Bringing Russian and American citizens together in Peace since 1983.
Dear CCI Readers,
Anatol Lieven, a respected PhD analyst of world affairs, makes the case that we in America totally lost perspective in the 1990’s and 2000’s… which has catapulted us into a chain of near impossible circumstances today. Does anyone see a way out? Ponder and share potential solutions if you see any.
Sharon Tennison
Center for Citizen Initiatives
Dear CCI Followers,
I had to look up the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) when this report from Russia’s Foreign Minister, Sergey Lavrov, showed up on my screen. If you are as behind the curve as I am, here is a quick explanation. In 2001, the SCO was put together by China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan. Since then, India and Pakistan have become members. Their goals are to promote cooperation, coordination against terrorism and external threats and to maintain regional peace and stability. The SCO is the largest regional organization in the world, covering 3/5th of the Eurasian continent and nearly half of the world’s population.
Check the underlines below for basic humanitarian intentions of the SCO.
Skimming through the Q&A below, I’m struck with the importance of the last question and Lavrov’s answer.
CCI Friends and Followers,
Rumors and disinformation are the political norm today. The “Blame Putin narrative” is the most dangerous one being currently pushed. Watching Putin closely, there is nothing to indicate ill will; if anything, he shows restraint when attacked.
I don’t know Philip Giraldi, an 18-year-CIA operative, but he covers the topics below that need to be addressed regarding the Navalny poisoning case and others in the past.
Until we Americans are better informed on issues manufactured in Washington, grave danger of moving toward confrontation is risked. Given the speed of missiles fired these days, a world-wide nuclear exchange could happen in seconds … creating a nuclear winter from which none would survive. Is this clear to you?
Please read and forward this email to as many Americans as possible. Even at this late date, we must find a way toward a less dangerous future … our children and grandchildren deserve better!
Dear CCI Followers,
Please read carefully the latest from former Colonel Andrew Bacevich, now the President of the new Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft. He hits the “nail on the head” regarding our challenging and dangerous situation.
Sharon Tennison
Center for Citizen Initiatives
Dear CCI Readers,
While we surmise that Alexei Navalny could have been poisoned by someone, I reject the accusation that Putin ordered it.
Why do I think it wasn’t Putin? This rumor is seriously out of sync with Putin’s basic mode of operating during the years for which his history is known. Being the butt of so many rumors and projections of evil during the past 20 years, he seems to have developed an imperviousness to it all. He simply keeps attention on what has to be done and moves forward.
I don’t suggest that any agree with me, but in case you are interested, here is my rationale: From what I’ve experienced and learned from other sources, Putin has been and is a level-headed, introvertish man. He admits to being governed by training in martial arts philosophy since age 11, under the guidance of his respected martial arts mentor. Putin is known (outside of the U.S.) to be the most strategically thinking of today’s world leaders. He is currently planning a United Nations “Big Five” meeting to address world issues in the immediate weeks ahead. Perhaps these most recent rumors are intended to downplay such a role, which no other world leader has risen to thus far. Past accusations heaped on Putin have had little-to-no-proof or truth offered to back them up. His way of handling these recurring rumors has become … “the dogs bark and the caravan moves on… ”
My experience with Putin started when I met an unknown Soviet bureaucrat in the St. Petersburg mayor’s office in 1992. I outlined the benefits my plan would provide to both countries. He seriously studied the proposal paragraph by paragraph, asking questions as he went along. Clearly he was interested in aspects of it. At the end he patiently said, “I’ve tried to understand whether this proposal is legal or not … and currently it is not. I’m sorry, I can’t sign my name to it.”