Germany … has the capability of preempting us in deploying and mounting a surprise attack. In order to prevent this from happening while destroying the German Army, I consider it necessary that in no way should we yield the initiative to the German command. We should preempt the enemy by deploying and attacking the German Army at the very moment when it has reached the stage of deploying but has not yet organized itself into a front….”

S. Timoshenko, Commissar of Defense
G. Zhukov, Chief of the General Staff
15 May 1941

Hitler broke the Molotov-Ribbentrop Non-aggression Pact on 22 June 1941 with an all-out assault on the Soviet Union. The Red Army was not able to launch the preemptive strike on the Germans called for in Timoshenko and Zhukov’s 15 May Memorandum. Because the Russian government is still holding back documents, we do not know exactly why the Red Army failed to carry out its preferred plan. We only know that the Red Army was badly defeated on the frontier, and the Soviet Air Force was massacred.

For many years historians believed that Stalin lost his nerve as the military disaster of June 1941 unfolded; that Stalin left the Kremlin and started drinking; that a delegation of officials had to beg him to resume his post. After the fall of the Soviet Union, Russian researchers located Stalin’s day calendar and discovered that Stalin went to work every day following the German attack. Thus, it turns out that the memoirs of Nikita Khrushchev were intentionally misleading – and prejudicial to Stalin. Of course, it was Khrushchev who denounced Stalin in his not-so-secret secret speech of 25 February 1956. We should not be surprised, as well, to see General Georgi Zhukov’s account of the war depicting Stalin as the fool who was “taken in by Hitler.” After all, Zhukov had reason to hide his mistakes, given the failure of the 15 May Memorandum. As Russian Defense Ministry historian Pavel Bobylev explained, Stalin was “correct in placing the blame on the military for failing to carry out in time the assigned deployments to the western [military] districts.”

Zhukov and Khrushchev were not, by any means, the only falsifiers of the historical record. Stalin built a huge propaganda myth which would grant legitimacy to the Soviet government for decades. It was all about defeating what Stalin called “the fascist hordes.” John Mosier pointed out in his book, Deathride: Hitler vs. Stalin, The Eastern Front, 1941-1945, that Stalin’s greatest achievement was not in winning the war, but in successfully establishing the prevailing interpretations of the war. According to Mosier, “Stalin’s role [in the war] was entirely improbable, but it was also of a piece with the legend Stalin had [previously] created. Moreover, like the other fabrications about the Soviet state, the Stalinist account of the war has proven to be remarkably durable, despite its improbability.” Mosier outlined four reasons why Stalin’s false account of the war has become integral to the understandings of Western historians: (1) Stalin’s account is clear and compelling; (2) Stalin’s account “resonates with the idealism of socialism that people find attractive”; (3) Stalin’s account is consistent with other Soviet myths which were successfully circulated in the West; (4) Stalin’s facts were carefully manipulated to fit a larger narrative that most Western observers could not see through and had no reason to distrust. 

Following the death of Stalin, Khrushchev and Zhukov merely modified Stalin’s myth by mixing it with a touch of anti-Stalinism. As it stands, Soviet official histories of the war are not trustworthy. Professor Albert Weeks has pointed out, “The distortions introduced into Soviet historiography, including military history, have been so potent – and convincing – as to mislead not only Soviet citizens but also Western observers, who … still rely on Soviet interpretations of major events.”

One might, in the Soviet context, exaggerate Napoleon’s quip on history into the following parody: “History is something that didn’t happen, told by people who were not there.” Indeed, Gaston de Pawlowski did exactly that when he wrote, “Military history is nothing but a tissue of fictions and legends, only a form of literary invention; reality counts for little in such an affair.” Insofar as modern man is deluded in so many areas of thought, we find he is especially deluded when it comes to wars and battles, since these are the special province of great lies and great liars.

Even now, Western historians uncritically cling to Soviet accounts of the war. Book after book yet holds to the line that Stalin was surprised by Hitler’s attack. This is part of the legend which invokes Stalin’s innocence – distinguishing the Soviet dictator as Hitler’s victim rather than as Hitler’s partner in aggression. We must question, indeed, which dictator ultimately victimized the other. In his advanced old age Vyacheslav Molotov gave an interview in which he said, “No, Stalin saw through it all. Stalin trusted Hitler? He didn’t trust his own people! … Hitler fooled Stalin? As a result of such deception Hitler had to [shoot and] poison himself, and Stalin became the head of half the world!” When challenged about the Soviet Union’s initial battlefield losses, Molotov insisted, “In essence, we were largely ready for war.”

Two former Soviet officers, General Oleg Sarin and Colonel Lev Dvoretsky, had an astute way of describing the outbreak of war between the two dictators: “Hypocritically smiling at each other and keeping up false pretenses, [Hitler and Stalin] had diabolical ideas relative to each other. Hitler was preparing for ‘Operation Barbarossa,’ the invasion of the Soviet Union, and Stalin was preparing a preventive strike at Germany.”

The Soviet offensive plan

Stalin and his colleagues lied about the war for several reasons. The Soviet Union was preparing an armored force of over 26,000 tanks with which to invade Europe. This was something, in retrospect, the Soviets needed to hide. To explain how big this number is, one only has to point out that Hitler deployed only 3,500 tanks at that time. From this we can read Soviet intentions. Given the extent of his war preparations, Stalin believed that Hitler was a dead man. As Molotov’s later statements show, it did not really matter which side attacked first. Stalin calculated that he was going to win either way.

The June 1941 disaster did not unfold because Stalin was “innocently” surprised, but because the Soviet generals failed to get their act together. The evidence is now overwhelming. Stalin knew of Hitler’s plans from Soviet secret agents and foreign friends. Stalin was handed detailed intelligence reports from Winston Churchill, whose codebreakers had cracked the German Enigma machine and were reading German military communications in real time. The idea that Stalin knew nothing of the impending attack, and flatly refused to believe all these reports, with intelligence pouring in from every side, is laughable. Yet mainstream historians have believed in this myth even as small children believe in Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

Of course, it served Stalin well to play the innocent. It is better to appear as a trusting dupe than a cunning manipulator. After all, a trusting statesman is a fine gentleman, while a treacherous aggressor is the Devil incarnate. The astute military historian J.F.C. Fuller, writing in 1956, was one of the first Western historians to see through Stalin’s charade. Fuller pointed to the work of Swedish journalist Arvid Fredborg, then working in Berlin, who learned that the original date for the Barbarossa attack was 12 June 1941, “but, on account of the Hungarians refusing to march against Russia, for certain minor adjustments, it was put [back] to the 22nd.” Fuller wrote, “That it came as a political surprise to the Kremlin is unlikely; but that it was a tactical surprise is all but certain.”

Fuller put his finger on the truth. The problem was not that Stalin didn’t know of Hitler’s plan to invade. The problem was, his generals didn’t know the exact date of the invasion, since Hitler’s plans changed; and this introduced an element of tactical uncertainty as Timoshenko and Zhukov placed their divisions in precarious forward positions vainly attempting to follow through on their 15 May Memorandum. Here the Soviet side faced a deeper problem than bad timing. It had to do with the bureaucratic rot that typically underlies communist regimes.

To understand the extent of the “communist rot” in the Red Army, consider what happened when the Soviets attempted to blitz Finland on 30 November 1939. The Finns didn’t have a single anti-tank gun and were low on artillery shells. How could Finland have survived against overwhelming Soviet attacks involving tanks and massed artillery? And yet, thanks to the appalling inefficiency of the Red Army, the Finns wiped out many Soviet divisions, including tank divisions. Famously, the Finns used “Molotov” cocktails, logs and even pistols to disable Soviet tanks. They shot the ice out from under motorized columns crossing frozen lakes. When Soviet infantry sought protection by following behind tanks during an assault, the Finnish artillery overshot the tanks and wiped out the advancing infantry. One Finnish soldier said, “They are so many and we are so few. Where will we find the room to bury them all?” (The Russians and Finns signed a peace agreement on 12 March 1940, the background of which is shrouded in the Scandinavian intrigues of the Soviets, British and French.)

Winston Churchill, who was a keen observer of military affairs, commented on the Red Army’s failures in Finland. “Everyone can see how communism rots the soul of a nation,” said Churchill, “how it makes it abject and hungry in peace, and proves it base and abominable in war.” Hitler also drew a lesson from the disastrous Red Army performance against Finland. In early 1941 he applied his usual racial epithets: “The Russian himself is inferior. His army has no leaders.” However, at a 7 January 1941 meeting of his military advisors, Hitler added one of his prophetic asides: “True, the Russian forces are a clay colossus with no head, but who knows how they will develop in the future?” He saw the possibility that the Red Army’s inept performance of the Winter War might one day be remedied.

Mussolini’s African follies

Before we cover Hitler’s invasion of the Balkans and the Soviet Union, we must narrate events in Africa. The “Dynamic Duo” of Hitler and Mussolini was not so dynamic where Mussolini was concerned. When the Italians entered the war in June 1940, the British commander in Africa, General Wavell, had 36,000 men (with 9,000 in Sudan, 5,500 in Kenya, 1,475 in Somaliland, and 27,000 in Palestine). Across the border in Libya the Italians had 215,000 troops (with another 200,000 in Italian East Africa). In terms of numbers, the British were in trouble. But it was worse than that. Wavell’s air contingent was small and obsolete. He had only one armored division, consisting of two partly equipped brigades. But he had one advantage. He was facing Marshal Italo Balbo.

Italy became a belligerent on 10 June 1940. In July the Italian forces of East Africa invaded partway into Sudan, Kenya and Somaliland. Balbo’s air units also bombed the British island fortress of Malta in the Mediterranean. Having won these “Chinese victories,” wrote J.F.C. Fuller, “[the Italians] passed away into siesta.” In North Africa the siesta was not a peaceful one.

General Wavell decided to attack Balbo’s “ponderous” Libyan army in what became the “First Libyan Campaign.” Wavell’s idea was to frighten the Italians, making them believe he had a much bigger army. British war correspondent Alan Morehead explained: “this little Robin Hood force, being unable to withstand any sort of determined advance by the half-dozen Italian divisions across the border, did the unpredicted, unexpected thing – it attacked.” When the British began surrounding the Italian forts and harassing them, Marshal Balbo thought he was being attacked by five British armored divisions instead of one. He kept his army locked down in fortifications and called Rome for help. Being killed at Tobruk when his plane was shot down by friendly fire on 28 June 1940, he was replaced by Marshal Rudolfo Graziani who, Fuller tells us, had previously distinguished himself during the Italo-Abyssinian War as “a veritable snail.”

With Mussolini breathing down Graziani’s neck, the Italian “snail” pushed his forces across the Egyptian border in September 1940. The British could not resist such a large force and fell back. Instead of continuing his eastward march and capturing Alexandria, Graziani spent the month of October building forts – what Fuller called “monuments to his approaching defeat.” The Italian deployment was so idiotic, Major General R. N. O’Connor, now commanding the reinforced British Western Desert Force, attacked on 7 December 1940 in what became the “Second Libyan Campaign.” The British Navy supported the operation with coastal bombardments. Because of his passiveness, Graziani’s large army was destroyed as O’Connor’s force advanced over 500 miles across the Egyptian and Libyan desert. Speed of movement was O’Connor’s secret. As Graziani was a “snail,” most of his army was surrounded and the last remnants fled in panic toward Tripoli.

Above: Advance of General O’Connor’s Western Desert Force.
Below: Rommel strikes out from El Aghela and drives the British back to Tobruk.

Hitler now had two reasons to be annoyed with Mussolini. Just as he was considering a move against the Soviet Union, he had to save the Italian army in Albania and Libya. Hitler therefore sent General Irwin Rommel with a panzer division and attached elements to Tripoli. With the addition of another panzer and motorized infantry division, this became the famous “Africa Korps.” The Italians rallied to Rommel, who put an end to the British advance. Now the fighting devolved into a battle of wits and maneuver in which Rommel outwitted the British, earning himself the nickname of “desert fox.” His daring was accompanied by old-fashioned chivalry, making the war in the desert more humane than the war on the Eastern Front. (We will not cover Rommel’s victories and eventual defeat at El Alamein, for this theater of operations was a sideshow. In strategic terms, Hitler did not send Rommel to conquer Egypt. Hitler didn’t care about Egypt. Hitler sent Rommel to keep Italy’s position in Libya from collapsing, and supplied him accordingly.)

Meanwhile, the Italian “siesta” in East Africa ended as the British attacked from Kenya and Sudan. Carrying the Battle into Abyssinia in early 1941, the British drove the Italians out of East Africa.

Hitler Invades the Balkans

Since Stalin knew a German attack was coming, he played for time to advance his own war preparations. Mussolini’s failed invasion of Greece meant that Hitler would have to send his own forces to Greece in the spring of 1941. To do this, however, Hitler needed an alliance with Yugoslavia and Bulgaria (countries that border Greece). Stalin therefore sought to upset Hitler’s diplomacy in the Balkans. Already Hitler had secured alliances with Hungary, Romania and Slovakia. If Stalin could prevent Hitler from allying with Yugoslavia and/or Bulgaria, he would complicate Hitler’s rescue of Mussolini’s army in Albania (hard-pressed by the Greeks). Therefore, a fierce diplomatic battle between Moscow and Berlin erupted over Bulgaria – a country whose people loved the Russians, but whose monarchy favored Germany.

Meanwhile, General Wavell in Alexandria was pouring British troops into Greece. This upset Hitler since the British were now setting up shop within bombing range of the Romanian oil fields. To expedite his strategy, Hitler met with the King of Bulgaria. They came to an understanding which would allow German troops to use Bulgarian territory for an attack on Greece. On 25 March 1941 Hitler also persuaded Yugoslavia to align itself with Germany. But then, on 27 March a group of military officers took control of the Yugoslav government, signing a “friendship treaty” with Stalin on 6 April. The Communist Party of Yugoslavia took to the streets of several cities, signaling support for what was, in essence, a pro-Allied military coup supported by the British. At the signing of the Soviet-Yugoslav friendship treaty in Moscow, Stalin told Ambassador Gavrilovic: “We are brothers of the same blood and the same religion. Nothing can separate our two countries from each other. I hope that your army can hold up the Germans for a long time….” After the treaty was signed, Stalin shook Gavrilovic’s hand firmly and made the sign of the cross in the Orthodox manner. An attending diplomat barely managed to choke back a laugh by pressing a handkerchief to his mouth.

Even as Stalin was fooling Gavrilovic by making the sign of the cross in Moscow, German 12th Army, which was then deploying via Hungary to attack Russia through Romania, pivoted and invaded Serbia and Macedonia (then provinces of Yugoslavia). Other German divisions advanced from German territory into Croatia and on to Belgrade. Yugoslavia was defeated a matter of days. Simultaneously, German divisions that were prepositioned in Bulgaria invaded Greece, flanking the Greek forces operating against the Italians in Albania. The Greek command decided to hold the Metaxas Line along the eastern Rhodope Mountains with help from the New Zealand Division, 6th and 7th Australian, the British 1st armored brigade and a Polish brigade. The Allied line was improperly balanced, and as the Germans maneuvered toward a weak point, the British saw the danger, abandoned their positions and retreated toward the Pass of Thermopylae. This uncovered the right flank of the Greek forces withdrawing from Albania, leaving them to be cut off. Consequently, the Army of Epirus surrendered on 21 April. The British evacuated their troops to the Island of Crete as Greece fell to the Germans. Due to Hitler’s fear that the British would base long-range bombers in Crete and strike at the Romanian oil, the Germans then launched a massive glider and paratroop assault on Crete in May 1940, and forced the British to evacuate Crete.

Hitler Attacks the Soviet Union

With victory in the Balkans Hitler could now turn his attention on Stalin. Some historians have suggested that Hitler’s attack on the Soviet Union was delayed by his conquest of Yugoslavia and Greece, but this is untrue. A small panzer group and German 12th Army, which were originally going to attack the Soviet Union through Romania, were detained in the Balkans; other than that, Russia and eastern Poland suffered from heavy rains in May, and German forces would not have been able to attack even if they had been ready. This weather may also explain the Red Army’s delayed mobilization schedule (and the resulting catastrophe).

The German attack on the Soviet Union began on 22 June 1941, with panzer divisions piercing the Soviet lines in several areas. Three German army groups attacked the Soviet Union: (1) Army Group North (with Panzer Group 4) would strike toward Riga and Leningrad; Army Group Center (with panzer groups 2 and 3) would advance along the line of Minsk-Smolensk-Moscow; (3) and Army Group South (with Panzer Group 1) would strike toward the area between Tarnopol and Kiev. Army Group North and Center broke through in depth, forming pockets of trapped Soviet armies. Army Group South hit heavy resistance and made slower progress.

As the campaign evolved, the Germans ended the summer by enveloping the armies of the Soviet Kiev military district in a giant pincer attack from Kleist’s panzers in the south and Guderian’s panzers in the north, trapping 64 Soviet divisions of which 665,000 men were taken prisoner. As a result, the Germans captured the Ukraine with its cities, mineral wealth and agriculture. In the north the Germans reached the outskirts of Leningrad.

As fall approached the Germans relocated most of their panzer forces (now depleted) for a final attack on Moscow. This latter attack made tremendous headway initially, pocketing or destroying several hundred thousand Soviet troops. When Orel was captured by the Germans, the citizenry of Moscow panicked. According to John Mosier’s account, “the streets of Moscow exploded in a series of riots that gripped the city for days as terrified citizens, including officials and party members, tried to seize whatever they could and then flee. Stores closed, the transportation system came to a halt, the British Embassy was sacked, and the metropolitan police lost control.” As luck would have it, the fall rains began and the advancing German columns were mired in mud. Once the ground froze by mid-November, they picked up the pace as two mighty pincers converged on Moscow. The Soviet government was evacuated from Moscow to Kuybyshev. The Russians were out of reserves. Stalin tasked L. Beria to find a friendly country to which they might flee. Stalin even sent peace feelers to Hitler, who ignored them. One last intrigue was successful in the political sphere, which had long been prepared in Tokyo and Washington. It was called “Operation Snow,” and produced excellent results which brought Japan into conflict with the United States. Thus, anticipating the Japanese attack against Hawaii and the Philippines, Stalin ordered armies from the Soviet Far East to reinforce Moscow – stripping his defenses in Siberia. These fresh reserves began reaching Moscow in time to bolster the Soviet line.

On 30 November the 2nd Panzer Division reached Himki, Ozeretskoye and lobnya, 10-11 kilometers from Moscow. Stalin made a symbolic gesture by staying in the Kremlin, hoping his Siberian armies would hold. And then, on 5 December 1941, the city of Moscow was saved by a miracle. A cold front descended on Russia that day, and temperatures dropped to 40 degrees below zero. Untreated Petrol turned to sludge, German guns became brittle without winterized gun oil, Army Group Center – which was invincible the day before – turned into a freezing rabble that only wanted to do one thing: RETREAT. On 7 December the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor and the United States entered the war.

Thus, the drama of 1941 ended with a shocking reversal of fortune. Stalin had trapped Hitler, politically. He had outwitted him. But Stalin had not realized the military efficiency of the Wehrmacht and the comparative incompetence of his own army. If not for the sudden change in weather, Moscow probably would have fallen and the Soviet Union almost certainly would have lost the war. Now, the war would be prolonged and Hitler would have only one more chance to destroy the Soviet Union in 1942.

eAST fRONT 1941 ANIMATION

Note: Please make sure the red bar is all the way to the right when you play this video. It tends to start a few minutes into the presentation unless you rewind. For those who have not seen this, you are in for a rare treat. The “Eastery” East Front series is an excellent way to see how the War in the East was fought. The circles are German corps (xxx), the small red squares are Soviet divisions (xx) or corps (xxx). The black circles are panzer corps.
mapdisposition

Quarterly Subscription (Voluntary)

JRNyquist.blog

$10.00

Links and Notes

Albert L. Weeks, Stalin’s Other War, p. 169.

John Mosher, Deathride: Hitler vs. Stalin, the Eastern Front, 1941-45 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2010), opening quotation and introduction.

Weeks, p. 164.

Ibid, p.174.

Ibid, p. 111.

Ibid, p. 91.

Fuller, The Second World War, p. 115.

Erkki Hautamaki’s Finland in the Eye of the Storm Part II. (Fragments from Volume I sent from a Danish friend, and advanced excerpts from Volume 2 sent from sources in Finland. Here is a review of Volume II — Suomi myrskyn silmässä, 2 osa | PROMERIT.NET -<- klikkaa tästä.

Jonathan Clements, Mannerheim: President, Soldier, Spy (London, Haus Publishing, 2009), pp. 246-254.

Fuller, pp. 90-103.

Special note: When Marshal Balbo was killed by friendly fire over Tobruk, the Commander-in-Chief of the RAF Middle East Command sent a special mission over Tobruk to drop a wreath with a note of condolence. It read as follows: “The British Royal Air Force expresses its sympathy in the death of General Balbo – a great leader and gallant aviator, personally known to me, whom fate has placed on the other side. [signed] Arthur Longmore

Topische, Stalin’s War, pp. 92-95.

Mosier, Chapter VI, “The Campaign of Compromises.”

John Koster, Operation Snow: How a Soviet Mole in FDR’s White House Triggered Pearl Harbor (2012).

48 thoughts on “Grand Strategy, Part V (1940-1941, Europe and Africa)

  1. Jeff, I can’t help but feel that this contributes to dishonoring the memory and heroic sacrifices of the Russian people, particularly the brave men of the Red Army who rallied for the Motherland and crushed the Fascist beasts at such a terrible cost. I don’t know a family that did not suffer a casualty, and to us that struggle truly was a holy war, whatever the politics that brought it to pass. Hitler was bent on our eventual extermination, and thus posed an existential threat to Russia from the very beginning of his career…. Whatever the God-Fighting Bolsheviks had planned or even plan today. Some revisionism of the historical record as you know is a trojan horse for the acceptance or re-acceptance of the ideas of evil men, that are not confined to the ideology of Marxist-Leninism.

    You know that a man like Alexander Solzshenitsyn would say as much today to you, being an Orthodox Christian and Russian Nationalist that he was (not that I compare myself to that great man, not being a hero and a sinner indeed), and that the present situation is a bit more complex. What I do know is that Satan will not crush Russia forever, nor destroy the true Orthodoxy.

    This Great Lent seeing I am among the worst of men, I pray for us all.

    1. I am sorry you feel that way. It is true that Hitler was bent on Russia’s extermination, and the Russian people saved themselves despite Stalin’s mistakes. This is their great legacy. And perhaps Russia will embrace true Orthodoxy in earnest (though I think Putin is a pretender, and is not truly Orthodox). Nothing I have written dishonors the sacrifices made by the Russian people. It is the communist leaders who behaved despicably and irresponsibly. To say that some of America’s leaders also behaved irresponsibly, is also true. America’s entry into World War II is a horrifying story of incompetence and hubris and deception. Anyone who sees the truth about the modern state and man’s moral decline under it is going to feel disillusioned. It is not an inspiring story. We are all trapped by governments that have little regard for truth or goodness; for if Stalin had been a good man he would not have bolstered Hitler’s power. He would not have baited Hitler. Of course, Hitler had to be defeated to save the Russian people. But who put the Russian people at risk in the first place? Who unleashed Hitler? Stalin did it. This is all very depressing because we want to believe in the righteousness of our leaders. But that belief is dangerous in itself. It is not good that we have believed the lies of President’s and Chancellors and Prime Ministers and General Secretaries. Where has that gotten us? Now the United States faces possible extermination from Chinese or North Korean EMP weapons. If not for America’s help to Stalin, the American people would not be facing this danger (for which there is no solution). A single EMP bomb from North Korea could kill 90 percent of the people in the U.S. And it was Russian scientists who gave that technology to North Korea. America sent vital help to Russia throughout the war, hoping for lasting friendship between our people. And here is our turnaround. The best outcome in the Second World War would have been the overthrow of Hitler by negotiating with his generals, then the overthrow of Stalin to liberate the Russian people. A fantasy, of course, because Stalin’s agents of influence in Washington snd London made sure Hitler stayed in power so the war was prolonged and Stalin’s armies could reach Berlin and Vienna. It is a moral failing in us that we do not see through the lies of our leaders. And it may also signify the end of civilization altogether; for these lies are growing more outrageous, more “progressive,” month by month. Now we are told that a child’s gender cannot be determined at birth. We are on a downward slope. Worse will come before things get better. But it will not get better until we tell the truth, even if that truth offends our sensibilities.

      1. There is a goodly portion of what you’ve said that is not untrue, although it would probably go too far afield for me to speak of things like Patriarch Nikon and the Schism of 1666 or Tsar Peter and the Romanovs, Serfdom and so forth, to provide context. There’s much for me to think upon in what you and others have had to say. Much has been made I’m sure you’re aware of the peculiar psychology of an alienated and deracinated semi-colonial westernized elite (most of whom could hardly read or speak Russian, even Lenin!), concretized in reality by what Dostyoevsky called ”that most artificial of cities, saint Petersburg”.

        I will say for one illustration that Tsar Peter ”the Great” was in many respects the earliest ”Bolshevik” and Antichrist; and the Bolsheviks are more his children than Marx’s, much more so. ”true Orthodoxy” however, as you say, it really does exist. Solzhenitsyn spoke of it, the true Orthodox having in his personal estimation already suffered at least 15 million martyrs during the rule of the Romanovs alone, before the Bolshevik persecution. A lot I could say about all this. But every nation in every time has it’s share of plunderers and thieves, traitors and mercenaries. After all, much of the ”Smutnoe Vremya” was Russian versus Russian, Boyars ultimately wanting the rule of a Polish Tsar against the People led by Minin and Pozharsky.

        I’m sure you’re aware of a great deal of this, and as you say, the Western idea of the modern state, it is a real disillusionment, to say the least. But the real Russia, the old Russia, she still exists. They can’t break Russia, and it drives them mad inside to even try. Anyway, we’ll see what happens, Russia will be a bone in their bandit throats in any case.

      2. I was quite interested in the Russian television dramas depicting Ivan the Terrible, Boris Godunov and others. A very favorable view of the sincerely devout Orthodox occurs in these dramas. At some level the apparatchiks of the Russian state recognize they have nothing real to offer. So they are allowing this. And yes, we in the West are further down the road of false pride and decadence, and would not make such dramas now. Our institutions are too rotten for words. And yes, the problem does go back further than Marx.

      3. Jeff: In the above response you say that Stalin’s agents of influence made sure we (the US) stayed in the war longer so the Soviets could get to Berlin. Short of siding with Hitler, how could we have quickened the war?

      4. There is a great book, by one of those rare military analysts. It is titled “Great Mistakes of the War,” by Hanson Baldwin. I will be quoting from it toward the end of this series. There is also Congressional testimony that I will be posting in full, which will stun you — with a story you have never heard; a story that will completely change your understanding of what happened at the end of the war. It is a very sad story. A story that cost many American and Japanese lives. Also, there is the story of the Battle of the Bulge: why Field Marshal Walter model began drinking after the Battle of the Bulge, disobeyed Hitler’s orders, and shot himself; why SS General Schellenberg mounted sub-machine guns in his desk with a flip switch; why Martin Bormann was operating a “system” of radio transmitters, in 1944, sending and receiving messages from Moscow; why Hitler threatened to have the head of military intelligence for the Eastern Front committed to an insane asylum; and why Eisenhower forbade US 7th Army from crossing the Rhine when there was a gap in the German line that could have been exploited; why, also, Montgomery’s Operation Market Garden was not fully supported by Eisenhower — who did not provide the minimal flank support Montgomery requested. And last, but not least, why General George Marshal cut off Eisenhower’s replacements for our European forces in the fall of 1944, on the eve of the Battle of the Bulge. Was the war lengthened? Yes. Was it to Stalin’s advantage? Yes.

      5. PS – I do not understand your comment about siding with Hitler. We could have destroyed Germany’s rapidly deteriorating position earlier than we did — if the right line of advance had been supported. And I forgot to mention, as well, the strange death of Patton (which happened after the war.)

    1. Much of the material in this paper is familiar. I know about the various Soviet war plans; but given the time available for writing on a weekly basis, I skipped over a great deal of material that was not essential to my narrative and conclusions. Obviously, many people are going to dislike or disagree with what I have written. I have one thing to say to them: Few have grasped the degree to which the communists had penetrated all the key institutions of the leading states of the time. That anything was kept secret from Stalin for long — in the West or Germany or Japan — is too improbable for serious consideration. The thinking of our leading historians represents a failure to grasp the most basic fact of the war. The Soviets had eyes and ears everywhere. They have continued with this same advantage to the present day. When — I ask — are we going to understand? It just takes one communist sympathizer in an organization to compromise it. Only one. No organization has ever been able to keep them out. None! Now look at the outcome of that war and look at where we are now.

      1. Gorbachev’s 1987 programmatic book, “Perestroika”, with good reason had the following revealing subtitle for its German-language edition: “Die zweite Russische Revolution – Eine neue Politik für Europa und die Welt” (i.e., ‘The Second Russian Revolution – New Politics for Europe and the World’). It was an offensive “by other means” that magically opened all the doors for the unchanged communists that otherwise would have remained closed. Thirty-plus years later, they have finally reached at their long-desired end game. Shevardnadze made little secret, in November 1991, of their true, as-ever-global intentions (emphasis added):

        “I think that the idea of a Common European Home, the building of a united Europe, and I would like to underline today, of Great Europe, the building of Great Europe, great, united Europe, from the Atlantic to the Urals, from the Atlantic to Vladivostok, including all our territory, MOST PROBABLY A EUROPEAN-AMERICAN SPACE, a united humanitarian space: this project is inevitable. I am sure that we will come to building a united military space, as well. To say more precisely: we will build a united Europe, whose security will be based on the principles of collective security. Precisely, collective security.”

        It’s quite an irony that America now has her own “Uncle Joe”, even though he serves as a mere puppet!

        Thank you so much for this amazing series! There’s so much to learn, as well as to unlearn!

        All that said, nonetheless Happy Easter to all!

      2. This commentary demonstrates a continuity in policy from Stalin to Gorbachev. The current Russian buildup on the border of Ukraine also shows this; for Putin now attempts to enable that legacy. None of the NATO countries harbor aggressive designs on Russia. Everyone in NATO wants peace. The same is doubly true for the Ukrainians. Biden’s idiotic threats to Russia are the scripted stupidities of a Kremlin stooge who is playing the part of “imperialist aggressor” to bolster Putin’s propaganda lies. Through all this the Kremlin will have Ukraine — will try to piece the Union back together. To what end? To dominate Europe now that America is sinking into the oblivion of left wing idiocy! The Russian people are, indeed, our last hope. They have seen Putin’s true colors after his poisoning and arrest of Navalny. They have bravely protested. Only they can stop or delay what is coming.

      3. Jeff, the Thesis, although with errors such as giving credit to the Yugoslavian and Greece campaigns as delaying Barbarossa, is actually quite good and informative and complimentary to your work.
        Didn’t James Jesus Angleton share your conclusion about secrecy, such a “little” thing that is most of the difference between us and them?
        I hope, that in the future, you will give us more insight into “Operation Snow” and in particular, super spy Richard “Ramsay” Sorge.

        These writings are terrific, and a Happy Easter to you, your family, and all of your readers.

      4. Oh, yes, that paper you posted is interesting. There are a surprising number of papers like this. Many Russian historians have confronted this issue, which is so difficult to integrate with existing feeling and knowledge.

      5. A couple more comments, Jeff. And can’t wait for the next part.
        First, Putin is not only putting the empire back together but with the coming solar minimum he desperately needs Ukrainian farmland.
        Second, the Russian people are our last and maybe only hope. I understand there was no way that President Donald Trump was to be ever allowed to speak to the Russian people in person.

      6. I regret that so many of our leaders are too confused, too muddled, to speak rightly to the Russian people. Trump might have said the right things — the things we feel here in America. Trump was always careful to respect Russian and Chinese people as people. I only wish he had not said nice things about Xi and Putin. That always made me wince. Such led to my reservations about him.

  2. Jeff, not sure if you can comment, in regards to what the Western Media is promoting about the leader of the Hong Kong Democracy Movement Martin Lee, there is some unsettling things the Western Media has missed in regards to Martin Lee. ABC a Australian Media Outlet is reporting that Martin Lee and the Hong Kong Democracy Movement is against the Chinese Communist Party, Regime and Leadership. This can be said is very far from the truth.

    In the 1980’s during the Hong Kong handover negotiations. Martin Lee who is known to be working for the Chinese Communist Party during that time mentioned to Western Media that Hong Kong people want ‘Democratic Reunification” with Communist China. Also what many people do not realize is that the Hong Kong Democracy Movement has agreed that the Chinese Communist Party owns the Sovereignty of Hong Kong, this was also advocated by Martin Lee in the 1980’s during the Thatcher-Deng Xiaoping negotiations in Beijing.

    Martin Lee’s and the Hong Kong Democracy Movement’s position on Democracy in Hong Kong is basically this:

    Hong Kong should have democracy but it must be granted by the Chinese Communist Party and must stick to the Chinese Communist Party’s rule.

    https://twitter.com/Hkip_uk/status/1378110266588737537

    Martin had already chosen China instead of Britain before the Sino-British negotiations ended. He advocated “democratic reunification” with China, so he thinks CCP is much more democratic than Western countries’ rules. He is the father of deceiving and lying.

    https://twitter.com/Hkip_uk/status/1378114037549047809

    https://twitter.com/Hkip_uk/status/1378112624173416453

    The ABC is even admitting the Chinese Communist Party planned to take Hong Kong back early, I am starting to think that when I rang you up around September in 2019 to discuss this, what I said about the Chinese Communist Party taking Hong Kong back early has become real:

    https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-04/china-hong-kong-crackdown-decades-in-making-xi-jinping/100046472

      1. Jeff, not sure if you can comment, when the news of Martin Lee and the leaders of the Hong Kong Democracy Movement were being jailed. Many EU, Canadian, Australian, British and etc politicians condemned the sentence handed on Martin Lee and the leaders of the Hong Kong Democracy Movement but it seems many of them are not aware that the Chinese Communist Party are in control of the Hong Kong Democracy Movement and are unaware that Martin Lee has a history of working for the Chinese Communist Party. It seems to me the EU, Canadian, Australian, British and etc politicians are unaware of the deception strategy being used by the Chinese Communist Party. To my shock, many EU, Canadian, Australian, British and etc politicians still refer Martin Lee as the ‘father of Democracy’ in Hong Kong as well.

  3. Jeff, what do you think a Russian invasion of Ukraine would look like? Use of proxies and special forces in the east, like in 2014? A limited invasion to unite Donbass with Crimea and seize the Crimean canal? Or a blitzkrieg that seeks to take the whole country?

    1. There is a large Russian military buildup on the Ukrainian border. It looks like they will attack Ukraine and annex at least a part of it after the spring rains. There is also a Russian buildup in the Far East. China is also preparing for war. I have been warning of this dual mobilization for many years. Now that it is here, I need say much. Everything is obvious to the informed and intelligent. Add to this the Chinese low grade biological attack and the communist-manipulated left’s use of the same to justify a power grab. We are clearly in the end game.

      1. Thank you for this comment, Jeff. This is terrifying. Wouldn’t it be more beneficial for the invading forces to wait 2-4 years until our nuclear arsenal expires or until the vaccine takes its effect? From what I understand, most of the US army will be vaccinated by this summer, which would eventually weaken our defences. Perhaps the communists don’t need to wait due to their infiltration/occupation of world governments or maybe they can’t wait and ran out of time due to the solar minimum…

        Could you please share your opinion on how eastern US/Canada or Brazil might fare through all of this? I would love to hear your thoughts. Thank you in advance.

      2. I do not really know what the state of our nuclear arsenal is. We are told contradictory things. If the head of our Strategic Command said in February 2020 that we have three years until we are past the shelf life of our nukes, then China might wait. But 12 years ago last November Defense Secretary Robert Gates said our nuclear arsenal would be unreliable in one year — late 2009. So which claim is the true one? Maybe we are so past the real shelf life that our enemies don’t want to wait anymore. I don’t know. As I said before, Russian and Chinese war planning involves a sequence in which a series of very disruptive events take place. We have been in “grey terror” a long time now. With the pandemic we entered the last phase, the phase of mobilization —with open war preparations ongoing. I am told Trump’s tariffs hurt the Chinese financial system. Could have motivated them. Might be the grand solar minimum is threatening global food supplies — and guess who grows the most food? Yes, America is the biggest food-producing country. And that could be part of it. The coming months will be very dangerous. Watch very closely.

      3. I am trying to think; but if wars begin to break out there is no telling how bad it will get. The global economy is already in bad shape. WMDs can ruin your whole day — wherever you live, you will be affected. Conditions will vary greatly from PLACE to place

      4. Hi Jeff!

        Regarding biological attach, did you already know the very interesting interview by Dr. Alexander Kouzminov from 2017?
        “Information-Bioterrorism – a new form of global manipulation”
        https://www.researchgate.net/publication/320046708_Information_bioterrorism_-_a_new_form_of_global_manipulation
        … or …
        https://www.zeit-fragen.ch/en/archives/2017/no-34-6-february-2017/information-bioterrorism-a-new-form-of-global-manipulation.html

        (Background of Kouzminov:
        Dr. Kouzminov is an ex-intelligence operative of the Soviet-Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) in 1980-90s, and dealt with intelligence operations with bioweapons related activities in target countries.)

        The whole interview is worth reading, attached is an interesting excerpt:

        What is information-bioterrorism?
        You called this form of mass manipulation “infobioterrorism”. Could you define this concept? Do you have an actual example?

        I define “information bioterrorism” as a new type of global operational influence over people. I define it as influence over them and manipulation. What’s the purpose? Well, it may have some specific, pre-planned outcomes. Another name for it can be “information biological blackmail”.
        The basis of “information bioterrorism” is the use of fear over people. This fear is based on pandemics of very dangerous diseases, for example when a pandemic is a threat that arises from a viral outbreak in animals. The main components and aftereffects of such new form of mass manipulation of a “threat” are:

        – Time factor: practically immediate and globally-spread panic through electronic means of communication.
        – Vulnerability factor: helplessness before the threat, due to lack of effective means of defence. This creates panic among the general population.
        – Uncertainty factor: the lack of factual information about the source of threat and its spread; the side who initiates the threat thereby has a new opportunity for mass manipulation.
        – The lack of control factor: each person who finds himself “out of control” because he/she is a suspicious object, liable to have the disease, is a threat to everyone else.

  4. So about the middle of June around 12-13 or 20-21. Perhaps our friend The Contemplative Observer will run the astrology on it, often an intelligent read sometimes into the minds of Communists.
    Jeff, I get the impression this is about more, much more, than a land bridge to Crimea.

  5. “To permit irresponsible authority is to sell disaster.”

    Heinlein Robert A.

  6. Jeff, not sure if you can comment, I was talking to some Hong Kong people who live in the UK and are involved with the Hong Kong Independence Party. During the conversation when it came to discussing the Hong Kong Democracy Movement, one of them mentioned they believe the Hong Kong Protest in 2019 is actually a liquidation operation to get rid of the Hong Kong Democracy Movement as it had no use for the Chinese Communist Party Leadership. The same could also happen with the Hong Kong Pro-Beijing Movement as they at this point could be liquidated as well

  7. Is it true, as I have heard before, that the reason the Russians were unprepared for Operation Barbarossa is because there was actual mutiny against Stalin in the Russian ranks that even included generals? That it was only after they realized that the devil that was Hitler was worse for them than the devil that was Stalin, that the Russian people stiffened in their resistance to the Germans? If so, does that mean that Hitler and the Nazis lost Operation Barbarossa before it ever began because of their racism and plans for the Slavic people?

    1. It is true that many anti-communist people in the Soviet Union went over to the Germans, and many surrendered to them at the first chance. But Hitler’s racism, and the mistreatment of the Russians, turned some against Hitler. Also, we must not forget the harsh terrorist tactics of Stalin’s partisans.

  8. Fauci Must Explain Why Oversight Bypassed for Funding to Wuhan Lab, Congressman Says
    facebook Sharetwitter Tweetpinterest0 Comments
    Last updated 4/6/2021 at 2:31pm

    April 06, 2021

    Rep. Scott Perry, R-Penn., said it is “very concerning” that the federal infectious disease research organization led by Dr. Anthony Fauci bypassed federal oversight of a grant that funded a lab in Wuhan, China, to genetically modify bat-based coronaviruses.

    Infectious disease experts say the National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases’ grant to the nonprofit group EcoHealth Alliance, which involved the transfer of $600,000 to the Wuhan Institute of Virology, described scientists conducting “gain-of-function” research on SARS-like viruses to make them even more contagious.

    But a federal oversight board created in 2017 to scrutinize such research was not notified of the grant because the National Institutes of Allergies and Infectious Diseases opted against forwarding it for review, The Daily Caller News Foundation previously reported.

    “When it comes to oversight of U.S. tax dollars headed to the Chinese Communist Party, Dr. Fauci seems like he’s literally whistling past the graveyard,” Perry told The Daily Caller News Foundation.

    Want to keep up with the 24/7 news cycle? Want to know the most important stories of the day for conservatives? Need news you can trust? Subscribe to The Daily Signal’s email newsletter. Learn more >>

    The Wuhan Institute of Virology is at the center of widespread speculation that COVID-19 could have accidentally leaked from its lab into the human population. A World Health Organization investigation into the origins of the pandemic concluded in late March that it was “extremely unlikely” that the virus could have escaped from a lab.

    But WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus said his organization’s assessment of the lab leak theory was not sufficient and that further investigation was necessary.

    https://www.villagenews.com/story/2021/04/01/national/fauci-must-explain-why-oversight-bypassed-for-funding-to-wuhan-lab-congressman-says/65753.html
    _______________________________________________________

    https://www.sofmag.com/dr-fauci-who-china-connections-exposed/

    Judicial Watch: Dr. Fauci, WHO: China Connections exposed
    March 6, 2021 Comments Offon Judicial Watch: Dr. Fauci, WHO: China Connections exposed 1,472 Views

    Share
    Judicial Watch: New Emails Detail WHO/NIH Accommodations to Chinese Confidentiality ‘Terms’

    Judicial Watch announced today that it and the Daily Caller News Foundation (DCNF) received 301 pages of emails and other records of Dr. Anthony Fauci and Dr. H. Clifford Lane from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services showing that National Institutes of Health (NIH) officials tailored confidentiality forms to China’s terms and that the World Health Organization (WHO) conducted an unreleased, “strictly confidential” COVID-19 epidemiological analysis in January 2020.

    Additionally, the emails reveal an independent journalist in China pointing out the inconsistent COVID numbers in China to NIH’s National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases’ Deputy Director for Clinical Research and Special Projects Cliff Lane.

    The emails were obtained in response to a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia by Judicial Watch on behalf of the DCNF (Daily Caller News Foundation v. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (No. 1:20-cv-01149)).

    The lawsuit was filed after HHS failed to respond to the DCNF’s April 1, 2020, FOIA request seeking:

    Communications between Dr. Fauci and Deputy Director Lane and World Health Organization officials concerning the novel coronavirus.
    Communications of Dr. Fauci and Deputy Director Lane concerning WHO, WHO official Bruce Aylward, WHO Director General Tedros Anhanom, and China.
    The new emails include a conversation about confidentiality forms on February 14-15, 2020, between Lane and WHO Technical Officer Mansuk Daniel Han. Han writes: “The forms this time are tailored to China’s terms so we cannot use the ones from before.”

    A WHO briefing package sent on February 13, 2020, to NIH officials traveling to China as part of the COVID response ask that the officials wait to share information until they have an agreement with China: “IMPORTANT: Please treat this as sensitive and not for public communications until we have agreed communications with China.”

    In an email dated January 20, 2020, a WHO official discusses the epidemiological analysis they conducted of COVID-19 earlier that month and states that it is “strictly confidential,” is “only for,” the Strategic and Technical Advisory Group for Infection Hazards (STAG-IH), and “should not be further disseminated.”

    In an email dated March 4, 2020, from Chinese journalist Zeng Jia to Lane, a reporter for Caixin Media, points out to Fauci deputy Cliff Lane that the number of cases reported in the WHO Joint China Mission’s report are inconsistent with the number reported by the Wuhan Public Health Committee:

    It says on Page 6 [in the WHO report] that there was at least one clinically diagnosed case of coronavirus on December 2th, 2019, in Wuhan; and from Jan 11th to 17th there were new clinically diagnosed and confirmed cases every day in Wuhan, which is not consistent with Wuhan Public Health Committee’s numbers.

    In an email dated February 15, 2020, Gauden Galea, head of the WHO office in China, informs the joint mission members traveling to China that all of their activities in China would be arranged by the Chinese Government’s National Health Commission.

    “These emails set the tone early on in the coronavirus outbreak. It’s clear that the WHO allowed China to control the information flow from the start. True transparency is crucial,” said Ethan Barton, editor-in chief for the Daily Caller News Foundation.

    “These new emails show WHO and Fauci’s NIH special accommodations to Chinese communist efforts to control information about COVID-19,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton.

    This is the latest information obtained in Judicial Watch and the DCNF’s ongoing investigation into Fauci’s and NIH’s response to the coronavirus pandemic. Judicial Watch and the DCNF previously uncovered emails showing a WHO entity pushing for a press release, approved by Dr. Fauci, “especially” supporting China’s COVID-19 response.

    On September 22, U.S. District Court Judge Dabney L. Friedrich ordered HHS to begin processing responsive records. In a September 21 court filing, HHS said the agency could begin producing 300 pages of responsive records to the DCNF beginning on November 30, eight months after receiving the Daily Caller’s FOIA request. The total number of responsive records is approximately 4,200, which would have pushed off the full release of the records until at least 2022. HHS also alleged that Fauci must personally review each one of his emails before they are released.

  9. Going back to the premise of your serial, is it fair to say that China is the new “battering ram” for Russia? Is Putin thinking he is playing Xi the way Stalin played Hitler into attacking Poland? What did Churchill think of Stalin? What evidence is there to support Putin backing Xi? Both want to gang up on America, but cui bono? We are the world’s engine. China, in particular, would be wounded by a fallen US.

    Russia’s economy I have read is the size of Texas. For a vast country, they are not very prosperous. So they are not a big player in the world scheme imo. I don’t doubt that their communist infiltration is everywhere here: intellectually, politically, and physically (the southern border), but people are waking up to the seriousness of the Biden / Obama policies. You may be right that war is coming, but I don’t think it is coming here….maybe Taiwan will be attacked. I do wonder if we are going to see hordes of migrants walking on I-10 before November.

    1. I would not trust such a figure as a measure of real power. Who says Russia’s economy is the size of Texas? What exactly does that mean in terms of real power? Are we going to bomb Russia with consumer goods made in China — since we don’t make much ourselves anymore?Russia has been the world’s largest producer of wheat. Russia is one of the world’s largest producers of oil and natural gas. It has massive mineral resources. Is it a weak country? A non-factor? Consisting of 13 time zones? Russia is the largest country in the world, with 147 million people — with tens of millions of Russians living in former Soviet Republics — and with more nuclear weapons than America and China combined (if you count tactical nuclear weapons)….. There are lies. There are damned lies. And then there are statistics. China and Russia are working together. This is apparent in Africa and South America, in defector testimony and in arms manufacturing, in grand strategy and in their mutual support for communist regimes around the world. Evidence? Look at Venezuela where Chinese and Russian troops are working together. Look at their mutual support for North Korea and Iran. The proof is all over the map.

    2. Allow me, please, to interject: The communist project, so to speak, has always been: WORLD REVOLUTION, in other words: complete domination of the entire globe! Nothing whatsoever has changed in this regard since Christmas Day 1991 when the Soviet Union self-imploded. On the contrary, by removing from the eyes of the West the IMAGE of the enemy (and the image only), the communist world was able to push forward its expansive designs all the more (enter, most prominently. South Africa; enter: Bill Clinton’s election victory in 1992; enter the UN’s more than questionable 1992 Rio Summit, which was more or less the beginning of this fictitious Anthropogenic Global Warming propaganda). – Communist long-range strategy isn’t a myth, it’s real. To understand it properly, the following literature is indispensable: (1) Anatoliy Golitsyn’s two books, New Lies for Old, and The Perestroika Deception; (2) Christopher Story’s The European Union Collective: Enemy of Its Member States, and certainly (3) all books by J.R. Nyquist, particularly Origins of the Foirth World War: The New Tactics of Global War; and The Fool and His Enemy..

  10. Jeff, not sure if you can comment, Nathan Law who is one of the people involved with the Hong Kong Democracy Movement controlled by the Chinese Communist Party has been given Asylum by the UK Government, this has overseas Hong Kong people living in the UK worried, the Hong Kong Independence Party run by Hong Kong people living in the UK has also criticized the decision from the UK Government:

    https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/world/china-blasts-uk-for-granting-asylum-to-hong-kong-activist-nathan-law/ar-BB1fsyuH

  11. C.O. Thank you for all the work you do. In regards to Jeff’s book “Origins” the males of the USA that might have made good Arch-Generals were (perhaps deliberately) diverted into Mafia’s. The fate of the Lion. A question for the student: Who-Why calls them “tactical nukes” when one going off in downtown L.A. would have a very strategic significance?

  12. A good interview about China’s intent and the fate of the US between Victor Davis Hanson and John Anderson, former Prime Minister of Australia

Comments are now closed.