action they cannot sense the reek or unseemly nature of their behaviour.

One is drawn to the question of the family values, upbringing and education of such individuals; there appears to be a individual status complex that tends to be associated with self-obsession. This can arise from an inferiority complex, very much part of the British "class system", or as part of a more "privileged" upbringing which often includes a distance from family during formative years. This signifies, in some cases, a lack of a practical experience in the benefits of interaction with wider society and, at the extreme, being so egocentric, leading to the irrational belief, in the context of politics, that there is no such thing as society.

In terms of the evolution of such a damaging set of circumstances, it was the Conservative party elected Johnson to be their leader. Their main expressed logic was that "he is an election winner!". However the Conservative party membership only constitute less than 0.25% (one quarter of one percent) of the electorate. This really is tin pot. Their choice reflected a lack of an adequate intellectual critical mass and reflected an intense parochialism. Their self-seeking "vote", oblivious of the likely practical implications for the country, resulted in a government leadership which has overseen a rapid decline in public support and the international reputation of British "political party system" and our "parliamentary democracy". The rest of the electorate i.e. 99.75% is likely to consider it to be an imperative to spare us of this continual embarrassment and remove this government at the next election.

The climate crisis is so serious that irresponsible actions that exacerbate the risk to human lives will end up in the territory of crimes against humanity as an automatic class impact consideration. This, to have effect, will need to have significant sanctions. Amongst the first steps in this transformation, the financial institutions standing ready with "£ trillions" need to be subjected to a stricter financial regulation framework which prevents executives shielding behind corporate veils. Just as in the case of Libor manipulation and fraudulent derivative ratings where there should have been prison sentences for the £ billions stolen. In the case of green financial services prison sentences and the closing down of bad actors is an essential if we are to get anywhere.

On the part of those taking the actions on the basis of their own funds or receiving loans and investment from private or international development organizations, need to apply a strict due diligence procedure and evidence-based design, procurement, operations and post-funding sustainability. This is a difficult area, especially in widely distributed production units such as the case of agriculture. Project cycle management procedures have hardly changed since the 1960s. However, now, climate change is impacting crop yields negatively, they decline each year in many countries of the world requiring a revamp of design methods. Much work has been carried out in this area but it has not surfaced notably during COP26.

Large organizations, such as the World Bank should not be allowed to run their own administrative procedures in the case of whistle blowers exposing illegal actions, corruption or failure to follow internal regulations. The tactics applied by such organizations include an immediate exposure of the whistle blower to a poor performance review to undermine their credibility. This is followed by a biased review process, the termination of the individual's contract and where the whistle blower's accusations are correct, to provide a very low compensation, if any at all. Invariably press releases criticise the person while seldom admitting any responsibility for wrong behaviour on the organization's part. The objective, all through this process is to defend the "image" of the institution. Whistle blowers should have recourse to protection and be compensated rapidly for damage inflicted upon them and their families by such organizations. Most staff are in the hapless situation of not getting involved for fear of losing their high paid employment.

Environmental and indigenous advocates need to be protected from the continuing violence and murder inflicted upon them largely by deforestation and carbon industrial cartels who also happen to be major financial supporters of political parties.

Those wishing to finance the "green revolution" think that carbon trading will enable CO2 release in one part of the globe can be offset by carbon capture in some other location. So far this has failed to stop the net increase in emissions; it has not worked. Carbon Trading started in 1997 when some 180 countries signed the Kyoto Protocol. The Protocol called for countries to reduce their greenhouse gas emissions between 2008–2012 to 5% below 1990 levels, a target that was never met. The USA pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol in 2001 and other countries also followed later. In spite of carbon trading having been a failure, except for the commission agents selling the credits, the renewed emphasis on this scheme overlooks significant practicalities.

Arthur Cecil Pigou
Carbon trading is a modern version of a tax proposed by Pigou in 1920 in his, "The Economics of Welfare". Pigou developed the concept of "externalities", proposed by Marshall. These are the costs imposed or benefits conferred on others that are not accounted for by the person whose activities create these costs or benefits. Pigou proposed that negative externalities, such as pollution, could be discouraged by a tax, and positive externalities could be encouraged by subsidy. Carbon trading is based on this model.

Ludwig von Mises
unrelated to Pigou's book (as far as we can discern), Ludwig von Mises analyzed how pricing systems should work in practice. Mises reasoned in his essay, "Economic Calculation in the Socialist Commonwealth" that the socialist system was unlikely to operate effectively because it could not distinguish more or less valuable uses of social resources, and predicted the system would end in chaos. Translating that into current times he questioned how some central system of market control or coordination could set prices efficiently. Von Mises summarized this question as the challenge created by a "calculation and knowledge problem". His argument has held up over time. However, although fundamentally Von Mises was attempting to explain why "socialism" could not work, today, the very same question can be leveled at monetarism and central banks across the world and the way the financial system operates. Here we are faced with exactly the same calculation and knowledge problem. It was this particular issue that led to the central bank-driven monetarism delivering the 2008 financial crisis. Since then, the quantitative easing (QE) "solution" has led to an exacerbation of the state of affairs by increasing climate change and leading to increasing income disparity, rising poverty and debt levels exceeding those in 2008.

Read more ....

On the 2nd November there was a "Glasgow Leaders’ Declaration on Forests and Land Use" which promises to work collectively to halt and reverse forest loss and land degradation by 2030 while delivering sustainable development and promoting an inclusive rural transformation. Most of the signatories already have regulations banning deforestation. However, while the corporate media say this is a success and an important box ticked. Unfortunately that is all that it is, a tick in a box with no hope of delivery. For example, Brazil which has had strict legislation against deforestation since the 1990s, many regulatory agency enforcement personnel have been murdered. In the Amazon state of Pará alone, there have been well over 250 unsolved murders involving Amazon environmental and indigenous activists and in the last 30 years there have been well over 1,750 reported murders of environmental and indigenous activists in Brazil. These resulted in about 100 trials (5.7% of cases) and around 25 convictions (1.5% of cases). The failure of effective government action to prevent this scale of bloodshed has served to intimidate those who would support the termination of deforestation. To summarize, in Brazil, Indonesia and the Congo, the main Rain Forest areas, there is no way governments can oversee and deliver this promise. Certainly those who have deforested land will harm those advocating reforestation. The issue is a land-grab mafia gaining possession of land assets often illegally and through intimidation and murder and who in many cases are linked to key politicians who prevent effective oversight and control in exchange for cash or their contributions to political party coffers to fund the next election to keep these types of people in power.

A recent forum contribution on the "politics without parties" website observes that in a period when the behaviour of government points to a lack of political party integrity linked to the corruption of providing funds and contracts to party supporters it is notable that...

"...on 3rd November the Conservative government, has voted to suspend the suspension of a party politician Owen Paterson who had faced a 30-day suspension from the House of Commons because the Standards Committee had found him to be in an "egregious" breach of lobbying rules. He was found to have breached paid advocacy rules, two years after it had been revealed how he had helped lobby for two firms he was paid to advise. The government applied a 3 line whip. The government will set up another Standards Committee to review the "process". This illustrates: 1. The compromise of party politicians continues as a result of their promoting the interests of benefactors in exchange for cash, and 2. This is a good illustration of a government, with an overall majority, thumbing its nose at the UK constituency which expects some basic levels of integrity."

With the hydrocarbon and financial lobbies in over-drive this does not hold out much hope for the delivery of COP26 "undertakings" and "promises" by a government that tolerates this form of alleged behaviour. Political parties are key components in the power-by-proxy system where power is, in reality, wielded by the wealthy factional political party benefactors, to be in any position to take rational decisions to the benefit of the majority.

Rishi Sunak, our inexperienced Chancellor, has made a series of shining promises about the availability of finance for climate action. These are incredible leaps of faith. The very people "undertaking" to fund "net-zero" projects are those whose project performance has been quite dismal. For example, the current rate of project failures in the World Bank portfolio is 35% on average and approaching 45% for projects in the vitally important agricultural sector facing declining yields. These yield declines, affecting most of the developing world, are a direct result of temperature rises resulting in lower water availability and therefore lower biomass yields. This also means a reduced capacity for carbon absorption.

For example, the World Bank fails to follow its own due diligence regulations. From Bank reports, only around 20% of its projects being submitted to detailed financial appraisals before funding. The Bank's Board has developed an atrocious habit of waving projects through for funding before serious financial appraisals have been applied. Much of the "negotiation" is with party politicians. Rishi Sunak has optimistically declared there will be a new framework and investment regime where companies will be required to submit decarbonization plans; basically "projects". He might be sincere in this intent but his lack of direct experience in development economics shows up in his lack of understanding of the global scale of this challenge means there is a lack of qualified personnel to manage it. The efficacy of Sunak's "undertakings" are extremely shaky. The trillions of pounds "available" do not match the likelihood of transfers being used effectively or efficiently.

In the case of developing countries, the case study of the World Bank's bloated loans shows there is an absorption capacity problem in low income countries which leads to the siphoning off of funds into political party coffers and the inevitable high rates of project failure.

In the recently released book, "Subtle Tools", by Karen J. Greenberg, she describes the process of limitation of basic freedoms in the USA following the 9/11 attack on the twin towers in New York. These limitations were the result of specific acts but more ominously and difficult to grasp were the development of visceral tactics to obscure what the government was doing. In the domain of political rivalry in the party system, the tactics of dishonesty, secrecy and purposely using confusing or displacement arguments to redirect attention away from actions and facts are widely deployed on the election circuit. However, Karen Greenberg describes how these tactics became an operational basis for government decisions.

Read more ...

An interesting emerging basis for strategic analysis is the tracing the negative impacts resulting from the cause and effect relationships which are caused by political parties acting as pawns in a power-by-proxy system. Wealthy factions have captured political party agendas, through the provision of party funding, to favour their own interests. Their fellow travelers in the media keep parties in line under the threat of poor media coverage. Some 50 years after the Club of Rome's "Limits of Growth" was published, we have yet to see the necessary action to avoid a human tragedy resulting from the rising human population and declining planetary carrying capacity.

No matter what one analyses, the fact that political parties are so compromised as to have been blind as well as incapable of addressing the vital needs of their constituents and the planet. The evidence is abundant such as in the unacceptable levels of income disparity, ecological destruction, accelerating climate change, willingness to participate in murderous military campaigns and the failure to manage the Covid-19 pandemic in an effective fashion. All should therefore remain alert to the forthcoming compromises to be made by political parties at the forthcoming COP26.

There are two major oversights that are very apparent from the government's pre-COP26 statements. There is no reference to the need for family planning worldwide to stem the rise in the human population overburdening the planet's carrying capacity. There has also been a failure to calculate the degree to which CO2 emissions need to fall to reverse temperature rises because 1.5o will cause catastrophic damage, especially to food production. This requires calculations based on net-negative and not net-zero Net negative relates to a major investment in carbon capture such as tree planting and slowing the rate of population growth, since the rate of absorption is slow, actions here need to start now. Arriving at net-zero will not stop temperatures rising because of the accumulated CO2 in the atmosphere and a net-negative period, beyond net-zero, is required to get there and this will take years. Why have these facts not been included in the COP26 preparations? All the talk is about is net-zero. See the article and comments sections of: Declining carrying capacity brings population growth back into focus

The Politics without Parties (PWP) site has an interesting content in the "Controls" section relating to the attempt of government to impose acceptance of lies on the population,

"This marginalizing of a large part of the constituency creates a state of increasing limitations of freedom of action and expression, damping down prospects related to the limitation of resources available to most. This situation leads to a form of intimidation and cultivation of submissive behaviour considered by increasing numbers to be the only means whereby they can avoid damaging their individual prospects. This has the objective of creating a state of affairs where people fear of calling attention to outrages for fear of becoming conspicuous by rebelling against them. We face a situation where, "... the only thing enabling the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing because of intimidation" which is a variant on a phrase attributed to Edward Burke (1729–1797). In a satirical work by Samuel Butler (1612-1680), "Huldibras" there is a part with the following lines,

"He that complies against his will is of his own opinion still, which he may adhere to and yet disown for reasons to himself best known."

These messages although written 270 and 370 years ago, unfortunately reflect the default status and state of an increasing numbers of our constituents and this is raising questions as to the efficacy of our so-called democracy.

It is regrettable that the government in a land where enlightened individuals, in the early 17th century, drafted constitutional proposals designed to avoid the horrors experienced in a Civil war in the future included the words that we should "be free and happy" and which inspired the world as well as the US founding fathers 140 years later.

In seeking to punish Julian Assange, the governments of the USA and UK collude to destroy important constitutional principles essential to the freedom of the populations of these countries.

The most lucid written constitutional proposals for England were drafted in the 17th Century. Many sought to avoid the formation of political parties to prevent rich factions serving their own ends by capturing political parties through funding, at the expense of the majority. This is what we have now. Today the benefactors have members who own so-called corporate media able to reduce electoral prospects of parties that step out of line. Given the more than 45 years of rising income disparity, ecological destruction and damaging climate change and the Covid-19 saga, it is worth revisiting these proposals which were designed to support a Commonwealth with a shared prosperity in a healthier environment of politics without parties.

In spite of this evident factional control that excludes the interests of the majority, political parties have been able to promote the notion that they are essential components of "democracy". However, in these documents it is evident that political parties are irrelevant as long as policy formulation is participatory and subject to public choice. The new website Political without Parties is gathering a considerable amount of evidence on this topic and is worth a visit.

One of the pathways holding out a promise for an escape from the current dark age of rising income disparity, climate change and rising tensions it to question and seek to replace the current Neo-Liberal agenda of forever financialization and quantitative easing that mainly benefits political party benefactors. There is a rising and coordinated fund of ideas, proposals and advancing thought being given to this apparent impasse. Amongst the institutions which contains some interesting review of problems and solutions is the Von Mises Institute in the USA. To pick up some of the thoughts and logic disseminated by this Foundation it is worth listening to Jeff Deist, President of the Institute.

Although he does not refer to the elephant in the room, political parties, he presents an American-centric exposition making many valid points across the range of issues that are reducing the effectiveness of democracy. Many of these observations apply to the United Kingdom.

The inability of the government to introduce rational policies is linked to the fact that their political party is compromised by financial benefactors who oppose anything that will impact asset values, be these land, real estate of financial assets. The needs of the poor and wage-earning groups who see their real incomes declining cannot be helped by thoroughly compromised political parties who lie in fear of a hostile media owned or funded by the same benefactors.

This reality sees the evolution of an increasing paranoia within the political class of the likelihood of popular agitation by constituents who are fed up with declining wellbeing and the inability of governance to set out clear plans for action. Rather than address the causal factors, such as inappropriate economic policies which have discouraged investment, the main political parties are advocating increasingly extreme propositions and legislation to address imagined threats to democracy and the status quo by "extremists". There is, however, a widespread and rapidly growing grass roots movement that is not extreme but which seeks peaceful and rational solutions to the lengthening list of conditions created by a long run of inept governance. The common denominator linking all of the social and economic ills is the inability of the main political parties to respond to majority needs as a result of their compromised position. This has led to the self-evident conclusion that political parties are not the solution, they are the problem. This had led to increasing interest in "politics without parties".

With less than 0.2% of the electorate as members, it is amazing that the Conservative party, as a tiny political faction, can waste time in repeatedly taking leaps of faith which serve to mislead the electorate and which go nowhere. All at the behest of Boris Johnson. Having managed to win the BREXIT referendum in 2016 we find ourselves, five years later, still awaiting an explanation of what it is in terms of the economic performance of this country. Boris Johnson's speech at the Conservative Party's Conference was an embarrassing appeal to a giggling bunch of the faithful all of whom appear to be oblivious of the realities facing the majority of the constituents of this country. Few voters would agree that rabble rousing and fanciful concepts are what is required at the moment. There is a need for sober coherent plans delivered in terms that all can understand. It would appear the Conservatives are not prepared. Rishi Sunak talks about "fiscal responsibility" and hints of tax rises and Boris Johnson appeals to a promise of "things to come". It is these "things to come" for which there are no transparent plans. There is a consensus amongst economists, of various stripes, that after a decade of ineffective governance the state of affairs has deteoriated rapidly; the situation is now dire. Therefore, as the country sinks into an increasingly desperate state of affairs, we cannot afford such an open demonstration of extreme denial since this will ferment the possibility of extreme reactions. And yet, Johnson insists on the delivery of hot air, clearly prepared with no thought other than to rehash his image as a visionary to the adulation of a thankfully diminishing number of adherents. Johnson is their "election winner". It is time for them to grow up and become more concerned with the delivery of practical and tangible benefits rather than chasing mirages.

A process to resuscitate the image of the brand "New Labour" has been initiated by Keir Starmer's attempts to "clean up the image" of Labour by unceremoniously throwing out life-long members from the party to the applause of those who fabricated the downfall of Jeremy Corbyn in an even more disgraceful and dishonest fashion. The previous slogan of, "For the many not the few", had gained enormous traction because of the impact of Gordon Brown's quantitative easing (QE) exacerbated the plight of the many. It is notable that the Conservatives, rather than winding down this economically and socially destructive QE as Labour's "temporary solution", instead, supercharged it because they realized that it benefited their benefactors more than the majority of wage-earners. This ran down NHS, care, police and fire service staffing exacerbating the Covid-19 crisis.

As if in co-ordination with the objectives of the usual suspects who are manipulating Keir Starmer's proxy efforts, the BBC is launching a new series: "Blair & Brown: The New Labour Revolution". Given the actual events at the time, the title alone is, in itself, a completely misleading propaganda. New Labour had accepted the orientation of the very same monetarist policies as the Conservatives. This is why Thatcher embraced Blair as her success; there never was a "New Labour Revolution". The Thatcher regime had inherited the "new monetarism" from the decision by Denis Healey in 1975 to follow that route. Thatcher is often blamed for this approach but in reality it was launched under Labour.

Conclusion: no amount of replaying the past hopes and aspirations of "New Labour" can airbrush out the fact that by sustaining monetarism as their central macroeconomic policy, Labour contributed, along with the collaboration of the Conservatives, to the hollowing out our economy and to deliver the disparities and difficulties we now face. It would seem Keir Starmer, and the people advising or instructing him, are attempting to dupe the UK electorate yet again.

Keir Starmer's essay is a surprisingly easy read for such a long document. It's overall vision is essentially identical to the 1997 promises that brought in the Blair government. Today, the economic circumstances are substantially worse. In spite of expressed concern for the NHS, the Blair government's financing decisions caused many NHS units to come close to bankruptcy and some failed. The reason was that government's acceptance of the financialization ideology. To be more convincing, "The Road Ahead" should contain a more honest statement of why the working class in Britain is in such a state. This is a result of the Bank of England's (BoE) disastrous policy of quantitative easing (QE) launched by Gordon Brown as a temporary measure and which became the permanent foundation of the Conservative's austerity drive. Labour doesn't dare remind us that it was Brown who made the BoE independent, beyond public control and oversight. Starmer tip toes around this gigantic elephant but includes a token gesture of a quote from Mark Carney, the ex-BoE governor, to appease the Carbon trading contingent in the City.

John McDonnell, under Jeremy Corbyn's leadership, had the sense investigate why economic policies were so damaging by coordinating an in-depth evaluation to define better economic policies. Starmer ignored them. With no rational options for the majority of wage-earners, interest is growing in a wider participation in policy proposals and decisions via the promise of "politics without parties".

John Pilger is interviewed by Afshin Rattansi on Going Underground exposing some of the awful truths about the Afghani affair.

Pilger describes the real motivation behind the invasion and the role of this campaign in intentionally circulating bloated military budgets, through acts of wanton killing, back to the US military industrial complex and politicians.

The USA acted specifically to get rid of a government which was making practical progress in championing equality for women and literacy campaigns while at the same time funding the Taliban. The degree of disinformation circulated to the public is astounding. There is much more. Programmes like Going Underground expose the degree to which UK corporate media avoid telling the truth to the people of this country.

APEurope provides web services for nine independent media covering a wide political spectrum, innovation, constitution and economics and an atypical newcomer, Corbynista. Corbynista was inspired by the Peace & Justice Project (PPJ) launched by Jeremy Corbyn but has no connection to Corbyn. As a grass roots organization, typical of Corbyn's style, the PPJ is just getting on with it with few news releases while achieving a significant expansion throughout the country. As a result the Corbynista editorial changed tack to cover Jeremy Corbyn's record and objectives. Corbyn has a life long track record of dedication to human rights and multiple representations against racism and antisemitism. The UK media has ignored the fact that the Israeli government launched a worldwide disinformation campaign against Corbyn because of his life long support of the Palestinians. This was coordinated with corporate media campaigns to interfere in British democratic and electoral processes to "get" Corbyn. Within Labour, what Corbynista refers to as " Neobs" (neo-Blairites), sought to spoil the antisemitism complaints effectiveness to build up problems for Corbyn. In a much vaunted EHRC report no reference is made to the Israeli interference in British politics or Corbyn's own human rights, in the light of the Israeli government's onslaught of non-stop personal attacks on Corbyn. The more than obvious serious political aspect of these events and the fact that Labour, under Corbyn, had a far lower incidence of antisemitism than the UK population as a whole, were dutifully ignored by the EHRC report.

Corbynista is being redirected to "setting the record straight" and to call attention to what the country lost as a result of alien country's electoral interference and the UK corporate media bias and censorship. The country paid a high price by being denied rational alternative economic policies, a reorientation of the country away from asylum-seeker generating murderous military campaigns and towards peaceful co-existence and a focus on the majority and not the few. With no reflection on the PPJ, Corbynista has become an interesting read and is increasing its readership.

Following the BREXIT rhetoric people are curious to know where the benefits are. Shortages of labour in many areas formerly occupied by EU workers are resulting in rising rates of pay for some as well as a strengthening of the position of unions. The UK's balance of payments deficit increases, a result of a stretch of industrial destruction initiated by the Thatcher government, on the altar of financialization. The country is small making catch up difficult. Chinese competition gains ground reaping the rewards of returns to scale. Quantitative easing killed off productive investment and accelerated the decline in real wages.

The government is seeking revenue to fund social care. The options of higher NI or increased taxation reflecting a government confused by the reality of our state of affairs. Confused because much current lack of revenue has been policy-induced. The ideology of zero-sum leads to a hapless notion that to fund something everyone, including those without means, needs to pitch in. This blinkered national budgetary balance approach has lost track of the notion of real growth. This lapse arises from an ideological fixation that started with Thatcher's 1981 Budget and then ran through the governments of Blair, Brown, the coalition and more recent Conservative governments. None has been good with the economy. Real growth has been made difficult as a result of the killing off of productive investment and hollowing out of our manufacturing and industrial sectors. To afford such things as increased social care costs, there is a need for policies that increase real growth through increased productivity. Just a 1.0% real growth can result in an accumulated impact of growth in real income of over 5% in just 5 years. That is equivalent to around £100 billion of the current £2 trillion GNP. This government lacks initiative and can only think in terms of robbing Peter to pay Paul in a crass zero-sum game. By providing the necessary incentives it is possible to gain immediate rises in productivity and real income. Not by headline-grabbing super-deductions as vote-seeking give-aways but by adopting policies based on a rational real incomes approach to economics.

Recently a Labour faction called "Labour in Communications" has released a report entitled, "Fit for the future". This is a very similar "identity political agenda communication" without coherent substance as was elaborated by Neil Kinnock and the New Marxists back in the 1980s. This dog whistle agenda was one Kinnock was unable to deliver because he was unelectable. Blair rebranded this as "Blairism". Blairism's failures, ignoring, for the moment, lying and incompetence in misleading the whole country into the Iraqi and Afghani murderous fiascoes, was its lack of alternative economic approaches to wholesale financialization. As all know, this sunk public services into massive debt exacerbating Thatcher's onslaught. John McDonnell under Corbyn's leadership, made work on better economic policies a priority with credible results. But "Fit for the future" as a retread of this failed identity approach, light on detail on what policy areas are of particular significance in the period 2021-2023 and beyond. For image-building simple messages and a pledge card like the 1997 5-points are proposed. A political advisory cabinet containing such people as Mark Drakeford, Andy Burnham, Sadiq Khan and others to influence the party’s national strategy and decision-making. These people already have full time jobs. This would cast Starmer into an even bigger shadow ready for the eventual neo-Blairite takeover, with a leader who has "charisma" and who is a good liar and able to brush aside criticism for not delivering on promises.

The high tech world has never been known for its stability. In the UK something like 60% of high tech companies do not survive more than 5 years. This becomes an important factor in undermining the sustained productivity of customers as a result of loss of "after sales" support. Somewhat less apparent is that many attempts at "change" involving technology go wrong. Careful design procedures on how to incorporate changes in operations are essential.

The Analytical Tools Development Centre (ATDC) of SEEL, a division of the George Boole Foundation, is preparing a new family of simulation tools for companies to conduct performance and economic assessments of proposals before any commitment of funds. These tools will be cloud-based and accessed with a browser. Potential customers are SMEs in production activties from agriculture to manufacturing, systems development engineers, consultancies, automation companies, investors and banks.

At a APEuropean Correspondent's Pool workshop today (21/08/2021) the current apparent aims of central banks were reviewed. The developments that have taken place in parallel to the announcement of "a New Bretton Woods" and the concept of a CBDC (central bank digital currency) reflect a desire of central banks to control consumption. Our summaries on the content are accessible below:

Part 1 - morning session          Part 2 - afternoon session

In today's Renegade Inc. programme, the host, Ross Ashcroft, interviewed the economist Professor Richard Werner. The Agence Presse Européene Correspondent's Pool economists consider it to have been one of the most clear accounts of why the current version of monetarism is prejudicing the economy. A spokesperson stated, "In terms of banking, Werner provides a very simple solution based on the German model of non profit small local banks serving SMEs. This is a foundation of a competitive export economy based specialised companies founded on advancing technological innovation. Two weeks ago the editorial of the British Strategic Review had asked us to review Richard Werner's work because of very obvious gaps in the evidence contained in the recent Lords Economic Affairs Committee report on QE. Dr. Werner did not feature in the Report witness list.

We consider Dr. Werner's work to be the most balanced, however, there are specific issues which need to be addressed in the United Kingdom to take advantage of his solution. Britain's overly academic bias in secondary and higher education is a significant impediment. Germany has benefited from one of the world's best technical education and vocational training systems covering secondary and higher education supported by industry. Britain has a long way to go on this front. This topic is covered in the soon-to-be-published British Strategic Review."

The soon-to-be released Q3 edition of the British Strategic Review provides a plain English decription of how monetarism and Keynesianism impact the wellbeing of the British constituents. Most of the evidence and analysis is based on mathematical logic and sector analyses and confirms that QE is a policy with no theory. Sharing the same flaws with QE, monetarism and Keynesianism are, by default, demonstrably ineffective ways to manage the economy.

Click here to view the current BSR Q3 List of Contents which may be subject to minor changes before publication.

In the 60 years since Rachel Carson published "Silent Spring", another warning appears in Dave Goulson's "Silent Earth", released today 5th August, 2021. (we will post a review of "Silent Earth" soon). Carson pointed out that our state-of-the-art technologies & techniques were causing the extinction of other species and Goulson repeats the message but points to how this trend, having now created serious climate change, is likely to cause a drop in our ability to produce food. While many see economic growth as being a necessity to feed the growing population,

Today, 9th August 2021, the IPCC released their latest report. They need to communicate better. We need clear blueprints for action priorities. Simply informing people things are getting worse in a difficult to read report of almost 900 pages, is, at this stage, not helpful.

With increasing forest fires hundreds of years-worth of accumulated C storage is increasingly being released back into the atmosphere exacerbating atmospheric CO2 concentrations. This is likely to take us beyond the critical tipping point, if this has not yet occurred. Net-zero means nothing since we need to know the required rate of CO2 reduction to get to CO2 concentrations to reverse temperature rises, if this is at all possible. Net-zero is simply an arbirary point in this long journey.

To act, political parties need to emancipate themselves from their capture by corporations and financial institutions whose manipulative prevarication threatens humanity
the underlying message is stark. With current practice we are already overpopulated and there is a need for more effective population control, drastic changes in consumption patterns and a different "economics".

Indeed, the UN 2019 Sustainable Development Report highlighted the gaps associated with "economic growth" such as increasing income disparity, falling sustainability and failure to reduce temperature rises.

This was discussed in detail in the late 1960s calling attention to the world's population issue and the threat to the world's natural resources carrying capacity.Politicians have talked, and that is about all. The 1992 Rio Declaration on Environment and Development defined the rights of the people to be involved in the development of their economies, and the responsibilities of human beings to safeguard the common environment. The declaration built upon the basic ideas concerning the attitudes of individuals and nations towards the environment and development, first identified at the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment (1972). But none of this was put into action. In 1994 climate action intent was followed by 25 "Conferences of the Parties" (COPs) all followed by no effective action on the ground. The UK government wants commitments to Net-Zero which is not much more than a buzzword because this is a point in time after which temperatures will continue to rise for a period that no one has yet defined. No one seems to be getting the message because works such as Silent Spring and Silent Earth are not taken seriously by the political parties and their financial benefactors.

APEurope Correspondent's Pool held an ad hoc workshop to detect any critical lessons appearing in the accumulating comments section of the article, "Declining carrying capacity brings population growth back into focus". The current conclusion of enormous concern is that net-zero only achieves a stabilization of CO2 and other greehouse gasses in the atmosphere which are causing a continuing rise in temperatures. Therefore net-zero does not represent a strategic point at which temperatures will stabilize at + 1.5oC; temperatures will continue to rise. "Net-zero" appears to be a buzz word that will not solve the problem. We have received confirmation from a leading contributor to the climate change analyses and reports that the "Net-negative" target is more appropriate. So why is COP26 all about Net-Zero?

Over 50 years ago seminars on "Population & food supplies" at Cambridge and Stanford Universities in 1967 and 1968 drew attention to the question of whether the carrying capacity of natural systems was able to support the increasing human population and the state-of-the-art of human activties. In 1972, an MIT report entitled, "The Limits of Growth" was launched by the Club of Rome gaining more publicity. A phase of increasing crop yields and genetic innovation with increased areas of cultivation and modern inputs meant the carrying capacity was able to rise from 3.5 billion people to 7.0 billion in 50 years. However, a misreading of agroecological studies on the impact of rising temperature has caused an over-optimistic view of the impacts. In reality, climate change is causing crop yields to fall due to excessive seasonal temperatures and loss of water. We face a future in which the balance between the consumption needs of a rising world population and a falling carrying capacity for production. This brings human population policies centre stage.

Read more ....

At the beginning of May, based on projections made by SEEL-Systems Engineering Economics Lab, CybaCity stated that deaths from Covid-19 in India "... could exceed 3 million people." The Washington-based Center for Global Development has estimated excess deaths in India to be in the range 2.4 to 4.7 million.

Constituents cannot contribute to public choice on monetary policy but are expected to endure its destruction of wellbeing ....

Quantitative easing (QE) was introduced as a temporary solution to hollowed out bank balance sheets. As time has progressed it has become increasingly difficult to abandon QE since the financial intermediation community have become addicted to the advantages of close to zero interest rates. This has led to excessive across-the-board leverage signifying that raising interest rates will collapse this pack of cards. Misguided Keynesians have seen QE as a practical demonstration of the feasibility of MMT (Modern Monetary Theory).
Tax buffs are delighted in the prospects of safeguarding government "revenue" by government/central banks issuing funds for what is needed and then taxing companies and individuals to recover some of the funds released. The problem with this "model" is that public works and expenditure usually have a very low financial return to the productive economy in the short to medium term and companies will not gain substantial increments in productivity. As a result the tax burden could in fact get worse, turning MMT into a Magic Money Tree.

The Lords Economic Affairs Committee have asked the BoE to explain its degree of independence from government policy objectives in their recent operations, and to explain how to taper QE. There is a risk that the BoE will take refuge in the mumbo jumbo associated with MMT; not a good idea. The government needs to explain their understanding of the role of the Bank. Post-Covid, the result will be more "austerity". Monetarism as a basis for macroeconomic and financial management is ineffective in resolving the needs of the constituency and the real economy.

Since 1945, monetary policy has resulted in asset prices rising and the pound losing 98% of its purchasing power....

The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee report entitled,"Quantitative easing: a dangerous addiction?" is late and disappointing. It does raise questions constantly ignored by government. In 2013, Mervyn King commented that QE "seemed" to be favouring the wealthy. Income and wealth disparity appear en passant. QE to support government policy has been self-evident. The Committee frets over the image and the functioning of the Bank of England as an independent institution. Independence has been a convenient screen to justify the exercise of macroeconomic management free from the scrutiny of the public or Parliament. Bank of England independence is an important buttress to the interests of asset holders, the wealthy, financial institutions and many on the Committee. Monetarists do not know how to "taper" QE. Raising interest rates would crash asset and derivative markets. The Banks's "escape route" explanation is likely to be that they are "transitioning" towards Modern Monetary Theory.

Monetarism, now using QE, has dominated macroeconomic management since the early 1980s but basic macroeconomic policy objectives were ignored. The report focuses on Bank issuance of money, setting of interest rates and bond transactions. The report skirts round income disparity, declining real growth, industry and industrial investment, rising balance of payment deficit and poverty, the inability to raise real wages and the hollowing out of public services. Clearly, the Committee and those offering "evidence" are unaware or unconcerned about the connections to monetary policy. The report and the emphasis on Bank of England independence reflect the significant constitutional crisis and an ability of government committees to ignore the issues of most concern the majority.

The House of Lords Economic Affairs Committee report entitled, "Quantitative easing: a dangerous addiction?", has called the Bank of England's bluff suggesting the BoE should explain how it expects to reduce any inflation from the current state operating under a bloated policy of quantitative easing (QE). The Bank will not be able to do so because the central theory of monetarism is based on assertion. QE has provided all of the necessary evidence to establish that the monetarist's go-to policy justification logic, the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM), is irrational. The QTM formula fails to include such basics as savings, assets and offshore investment which leaks funds and raises onshore (UK) unemployment. Monetarism lacks a transparent linkage to investment for productivity and growth. QE funds have flowed into speculative high inflation asset markets and away from needed productive investment (see Why Monetarism does not work).

QE has exacerbated the state of affairs helping "justify" the ill-advised policy of austerity over 13 years designed to impose the government's ideological agenda of running down public services such as the NHS, police and care services. The "independent" Bank of England, under Mark Carney, was hardly independent of Treasury/Chancellor's political objectives; the Bank supported government policy directly. The Lords Committee report, which appears to be lost in flawed monetary theory, only ventures to query if the Bank was acting independently; of course it was not. Policy decisions rested in the hands of decision makers beyond Parliamentary and, even more distant from, constituent oversight.

Political parties and the current government, in particular, were taken aback by the mass support for Jeremy Corbyn and his success in rallying popular support through protests and old fashioned campaigning. Other popular movements such as "Black Lives Matter" exposed an unwillingness of political parties to embrace and support issues of general comncern. As a result the government is attempting to curtail these types of democratic freedoms through stealth legislation.

Naomi Smith, the CEO of Best for Britain has recently posted an article in the Independent which reveals the manipulation of legislators in attempting to exercise more constraints over protests and popular movements and to move all decision making and control of elections more firmly into the hands of political parties in the Westminster bubble. With the persmission of Best for Britain we have pleasure in posting Naomi's article on our site.

Read more ....

Responding to the news that the number of global deaths from COVID-19 has now passed 4 million, Anna Marriott, Oxfam’s health Policy Manager and spokesperson for the People’s Vaccine Alliance, said:

"This is a horrific milestone and each one of these lives lost is a tragedy. Many of these deaths could have been prevented had the successful vaccine science been shared and production of doses ramped up by more manufacturers across the world. People are dying in large numbers in countries without enough health workers or ventilators to save them and vaccine stocks have run dry. We will see many more needless deaths, especially in developing countries which are being hit by a third wave of the deadly disease, unless vaccines are produced on a much bigger scale, more quickly and at much lower prices."

"“Pharmaceutical corporations are making eye watering profits but are refusing to share the vaccine science and know-how. We urge the leaders of countries like the UK and Germany to support the waiver of trade rules that would allow developing countries to make their own vaccines, so that everyone, no matter where they live, can share the hope of a future free from COVID."

An opportunity cost is the potential benefit lost when taking a specific decision over an alternative. The Covid-19 pandemic has been peppered with unfortunate opportunity costs measured in additional deaths and the build up of Long Covid in unprotected children. Taking the right decisions too late are wrong decisions. The bottom line measure of opportunity costs has become the number of avoidable deaths and 12-16 year-olds debilitated by Long Covid.

The current movement in the ratios of today's infected population, growth rate, daily deaths and hospital admissions hold and the number of 12-16s with Long Covid are changing rapidly is relation to infection levels as to make projections unreliable. However, the government's "plans" and failure to vaccinate younger people is likely to result in accelerating entries to hospitals and rising numbers of young and others being affected by debilitating Long Covid. The national statistics generally published do not indicate how many who die have been vaccinated so the actual benefit is unknown. However with the relaxation of precautions the infection rate and deaths are likely to rise.

The likelihood of removing Covid-19 restrictions on July 19 is very likely to be the wrong decision. It is neither "following the science" nor "common sense".

At the moment with the rate of infections doubling every 9 days. At this rate, by the end of August the daily infection rate is likely to rise from 27,000 each day (now) to around 148,000 or a weekly total of 1 million. This significant rise in inoculum in people will significantly raise the likelihood of the formation of mutations.

The evolutionary explanation of fungal, insect or virus resistance to counter measures is not that resistance is developed by exposure to counter measures, it is that specific genotypes or mutants are better adapted to what is a hostile environment for the other genotypes. In the case of Covid, this means a mutant could occur which can avoid the prophylactic protection provided by the current strain of the vaccination and initiate a new cycle of rising suffering and deaths. And of course, an overloaded NHS.

To simply advise people to exercise their "judgement" is an abandonment of responsibility where at least masks should remain as should social distancing in order to attempt to reduce the infection rate. Removing all restrictions should only occur when infection rates are brought down. Relying on a high level of vaccination as a "herd immunity" justification and making reduced pressure on the NHS the sole consideration is a naive binary decision under circumstances that present us with a far from binary set of possible occurrences and outcomes. The strategy should be to reduce the infection rate to reduce hospital admissions and the likelihood of mutants upsetting this delicate state of affairs.


Key "evidence" in the case against WikiLeaks co-founder Julian Assange is based on testimony from a convicted fraudster who has now admitted his testimony to have been fabricated. Sigurdur Ingi Thordarson, a former WikiLeaks volunteer became an FBI informant for $5,000 and has admitted that he fabricated important parts of the accusations in the indictment used to portray Assange as a criminal rather than a journalist. A crucial detail is that Assange never instructed him to carry out any hacking. The UK court had accepted this false testimony. In 2012, WikiLeaks filed criminal charges against Thordarson over embezzlement and financial fraud. He was later sentenced for both in Iceland.

These revelations have appeared in the Icelandic medium Stundin which cites Ogmundur Jonasson, the then Icelandic interior minister stating that US authorities were going out of their way to get Assange by trying to use events in Iceland and people to spin a cobweb to catch Julian Assange. At the time Jonasson had kicked the FBI team out of Iceland. These revelations have completely undermined the US case against Assange who should be released from prison.

An alienated youth is tempted into County Lines and knife crime for lack of perceived alternatives in a decaying economy where generations of working people have become increasingly marginalized by offshore investment draining economic growth and employment opportunities. Macroeconomic policies have moulded the conditions of what became known as the Red Wall. A tiny clique duped the nation into thinking this decay was caused by the EU.

In the name of "freedom and democracy" our governments have invaded Iraq, Libya and Syria causing chaos, murdering millions of innocent people and creating a serious migration crisis from North Africa and the Middle East towards Europe. The result has been xenophobic reactions and the advent of extremist points of view and politics. This has mingled with monetarist policies causing and failing to resolve the UK's growth and real incomes in employment crisis. Pauperism has increased dramatically. A largely useless academic educational system, which has no obvious connection to practical realities of how global or local problems might be resolved only serves to further alienate youth. They lose any notions of community involvement, or attachment by witnessing the diminution of their own role models, their parents, in a "democracy" in name only.

We not only have a significant leadership problem but also a constitutional crisis where leaderships have alienated most constituents by not involving them in decisions. A largely useless clique of political parties, with less than 1.25% of the voting population as members, serve the interests of an influential 1% who fund the parties. When our leaders, so-called, resolve international affairs through sanctions and murder, rather than the more difficult route of logic and diplomacy, there can be no justice and therefore there can be no peace. This has resulted in misery and suffering both abroad and at home. Beveridge once noted that, "misery generates hate". With such "leadership", what can we expect of our youth?

Michael Saylor, the CEO of MicroStrategies, a major investment fund, recently invested millions of dollars in Bitcoin. In a recent on-stage interview at the Bitcoin 2021 gathering in Miami, Max Keiser asked a series of questions. Saylor's replies were revealing touching on alternative investments in a world of falling purchasing power of fiat currencies, the green agenda and the promise of providing people with property rights worldwide without interfering CEOs shaving off funds for themselves or monetary policies undermining purchasing power.

Saylor's statements are of importance. So far monetarists, central banks and politicians have been unable to find arguments that counter this consolidating logic. This part of the interview comes in the second part of the current Keiser Shown on RT. To view click on the image on the right. This section starts at the time position 13.50. As typical at such events there is a bit of audience hooplah, but wait for them to sit down and talk.

We have added the second article in this three part series.

Read part 1           Read part 2

The Parliamentary Education Committee has released a report stating that the system is inequitable. Even if it were equitable, it is pretty useless for a country that needs to fill in major gaps in human resource capabilities in skilled manufacturing and industrial processes. These gaps have been created by inappropriate macroeconomic policies since the 1970s. These policy impacts have destroyed a culture necessary for educational development.

A period of applied development economics, through consensus planning, helped the UK recover from the war (1945-1965). By the 1970s Anthony Crosland (1918-1977) had concluded that "capitalism" could provide adequate incomes for labour but Denis Healey (1917-2015) failed to support incomes and growth policies based on exports; he introduced a monetarist approach. This was intensified by the Thatcher government. The resulting disaster is described in Jon Cruddas' book, "The Dignity of Labour". Two generations of what were a skilled working class has been demoralized and put out of work. A "no hope" environment has evolved for many children born between 1970 and 2020. Family cultures have been blighted by many on extremely low pay or becoming paupers. Society offers few opportunities for such children with no role models, a void of confidence and an exposure to a wholly academic school curriculum. The result is the societal alienation of a large number of children.

Anthony Crosland introduced comprehensive education and got rid of the 11+ to stimulate social mobility but he could not have foreseen the failure of the string of UK governments, since 1979, to maintain worker incomes and employment. The cultural impact of onshore unemployment on two generations of workers and their children were not anticipated. The policy-induced distortions have created social instability and a fall in confidence in the relevance of democratic institutions, including parliamentary governance. During the pre-comprehensive education period, by far the best schools for developing an involved student body gaining an education that provided a broad appreciation of how the economy worked, and therefore, did not generate alienation, were some of the technical schools that benefited from having enlightened headmasters. These viewed technical education as a general and necessary experience rather than limiting their focus on vocational training. Grammar, Public schools, Academies and some universities, including economics courses are too academic to provide much in preparing people for fulfilling lives and careers in a socially and economically sustainable society.

In a debate organized by Policy Exchange on the launch of Jon Cruddas' book "The Dignity of Labour, the most revealing contributions came from Lisa Nandy the Shadow Foreign Secretary. Her contributions were well thought out, marked by a very logical feet-on-the-ground rationality that was appealing. Her views echoed some of the best values associated with a Labour party that appears to no longer exist. Watch this space.

The debate was chaired by Stephen Bush, the political editor of the New Statesman and others in the debate included Jesse Norman a Conservative MP, Lisa Nandy and Jon Cruddas. A particularly interesting dimension to this debate was the degree to which Jesse Norman agreed with Lisa Nandy and Jon Cruddas; quite a change from the normal cheap confrontational point scoring so common nowadays.

Cruddas and Nandy referred to the legacy of Thatcher as being a shadow hanging over the Conservatives weakening their credibility to address the labour problem. Norman, as Financial Secretary to the Treasury, made an attempt to refer to evidence of change. However, government still pursues monetarism.

The Dasgupta Review has been hailed as a milesone of economic thinking. Unfortunately this report has paid insufficient attention to the policy-induced acceleration in the consumption of renewable and fixed resources resulting from macroeconomic policies.

The 2019 United Nations Sustainable Development Report identified a negative corrreletaion between the type of economic growth attained with the achievement of raising equality, and in particular reducing disparity in incomes, the achievement of increased sustainability and arresting climate change. This was emphasized by Dr. Jean-Paul Moatti, the director-general of the French National Research Institute for Development (IRD) ahead of the Report's publication. Dr. Moatti was a member of the expert group charged by the UN with evaluating progress of Agenda 2030 and SDGs so far. His blunt statement was that most SDGs were "going into reverse"; an alarm bell that climate change goals were not being met. They are still not being met. This is caused by a stubborn insistence in governments and central banks by continuing an intense process of financialization.

Profesor Partha Dasgupta, of Cambridge University, and author of the report, makes no reference to the findings of the 2019 UN Sustainable Development Report and has not referred to this specific macroeconomic policy problem. There is a need to address the current macroeconomic policies that incentivize perverse behaviour by individuals and companies. An out-of-control financialization of economies has seen excessive flows of available funds into assets as opposed to the production of the sustainable production of food, fibre, feedstocks, goods and services at accessible prices while preserving the natural environment. The issue is to identify how to initiate a process of declining per capita consumption of goods and services that are irrelevant to survival. The forthcoming British Strategic Review covers this issue.

Nicholas Kaldor
The giggling politicians who enjoyed Theresa May's parliamentary barb that Labour thought there was a "Magic Money Tree" subsequently used the acronym MMT as a standard retort to trivialize any economic proposal made by Jeremy Corbyn and John McDonnell. Twelve years of QE has sunk the economy and Red Wall constituencies into a deep hole, the government fears its image as being "Good with the economy" is shot. They have now been forced to apply MMT. However MMT now stands for "Modern Monetary Theory". This decadence started when the rational arguments of the economist Nicholas Kaldor were rejected and the Thatcher government was seduced by Milton Friedman and Hayek's monetarist assertions. Kaldor's explanations of why there was no connection between money volumes and inflation were simple and water tight. They have since been validated by SEEL. The outcome of QE has also reaffirmed the Real Income Approach 1976 proposals for inflation to be controlled through technological innovation; Kaldor had modeled the role of technology in the late 1950s. What continues to escape the Chancellor and the government is that their embrace of MMT disproves the Quantity Theory of Money (QTM). The QTM is the standard "reference" made in central bank speak justifying monetary decisions to "control inflation".

There is an unacknowledged but standing strategy of government to avoid monetary policy becoming an issue subject to constituency review and influence. In the absense of credible government proposals, Agence Presse Européenne Correspondent's Pool has requested that SEEL prepare an edition of their forthcoming British Strategic Review to explain the Real Money Theory model, which they developed to substitute the QTM in 2020. The objective is to estabish a transparent and open access reference for constituent groups and journalists to foster understanding, encourage dialogue and build consensus on what is happening and to identify what is needed in terms of policy for this country. HPC have confirmed this will be the Q3 2021 edition entitled, "Monetarism & the real economy", we will distribute this free of charge.

Building back better is a hope expressed by many in the political bubble. A mix of booklets and books serve to illustrate why the UK has difficulties not only in perceiving what is needed but also lacking the popular agency to bring about necessary change.

The booklet "Britannia Unchained - Global Lessons for Growth and Prosperity" (2012) of uncertain authorship carries the names of Kwasi Kwarteng, Priti Patel, Dominic Raab, Chris Skidmore and Elizabeth Truss all of the Conservative party. "The Dignity of Labour" (2021) is by Jon Cruddas a Labour MP and "Greater - Britain after the Storm" (2021) is jointly authored by Penny Mordaunt of the Conservative party and Chris Lewis about whom we have found little information.

None of these documents pays attention to the power and scale of historic global events causing our plight and are therefore alarmingly parochial as three disjointed models oblivious of the main driving forces creating Britain's decline.

There being no adequate macroeconomic theory, Cruddas has the sense not to propose any policies, but he points out a crucial issue, the loss of vocation within the "working class" in the sense of professional competence, enthusiasm and pride in occupation.

"Britannia Unchained" is more policy "ideas", in a disjointed sense, based on peering over the fence to see what other countries are doing and exclaiming, "We can do that!". "Greater" has a bit of that too, it tries to justify confidence in the future by placing faith in the mix of traits and values of the population. "Greater" also points out some of the drawbacks associated with British Governance in the hope political parties might respond; they wont.

Please find below the link to Part 1 of a 3 part coverage. Part 1 explains some of the reasons politicians and their advisors are unable to propose practical solutions.

Part 1 of the series "Disjointed"

The never-ending tragedy. A Palestinian mother searches through the rubble of her home destroyed by Israel. With Covid-19, Israel changed tactics, by destroying homes en masse by destroying tower blocks more families will be crowded into facilities raising the likelihood of Covid-19 infection and death.
One of the claims made by Israeli spokes people following the recent Gaza conflict was that, "No other army would advise residents to leave buildings before destroying them; for this reason the Israeli Defence Force is the most moral army in the world".

The evidence shows such people do not understand the meaning of morality. The switch to high rise destruction occurred with Covid-19. This was to ensure that more families would be forced into crowded facilities such as schools. The number exceeded 150,000 people. They will suffer from Covid-19 infections and deaths because of the over-crowding. Israel did not vaccinate the Palestinian population in line with their desire to eliminate Palestinians. They tactically destroyed high rises to ensure that between 1,000 to 2,000 additional deaths will be added to the recent Palestinian death toll of over 257 and over 8,538 people injured.

Such tactics have no morality but constitute a cynical group manipulating declarations through a very crude applied psychology of an enthusiastic misrepresentation of the facts and their intent. They continue to treat the world as idiots and openly rejoice in their power to continue the 73 years of dispossession and selective murder of the people of Palestine. Israel has no "right to defend itself" by murdering the innocent. Such actions undermine the right of this Israel to exist. Israel occupies the territory of the people of Palestine and should be grateful for what it has. But it continues to steal land and displace Palestinian families through settler schemes. In line with the actions of their immoral IDF they have the crass affront to refer to this overt territorial robbery and people displacement, imposing suffering on the Palestinians as "God's work". Can such a people have any claims to morality?

Following Dominic Cummings' statement that there had been no provisions to protect people living in care homes from Covid-19 infection, nothing stated by anyone in government have disproven Cummings point. With or without vaccinations there are still ways to shield people basically using isolation. So 14 days in a motel/hotel would have done the trick in transferring patients from hospitals with or without tests back to Care homes. This was not done. The cost appears to have been something like 45,000 avoidable deaths.

Whether or not "herd immunity" was or was not "official policy" there are enough papers and recorded public statements to confirm that the government introduced significant delays in decision making, in spite of considerable amounts of data from other countries showing high death rates, coasting on the notion that "herd immunity" might work, when it was patently obvious it would not. As a result, as Cummings noted, thousand of people died unnecessarily. Just these two points alone probably account for about 50% of the deaths so far and PM waffle and Secretary of State for Health side-stepping cannot hide these facts.

There needs to be a demand that an investigation into the management of Covid-19 should start immediately rather that give it the long grass treatment intended by an incompetent government, to put all of this off until next year. Too many constituents have lost family members to be treated in such as offhand manner.

Last March when Dominic Cummings gave evidence on ARIA to the S&TC, we mentioned the findings of that other son of Barnard Castle, John Northcote Parkinson (1909–1993) the originator of Parkinson's Law, whose Laws enable an understanding of what Cummings described with respect to decision-making in the civil service. This time, because the discussion homed in on ministers, secretaries of state and the Prime Minister the focus would seem to switch to the Peter Principle, that in organizations people rise to their level of incompetence. If the subject matter, Covid-19, was not so serious, these sessions would have been quite amusing. For example, at one point Cummings pointed out that there was something wrong with a democratic system that gave someone like him so much power and the alternatives for national leadership in the election as Jeremy Corbyn and Boris Johnson. Cummings pointed out some key issues that plague British governance such as the secrecy and failure to publish positions and plans, a closed HR system within the civil service and perverse incentives.

Fact checkers have been busy. The BBC seemed to misunderstsnd Cummings' statements referring to the perceptions of decision-makers in the bubble doubting the willingness of the British public to tolerate Asian Covid-19 control methods. Citing polls of pubic opinion indicating willingn