The Intercept
August 19, 2016

By Lee Fang

The escalating anti-Russian rhetoric in the U.S. presidential campaign comes in the midst of a major push by military contractors to position Moscow as a potent enemy that must be countered with a drastic increase in military spending by NATO countries.

Weapon makers have told investors that they are relying on tensions with Russia to fuel new business in the wake of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and modest increases in its military budget.

In particular, the arms industry — both directly and through its arsenal of hired-gun, think-tank experts and lobbyists – is actively pressuring NATO member nations to hike defense spending in line with the NATO goal for member states to spend at least 2 percent of gross domestic product on defense.

[Continue Reading]

Dear Friends,

I’m pleased to share with you an exceptional analytical piece concerning Putin and Russia. John Pepper, the author, has served in numerous notable positions and roles, including former CEO and Board Chairman of Procter & Gamble. John’s decision to take P&G to Russia (to both sell and manufacture there) has been a huge success story.

While introducing P&G to Russia, John immersed himself in the country’s history and culture, as well as in the worlds and lives of his Russian managers and staff. He is widely known as a noble American businessman who exudes ethics, integrity and the spirit of “giving back” to the countries in which his businesses have operated.

While John was working in St.Petersburg, he led an initiative to develop a high quality School of Business. He began a funding campaign and obtained the support of the academic leadership at St. Petersburg State University. Thanks largely to his efforts, the city gave the University two all-but-destroyed 19th century palaces for the first buildings of the new School of Management. It was here that my life intersected with John’s work. The project needed a respected US-based 501C3 organization through which to receive donations and pay bills for renovating the two palaces. I was delighted by the concept and invited to sit on the board. CCI became the U.S. NGO for this amazing project––giving me the opportunity to begin a long-term friendship with this remarkable man.

[Continue Reading]

Friends, interesting …. when reading a few days ago that President Obama was considering “No First Use” regarding nuclear weapons, I pondered at that time, “Is this a ploy to get the issue aired (because others have begun bringing it up) …. then get a hefty response from the “First Use” crowd around him? I’m not psychic, but it was obvious that this would happen––and it has.

So now we have it — our futures look to be relentlessly driven toward a confrontation, or in less sanitized words, a massive Nuclear War. Meanwhile, our hard-working American citizens who run daycare centers, schools, churches, hospitals, businesses, universities and city halls know little to nothing about this. Why? Because they read only mainstream media and watch U.S. TV news — which are not reporting what our top investigative journalists, academicians, scientists and now mayors of American cities are urging. That is, back off on pushing Russia from all directions, reduce the number of nuclear weapons, and declare a ’No First Strike” policy.

Do our current U.S. policymakers have a death wish? Will they force a war with Russia and Putin because they’ve begun to believe their own disinformation? Do they think their grandchildren won’t be destroyed in the process? It is unfathomable …. simply unfathomable.

What are we knowledgable, informed citizens of America to do?

Your thoughts please.

Sharon

Wall Street Journal
August 12, 2016

‘No First Use’ Nuclear Policy Proposal Assailed by U.S. Cabinet Officials, Allies

Obama’s disarmament agenda hits significant roadblock on opposition from Kerry, Carter and Moniz

By PAUL SONNE, GORDON LUBOLD and CAROL E. LEE

WASHINGTON—A proposal under consideration at the White House to reverse decades of U.S. nuclear policy by declaring a “No First Use” protocol for nuclear weapons has run into opposition from top cabinet officials and U.S. allies.

The opposition, from Secretary of State John Kerry, Secretary of Defense Ash Carter and Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, as well as allies in Europe and Asia, leaves President Barack Obama with few ambitious options to enhance his nuclear disarmament agenda before leaving office, unless he wants to override the dissent.

The possibility of a “No First Use” declaration—which would see the U.S. explicitly rule out a first strike with a nuclear weapon in any conflict—met resistance at a National Security Council meeting in July, where the Obama administration reviewed possible nuclear disarmament initiatives it could roll out before the end of the president’s term.

[Continue Reading]

This article from Wayne Merry at the Kennan Institute interests me, since it presents a more even-handed analysis of what’s occurring with both Russia and the U.S. during the pre 2016 elections. I have secretly longed to see the Kennan Institute again become the wise and sane middle ground in helping ferret out the complicated US-Russia challenges as did its founder. I’d about lost faith it could happen, but Merry’s piece gives me a modicum of hope that it can if individuals there choose to emulate Kennan.

Thanks Wayne Merry, it’s so tiring to read everyday’s countless numbers of articles that make it clear that fair analysis isn’t of interest any longer––only bashing Russia is. You have done your forerunner proud with this one.

Sharon Tennison

Note: Bolding is mine.

The Russia File – a Kennan Institute Blog
August 1, 2016

In DNC’s Russia Controversy, Finger-pointing Trumps Analysis

By E. Wayne Merry
Senior Fellow for Europe & Eurasia at American Foreign Policy Council

Many foreign countries sent diplomatic observers to our presidential nominating conventions. Russia did not, but a Russian image hovered over the Democratic Convention in Philadelphia, from start to finish.

Presumably, the last thing Hillary Clinton wanted to initiate her political triumph in Philadelphia was public confirmation that the Democratic National Committee (DNC) had functioned effectively as an extension of her own campaign rather than as a neutral party secretariat. The confirmation via WikiLeaks of suspicions about the DNC greatly hampered Senator Bernie Sanders in his efforts to convince his ardent supporters to transfer their loyalty to Clinton in the final contest with Donald Trump.

[Continue Reading]

Friends, it is telling how many people and organizations are beginning to weigh in on the issue of “No First Strike” and No Nuclear War.

This issue wasn’t mentioned  a few months ago––now it is frequent.  Clearly those in the know are feeling the need to speak out and warn the public of this possibility.

Sharon

The National Interest

America Would Never Be the First to Use Nukes. So Why Say We Might?

Obama should declare a No First Use policy—and go even further.

Tom Z. Collina
July 28, 2016

President Barack Obama is reportedly considering changing U.S. policy to say that the United States would never be the first nation to use nuclear weapons. Good idea. The United States has nothing to lose from this new policy, and everything to gain.

No sane U.S. leader would ever—ever—initiate the first use of nuclear weapons. So why keep the option open?

Most Americans will be surprised to learn that current U.S. policy allows the first use of nuclear weapons and horrified that we would even consider it. Given our vast advantage in conventional weapons and the devastating consequences of nuclear war for both the United States and its allies, using nuclear weapons first would be a military and diplomatic blunder of historic proportions.

[Continue Reading]