WORLD, FEATURED STORY

Incredibly, Britain is currently in the process of exiting the EU, and yet it is actively bequeathing a legacy of even worse relations between Europe and Russia as it departs the bloc.

Events in Syria increasingly resemble a direct confrontation between major powers rather than a proxy war. Lavrov’s words, delivered a few days ago, reveal the critical phase of international relations the world is going through, with a potentially devastating conflict ready to ignite in the Middle East region.

In all of the recent ‘chem tales’ being hurled at Russia, the agenda is crystal clear: the sidelining of Russia from the geopolitical stage, something which Vladimir Putin, as he emphasized at his recent presidential address, will never allow to happen.

The return to Cold War politics in Britain is not just marked by knee-jerk hostility towards Russia – based on Russophobia and irrational innuendo – it is also characterized by the British establishment shutting down any dissent by smearing critics as “enemies within”.

The firing of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and his replacement by Mike Pompeo surprised no one in Washington as rumors to that effect have been circulating for more than six months. He is known for his hawkish positions on Iran and other issues, but perhaps more disturbing is Trump’s designation of Agency Deputy Director Gina Haspel as the new Director of the CIA to replace Pompeo.

The British press and its political puppets are determined to convince the British public that there is a massive threat from Russia. The affair of the spy Skripal has provided much ammunition, and the newspapers have been effective in increasing the level of anti-Russian sentiment and increasing international tension.

Last week, Rex Tillerson’s tour of Africa gave practical expression to what this “great power competition” looks like in the modern era. The top US diplomat seemed more interested engaging in schadenfreude and shadowing with regard to China and Russia, rather than in supposed “partnership” with African states.

The second article in a series by Federico Pieraccini explains why nuclear-armed powers decrease the likelihood of a nuclear apocalypse, as counterintuitive as it seems.