Ukraine and the backstage of geopolitics

Image: lalesh Aldarwish


Democratically governed peoples are responsible for the decisions repeatedly taken by their leaders and maintained even with alternation of power.

At dawn on February 24, Russian forces entered Ukraine massively. According to President Vladimir Putin's televised address, this "special operation" was the beginning of his country's response to "those who aspire to world domination" and who have been advancing NATO's infrastructure right up to his country's gates. During the long speech, Putin referred to the way in which NATO destroyed Yugoslavia without authorization from the United Nations Security Council, even bombing Belgrade in 1999. He then referred to the widespread destruction by the United States in the Middle East, Iraq, Libya and Syria. It was only after this extensive presentation that he announced that he had sent his troops into Ukraine with the dual mission of destroying NATO-linked military forces and ending the neo-Nazi groups armed by this military alliance.

Immediately, all member states of the Atlantic Alliance denounced the “occupation of Ukraine”, which would be comparable to that of Czechoslovakia during the “Prague Spring” (1968). According to them, Vladimir Putin's Russia would have adopted the "Brezhniev doctrine” of the former Soviet Union, and therefore the “free world” would need to punish the revived “Evil Empire”, imposing “devastating costs” on it.

The Atlantic Alliance interpretation aims above all to deprive Russia of its main argument. Of course, NATO is not a confederation of equals, but a hierarchical federation under Anglo-Saxon command. But Russia would now be acting in the same way, and denying Ukraine the possibility to choose its destiny, just as the Soviets denied it to the Czechoslovaks. It is clear that NATO, by its way of functioning, violates the principles of sovereignty and equality of States, stipulated by the Charter of the United Nations, but it must not be dissolved, unless Russia is also dissolved.

Maybe it looks like that. But it isn't necessarily.

President Putin's speech was not explicitly directed against Ukraine, or even against the United States, but against "those who aspire to world domination"; in other words, as we shall see, against the “Straussians” – who will be dealt with later on – installed in power in the United States. That was a real declaration of war against them.

On February 25, President Vladimir Putin described the Kiev regime as a “drug addict and neo-Nazi schmuck”. For the Atlanticist media, such words could not be other than those of a mental patient.

On the night of February 25th to 26th, President Volodymyr Zelensky sent Russia, through the Chinese Embassy in Kiev, a proposal for a ceasefire. The Kremlin immediately responded with its conditions: (i) arrest of all Nazis (Dmitry Yarosh, the Azov Battalion, etc.); (ii) the deletion of all street names and the destruction of monuments that glorified Nazi collaborators during World War II (Stepan Bandera etc.); (iii) the laying down of arms.

The Atlanticist press chose to ignore this event, while the rest of the world who knew about it held its breath. The negotiation would fail a few hours later, with Washington's intervention. Only then would Western public opinion be informed. Still, Russian conditions were kept hidden. What is President Putin all about? Who is he fighting? And what are the reasons that blind and silence the Atlanticist press?


Brief history of the Straussians

Let us dwell for a moment on this group, the Straussians, about whom Westerners generally know little. They are originally individuals, all Jews – but absolutely not representative of American Jews or Jewish communities around the world –, who were formed around the German philosopher Leo Strauss, who took refuge in the United States during the rise of Nazism and became a professor of philosophy at the University of Chicago.

According to the most varied accounts, he gathered a small group of faithful students, to whom he gave oral seminars. Therefore, there are no written records about them. He argued with them that the only way for the Jews not to be victims of a new genocide was to constitute their own dictatorship. He referred to his disciples as hoplites (the soldiers of Sparta), and had a habit of sending them to disturb the classes of rival teachers. Finally, he taught them to be discreet and praised what he called “the noble lie” [deception: “lie is the norm of political life”]. Even though he died in 1973, his student fraternity has moved on.

The Straussians began to form a political group half a century ago, in 1972. They were all members of Democratic Senator Henry “Scoop” Jackson's staff, including Elliott Abrams, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz. They worked closely with a group of Trotskyist journalists, also Jewish, who met at City College in New York and edited the magazine Commentary, and for this reason they were called “New York intellectuals”. Both groups were closely linked to the CIA, but also thanks to Perle's father-in-law, Albert Wohlstetter (the US military strategist), the Rand Corporation (the main think tanks of the military-industrial complex). Many of these young people formed marriages, eventually establishing a compact influence group of about one hundred people.

Together, they wrote and managed to approve, in the midst of the Watergate crisis (1974), the “Jackson-Vanik Amendment”, which obliged the Soviet Union to authorize the emigration of its Jewish population to Israel, under penalty of economic sanctions. This is your founding act. In 1976, Paul Wolfowitz he was one of the architects of the “Team B” (Team B), charged by President Gerald Ford with assessing the Soviet threat.[1] The team delivered a raving report, which accused the Soviet Union of preparing to assume “global hegemony”. The nature of the Cold War then changed: it was no longer about isolating (containing) the USSR; it was necessary to stop it in order to “save the free world”.

Straussians and “New York intellectuals” (so-called leftists) then put themselves at the service of right-wing President Ronald Reagan. It is necessary to understand that these groups, strictly speaking, did not position themselves on the “right” or the “left” of the North American political spectrum. Some of its members even changed five times from the Democratic Party to the Republican Party and vice versa. The important thing for them is to infiltrate power, whatever the ideology. Elliott Abrams became Assistant Secretary of State. He led an operation in Guatemala, where he installed a dictator in power and tested, with Israeli Mossad officials, the creation of reservations for the Maya Indians, to eventually do the same in Israel with the Palestinian Arabs. The Mayan resistance would earn Rigoberta Menchú the Nobel Peace Prize in 1992.

Elliott Abrams continued with his excesses and crimes in El Salvador and, finally, in Nicaragua, operating against the Sandinistas through the Iran-Contra scheme. In turn, the “New York intellectuals”, now called “neoconservatives”, created the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) and the United States Institute of Peace. , a two-pronged device that organized many color revolutions, starting with China, with the attempted coup by Prime Minister Zhao Ziyang and the subsequent actions in Tiananmen Square.

At the end of George H. Bush's (senior) term, Paul Wolfowitz, then number three in the Defense Secretariat, prepared a document around a strong idea: after the decomposition of the USSR, the United States should avoid the emergence of new rivals , starting with the European Union[2]. The document concluded by defending the possibility of unilateral action, that is, in practice, to put an end to consultation with the United Nations. Wolfowitz is undoubtedly the creator of “Desert Storm”, the operation to destroy Iraq, which allowed the United States to change the rules of the game and organize a unilateral world. It was at this time that the Straussians enthroned the concepts of “regime change” and “democracy promotion”.

Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky, and Paul Wolfowitz joined the US intelligence community through the Working Group on Intelligence Reform (Consortium for the Study of Intelligence's Working Group on Intelligence Reform). They criticized the assumption that other governments would reason the same way as the United States.[3] They then criticized the intelligence services' lack of political leadership, letting them wander into unimportant matters instead of focusing on the essentials. Politicizing intelligence was what Wolfowitz had done on Team B, and he would do it again successfully in 2002, with the Office of Special Plans (Office of Special Plans); inventing arguments for new wars against Iraq and Iran (…the “noble lie” of Leo Strauss).

The Straussians were removed from power during Bill Clinton's tenure. They then passed to the think tanks from Washington. In 1992, William Kristol and Robert Kagan (husband of Victoria Nuland, who will be discussed shortly) published an article in Foreign Affairs lamenting President Clinton's timid foreign policy and calling for a renewal of "benevolent global hegemony" ‎‎(benevolent global hegemony) from United States.[4] The following year, they founded the Project for a New American Century (Project for a New American Century – PNAC) at the premises of the American Enterprise Institute. Gary Schmitt, Abram Shulsky and Paul Wolfowitz were members. All non-Jewish admirers of Leo Strauss, including Protestant Francis Fukuyama (author of The end of the story), immediately joined them.

In 1994, Richard Perle, now a converted arms dealer, also known as “the prince of darkness”, became an adviser to President and former Nazi Alija Izetbegović in Bosnia and Herzegovina. It was he who brought Osama Bin Laden and his Arab Legion (forerunner of Al-Qaeda) from Afghanistan to defend the country. Perle would even become a member of the Bosnian delegation when the Dayton Accords were signed in Paris. In 1996, members of the PNAC (including Richard Perle, Douglas Feith and David Wurmser) wrote a report within the Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies (Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies – IASPS), a think tanks of Israel, on behalf of the new Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, who advocates the physical elimination of Yasser Arafat, the annexation of Palestinian territories, a war against Iraq and the transfer of Palestinians there.[5] The report is inspired not only by the political theories of Leo Strauss, but also by those of his friend Ze'ev Jabotinsky, the founder of “revisionist Zionism”, and for whom Netanyahu's father was private secretary.

PNAC raised funds for the candidacy of George W. Bush (Jr.) and published its famous report Rebuilding America's Defenses (Rebuilding America's Defenses) before his election. This report practically pleads for a Pearl Harbor-like catastrophe to launch the American people into a determined war for global hegemony. These turned out to be exactly the terms that Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, a member of the PNAC, would use on September 11, 2001.

Thanks to the 11/XNUMX attacks, Richard Perle and Paul Wolfowitz installed Admiral Arthur Cebrowski in Donald Rumsfeld's shadow. He had a role comparable to what Albert Wohlstetter had during the Cold War. Cebrowski enshrined the “endless war” strategy: the US armed forces should no longer win wars, but start a large number of them and make them last as long as possible. It is a question of destroying all the political structures of the targeted States, to ruin these countries and deprive them of any means of defense against the United States; a strategy that has been implemented for twenty years in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, Syria, Yemen...

The Straussians' alliance with the revisionist Zionists was sealed at a major conference in Jerusalem in 2003, which Israeli political figures of all persuasions sadly believed they should attend.[6]. Thus, it is not surprising that Victoria Nuland (wife of Robert Kagan, then NATO ambassador) intervened to proclaim a ceasefire in 2006 in Lebanon, allowing the defeated Israeli army not to be mortally harassed by Hezbollah.

Individuals like Bernard Lewis worked with all three groups, the Straussians, the Neoconservatives and the Revisionist Zionists. A former British intelligence agent, he acquired American and Israeli nationalities, was an adviser to Benjamin Netanyahu and a member of the US National Security Council. Lewis, who had asserted mid-career that Islam is incompatible with terrorism and that Arab terrorists are actually Soviet agents, later changed his mind and asserted, with equal aplomb, that this religion preaches terrorism.

He invented, for the US National Security Council, the “clash of civilizations” strategy. It was about instrumentalizing cultural differences to mobilize Muslims against orthodox Christians. The concept was popularized by his Council assistant, Samuel Huntington. However, the latter did not present it as a strategy, but as a fatality against which it was necessary to act. Huntington began his career as an adviser to the US Secret Service. apartheid South African, then wrote a book, The Soldier and the State, ensuring that soldiers (regulars or mercenaries) formed a separate caste, the only one able to understand the needs of national security.[7]

After the destruction of Iraq, the Straussians were the subject of all kinds of controversy.[8] Everyone was astonished that such a small group, supported by neoconservative journalists, could have acquired such authority without being the subject of public debate. The US Congress appointed an Iraq Study Group (known as the “Baker-Hamilton Commission”) to evaluate its policy. He then condemns, without naming it, the Rumsfeld-Cebrowski strategy and laments the hundreds of thousands of deaths it has caused. But Rumsfeld resigned, and the Pentagon is inexorably following a strategy that, officially, it has never acknowledged having adopted.

In the Obama administration, the Straussians found shelter in the office of Vice President Joe Biden. His national security adviser, Jacob Sullivan, played a central role in organizing operations against Libya, Syria and Myanmar, while one of his other advisers, Antony Blinken, focused on Afghanistan, Pakistan and Iran. It was he who led the negotiations with Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, which resulted in the arrest of key members of President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's staff in exchange for the nuclear deal.

The regime change in Kiev in 2014 was organized by the Straussians. Vice President Biden resolutely engages in it. Victoria Nuland would support neo-Nazi Right Sector elements and oversee the Israeli sabotage command Delta[9] in the outbreak of the conflicts on Maidan Square. A telephone intercept reveals his desire to "fuck the European Union" (sic!)("Fuck the US!”), very much in the tradition of the 1992 Wolfowitz report. But the EU leaders did not quite understand, and only feebly protested.[10]

Jake Sullivan and Antony Blinken then put Vice President Biden's son Hunter on the board of a major Ukrainian gas company, Burisma Holdings, despite opposition from Secretary of State John Kerry. Hunter Biden is unfortunately not much more than a junkie, but it will serve as a curtain to cover up a huge fraud committed against the Ukrainian people. He would appoint, under the supervision of Amos Hochstein, several friends from his circle of drug users to serve as orange men at the head of various Ukrainian companies, and loot their gas. These are the people that President Vladimir Putin called "addict fools".

Sullivan and Blinken also have the backing of mob boss Ihor Kolomoisky, the country's third fortune. Despite being Jewish, he funds the henchmen of Right Sector, a neo-Nazi organization that works for NATO and fought in Maidan Square during the “regime change” operation. Kolomoisky tried to use his influence to assume leadership of the European Jewish community, but his co-religionists reacted and expelled him from their international associations. Still, he managed to get the head of the Right Sector (Pravyy Sector), Dmytro Yarosh, appointed deputy secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, and himself appointed governor of Ukraine. region from Dnipropetrovsk. Both would end up removed from their political functions. It is their group that President Vladimir Putin has referred to as “neo-Nazis”.

In 2017, Antony Blinken founded WestExec Advisors, a consulting firm that brings together former Obama administration officials and many Straussians. The activity of this company is extremely discreet. Uses its employees' political connections to make money; what elsewhere would be recognized as influence-peddling and corruption.


Straussians don't change

Since Joe Biden's return to the White House, this time as President of the United States, the Straussians have come to control the entire system. “Jake” Sullivan becomes National Security Advisor; while Antony Blinken, Secretary of State, with Victoria Nuland at his side. As undersecretary of state, the latter travels to Moscow in October 2021 and threatens to crush the Russian economy if the country does not comply. This is the beginning of the current crisis.

Nuland brings Dmitro Yarosh back to life, and imposes him on President Zelensky, a television actor protected by Ihor Kolomoisky. On November 2, 2021, Zelensky appoints him as a special adviser to the Chief of the Armed Forces, General Valerii Zaluzhnyi. The latter, an authentic democrat, is indignant at first, but ends up accepting it. Questioned by the press about this surprising partnership, he refuses to answer and says it is a question of National Security. Yarosh gives his full support to "leader white”, Colonel Andrey Biletsky, and his Azov Battalion. This formation is a copy of the Nazi divisions SS Das Reich, and since the summer of 2021 it has been under the command of American mercenaries from the former Blackwater, now called Academi.[11]

Since this digression has served to identify who the Straussians are and what they want, we are forced to admit that Russia's aspiration is understandable. Even desirable. Ridding the world of Straussians would be doing justice to over a million deaths they've caused and saving those they're about to kill. It remains to be seen whether this intervention in Ukraine will be a good resource.

Be that as it may, if the responsibility for current events lies with the Straussians, all those who allowed them to act on free rein also bear responsibility. Starting with Germany and France, who signed the Minsk Accords seven years ago and did nothing to ensure they were implemented. Following are the fifty or more states that have signed OSCE declarations (Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe) prohibiting NATO expansion east of the Oder-Neisse line and who did nothing either. Interestingly, only Israel, which has just got rid of the revisionist Zionists, has come to express a more nuanced position on current events.

This is one of the lessons of this crisis: democratically governed peoples are responsible for the decisions repeatedly taken by their leaders and maintained even with alternation of power.

* Thierry Meyssan is a French journalist and political activist. Author, among other books, of Before our very eyes, fake wars and big lies: From 9/11 to Donald Trump.

Translation: Ricardo Cavalcanti-Schiel.

Originally published on Voltaire Network.



[1]           Cahn, Anne H. 1998. Killing Detente: The Right Attacks the CIA. State College: Pennsylvania State ‎University Press.

[2]          This document was revealed by the article “US Strategy Plan Calls For Insuring No Rivals Develop”, by Patrick E. Tyler, in the New York Times, on March 8, 1992. See also the excerpts from the document, published in the same source and date: “Excerpts from Pentagon's Plan: 'Prevent the Re-Emergence of a New Rival'”. Additional information is provided in "Keeping the US First, Pentagon Would preclude a Rival Superpower" by Barton Gellman at The Washington Post, on March 11, 1992.

[3]          Shulsky, Abram N. & Schmitt, Gary J. 1999. Silent Warfare: Understanding the World of Intelligence. Dulles, VA: Potomac Books.

[4]          Kagan, Robert & ‎Kristol, William. 1996. “Toward a neo-Reaganite Foreign Policy”. Foreign Affairs 75 (4) 18-32.

[5]          "A Clean Break: A New ‎Strategy for Securing the Realm”, Institute for Advanced Strategic and Political Studies, 1996.

[6]          “Sommet historique pour sceller ‎l'Alliance des guerriers de Dieu”, Voltaire Network, October 17, 2003:

[7]          T. No.: The Soldier and the State: The Theory and Politics of Civil-Military Relations, originally published in 1957 by Belknap Press, a subsidiary of Harvard University Press, was translated into Portuguese and published in Brazil in 1996 (curiously!) by Biblioteca do Army Editora.

[8]          This controversy still persists. To write this article, these eight books were consulted in particular:

  • Drury, Shadia B. 1988. The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
  • Norton, Anne. 2005. Leo Strauss and the Politics of American Empire. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.‎
  • Zuckert, Catherine ‎H. & Zuckert, Michael P. 2008. The Truth About Leo Strauss: Political Philosophy and American Democracy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.‎
  • Minowitz, Peter. 2009. Straussophobia: Defending Leo Strauss and Straussians Against Shadia Drury and Other Accusers. Washington, DC: Lexington Books.‎
  • Gottfried, Paul E. 2011. Leo Strauss and the Conservative Movement in America Cambridge: Cambridge ‎University Press.‎
  • Jaffa, Harry ‎V. 2012. Crisis of the Strauss Divided: Essays on Leo Strauss and Straussianism, East and West. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield.‎
  • Deutsch, ‎Kenneth L. 2013. Leo Strauss, the Straussians, and the Study of the American Regime. Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield
  • Hirst, Aggie. 2013. Leo Strauss and the Invasion of Iraq: Encountering the Abyss. London: Routledge.

[9]          “Who are these ancient Israeli soldiers parmi les combatants de rue dans la ville de Kiev?”,, March 2, 2014.”The new Gladio in Ukraine”, by Manlio Dinucci, The poster, Rome, March 18, 2014; Portuguese translation:

[10]         The transcript of the telephone tapping was originally published by Andrey Fomin, at oriental review, from Russia, and translated into Spanish with the title “El texto íntegro de la intercepción telefónica. Conversation between the Assistant Secretary of State and the Ambassador of the United States to Ukraine”, at Voltaire Network, February 8, 2014:

[11]         Simon Shuster, “Exclusive: Documents Reveal Erik ‎Prince's $10 Billion Plan to Make Weapons and Create a Private Army in Ukraine”, Time, July 7, 2021:

See this link for all articles


  • About artificial ignoranceEugenio Bucci 15/06/2024 By EUGÊNIO BUCCI: Today, ignorance is not an uninhabited house, devoid of ideas, but a building full of disjointed nonsense, a goo of heavy density that occupies every space
  • The society of dead historyclassroom similar to the one in usp history 16/06/2024 By ANTONIO SIMPLICIO DE ALMEIDA NETO: The subject of history was inserted into a generic area called Applied Human and Social Sciences and, finally, disappeared into the curricular drain
  • Franz Kafka, libertarian spiritFranz Kafka, libertarian spirit 13/06/2024 By MICHAEL LÖWY: Notes on the occasion of the centenary of the death of the Czech writer
  • A look at the 2024 federal strikelula haddad 20/06/2024 By IAEL DE SOUZA: A few months into government, Lula's electoral fraud was proven, accompanied by his “faithful henchman”, the Minister of Finance, Fernando Haddad
  • Letter to the presidentSquid 59mk,g 18/06/2024 By FRANCISCO ALVES, JOÃO DOS REIS SILVA JÚNIOR & VALDEMAR SGUISSARDI: “We completely agree with Your Excellency. when he states and reaffirms that 'Education is an investment, not an expense'”
  • PEC-65: independence or patrimonialism in the Central Bank?Campos Neto Trojan Horse 17/06/2024 By PEDRO PAULO ZAHLUTH BASTOS: What Roberto Campos Neto proposes is the constitutional amendment of free lunch for the future elite of the Central Bank
  • Chico Buarque, 80 years oldchico 19/06/2024 By ROGÉRIO RUFINO DE OLIVEIRA: The class struggle, universal, is particularized in the refinement of constructive intention, in the tone of proletarian proparoxytones
  • Why are we on strike?statue 50g 20/06/2024 By SERGIO STOCO: We have reached a situation of shortage of federal educational institutions
  • The melancholic end of Estadãoabandoned cars 17/06/2024 By JULIAN RODRIGUES: Bad news: the almost sesquicentennial daily newspaper in São Paulo (and the best Brazilian newspaper) is rapidly declining
  • The strike at federal Universities and Institutescorridor glazing 01/06/2024 By ROBERTO LEHER: The government disconnects from its effective social base by removing those who fought against Jair Bolsonaro from the political table