The international rules-based order

The ‘international community’ that subscribes the ‘rules-based’ order. (Image:

For the past few months, one expression is being repeated by the leaders, politicians, elites and journalists all over the West: A rules-based international order.

Although the term was coined at the end of the Cold War, it has recently gained enormous momentum after Moscow’s recognition of the Lugansk PR and the Donetsk PR as independent states on February 21st 2022, reaching all corners of the planet and being echoed everywhere, from Juneau to Wellington, throughout the whole US-led Collective West. We can hear the slogan incessantly repeated by the dubiously-legitimate 46th president of the United States of America, ‘Big Mouth’ Joseph Robinette Biden, every time he sees himself in front of a microphone, as well as by that globalist cyborg and White House parrot who is Mrs. Ursula Vonderleyen, president of the European Commission as of today. ‘We must rally around a rules-based international order’, we get ad nauseam coming out of our TV sets’ and electronic devices’ speakers; ‘We are aiming to a rules-based world order’, we read on every media terminal owned by the harbingers of such a concept.

And it certainly sounds good. It could not be otherwise, given these people’s ability Continue reading “The international rules-based order”

The Green agenda hoax

Being a genuine environmentalist myself since my early teens–that is, four decades before I begun being interested in politics–I don’t think any single human being can lecture me on what loving nature and respecting the planet does mean. Except for my admitted venial sin of wearing for some time an “anti-nuclear” badge (I remember it perfectly: a red, smiling, beaming sun on yellow background, and the reading “¿Nuclear? No, gracias”), which I hope I will be forgiven, since I was only too young and still didn’t know that–though very dangerous–nuclear is one of the cleanest energy sources our civilization has come up with, for the rest of my life I have followed the most nature-friendly habits compatible with a decent quality of life. Besides, given that I studied a good deal of chemistry and thermodynamics at college, and then air physics (meteorology), which was my profession for three lustrums, I believe I have a fairly reasonable idea of both what is more and less polluting, and what heats up, and what does not, the atmosphere so as to cause global warming.

I spontaneously developed this concern for ecology out of my own romanticism, love for nature and fondness of rural lifestyles way before the “green movement” gained the popularity they have today. As a matter of fact, during my youth I was so naïve that, for many years, I nursed the idea of becoming a Jeremiah Johnson revived… Poor me! But that is another story. My point now is: when the Green agenda bursted into our socio-political life, I immediately smelled the hoax and begun despising the so-called environmentalists. Not that I believe this agenda’s main slogan to be false: for purely technical reasons (on which I will not elaborate here), it turns out that global warming is a well-measured and undeniable fact among scientists, plus I am positive that, for the most part, it is man-made. But this fact does not make the Green agenda less of a fraud. Why? Because it does not address the main issue, and because it entails so many contradictions. For the sake of brevity, in this article I’ll only mention three. Continue reading “The Green agenda hoax”

Global agenda and war in Donbass

Klaus Schwab and Volodimir Zelenski. (Photo:


The information channels I usually follow to be updated on the war in Donbass and its political implications agree, among other things, on one idea which I personally find not plausible: the collective West governments’ astonishing stupidity or nearsightedness. Apparently, this idea stems from the disastrous failure of the economical sanctions imposed on Russia, which not only have barely hurt this country but rather contribute to strengthen its currency and -literally- overflow its revenue with the money coming from the ridiculous prices gas and oil have reached thanks to, precisely, those very sanctions; which, besides, turn out to be ruinous -in social and economical terms- for the same countries that have decreed them. In effect, we have already begun to undergo energy and supply shortages (including food), as well as a worsening of our industry and agriculture, with severe inflation the like of which we have not seen in decades and threatens to cause a general standstill of our economy. Upheavals are taking place in several European countries, with harsh social demonstrations and a weakening and downfall of their governments.

To those consequences we must add the increase in defense budgets Euro-NATO countries will have to undertake, the need to accommodate and feed millions of Ukrainian immigrants, plus a worsening of public safety, the cold we are going to endure next winter and, most dangerously, the risk of provoking a world war of unpredictable (or predictable?) consequences. All for what? For siding with, and support, one particular side in a warlike conflict that does not belong to us and takes place in a country which is none of our business. And, worst of all, to no avail, because Ukraine is going to lose all the same. Continue reading “Global agenda and war in Donbass”

Live with us the European dream

Once more, Mrs. Ursula Vonderleyen has managed to chill her audience with her eloquent words: “We all know that Ukrainians are ready to die for the European perspective. We want them to live with us the European dream.” These two sentences were, in my opinion, the key ones in the speech she, literally wrapped in the colours of the Ukrainian flag, gave at a news conference in Brussels on June 17th. Both sentences I deem worthy of some thoughts.

“We all know that Ukrainians are ready to die for the European perspective”, she pathetically said. Well — to begin with, I find it a bit odd -and somewhat enigmatic too- her picking of the word ‘perspective’. This detail got me a bit baffled. Why ‘perspective’ instead of, let’s say, ‘ideals’ or ‘values’, which would’ve seemed more appropriate and grandiose for the occasion? As I understand, words in political speech are carefully chosen so they transmit very particular meanings and shades; therefore, if Ursula said ‘perspective’, perspective she meant and not something else. But whatever be the hue she wanted to tint her sentence with, it comes to me so subtle and hard to guess that I’m not feeling capable of successfully undertake the task of guessing; so I won’t even try.

In any case, what I think important to focus on is the following: if ‘we all’ Europeans ‘know’ that Ukrainians are ready to die for our perspective, then you can bet we know a lot more than they themselves do. I thought -alongside with so many other people, I’m sure- that Ukrainians were dying to defend -what they consider- their territory from -what they consider- an ilegitimate invasion. Dying, by the way, quite reluctantly and not so ‘readily’ as Vonderleyen fantasizes. I know for a fact that, except for the extreme nationalists, Ukrainian soldiers in general don’t want to fight this fratricidal war (neither do the Russians, by the way). A high proportion of the Ukrainian population has some sort of relatives in Russia, and killing each other isn’t to anyone’s taste.

But to get back on track, Continue reading “Live with us the European dream”

Let’s castrate the Russians

A couple of months after the special military operation in Ukraine begun, one of my most trustworthy Russian contacts (who, by the way, generally dislikes Vladimir Putin) told me the following, shocking story:

“Yesterday I was talking with a doctor who works in a military hospital not far from here, to where some of our soldiers, that had been captured in the Donbass, were recently brought back after being liberated by our troops. It was a group of around thirty young men, aged 23 to 29. You know… they had all been castrated while in captivity; and not by the Ukrainian military -who, like our servicemen, took an oath- but by the militias of the nationalist brigades, whom the Ukrainian government has legalized and now cannot control any longer. These militias behave like terrorists, disguise as civilians -being therefore very difficult to spot among the population- hide behind children and enjoy cruelty.”

Let’s for a moment forget about the second half of this story, since it might, arguably, be somewhat subjective — or at least we don’t know, in principle, how accurately depicts the average behaviour and tactics of the Ukrainian nationalist brigades. But as to the main atrocious point, I deem it an indisputable fact; and the image of those thirty young prisoners, barbarously maimed by their captors, was so disgusting to me that, for some weeks, I tried -unsuccessfully- to expel it from my mind.

Later on, by sheer chance, on the internet I stumbled upon the stark remarks that Grennadiy Druzenko, manager of a war-zone mobile hospital in eastern Ukraine, had made to an interviewer of Ukraine-24 TV channel around the same date when the story I’ve just mentioned took place. In Druzenko’s own words, he had given his doctors “very strict orders to castrate all [captured Russian] men, because they are cockroaches, not people.” And though he, afterwards, tried to take his words back saying that his hospital “saves lives, period”, the connection between my friend’s story and Druzenko’s statement was straightforward, and the inference unavoidable: facts talk by themselves, evidencing that such practice has been carried out and strongly suggesting that the castration of Russian soldiers is, indeed, not wholly unusual among Ukrainian nationalists. This brutality not only constitutes a blatant war crime, but also says volumes about the racial cleansing inherent to their ‘ideology’. Castrated individuals, you see, cannot procreate.

(Comments below are subjet to moderation. Please make sure yours belongs to the topic.)