What is now emerging into full view is the development of bio weapons in Ukraine by the Americans. This program has been in existence for a number of years, organised by the leadership of the Democratic Party who in turn benefited from company donations from the principal organisers of the program. These companies include Pfizer, Moderna, Merch and Gilead, all of whom have close connections with the Pentagon and all of whom are substantial donors to the Democratic Party.
What the Americans have been doing is testing new drugs in the Ukraine, all of this action being not only in secret, but also in violation of international safety standards. Evidence in support of these allegations has recently been presented by Igor Kirillov in his role as the chief of the Russian Radiation, Chemical and Biological Protection Force. The evidence presented by Kirillov demonstrates that using Ukraine not only provides opportunities for secrecy, but is also of lower cost and therefore provides further competitive advantages.
According to the evidence presented by Kirillov (New Eastern Outlook, 14 May 2022) the United States pharmaceutical companies worked together with the Pentagon “concealing illegal activities, conducting field and clinical trials, and providing the necessary biomaterial”
The purpose of the research was not only in providing military usage for the two technical activities, but also to conduct clinical trials on the use of the bio material. The research, according to Kirillov, gathered information on antibiotic resistance to certain diseases in different regions of the Ukraine, and also enabled the research to be carried out outside the control of the international community which has long-opposed research in this area.
What is also becoming clearer is that the ongoing United States bio weapons program being conducted in Ukraine was one of the principal reasons for the launch of the Russian offensive in February this year against Ukrainian forces gathered in the Donbass. It is clear that the Ukrainian forces were about to launch massive attacks on the Donbass, notwithstanding the protestations to the contrary of Ukraine’s president.
The lies and deceptions of the Ukrainians is a principal reason why the Russians have refused to engage in further talks with them. The parties had reached a level of agreement in the talks that were held in Istanbul earlier this year. Ukrainian agreement lasted only until the president returned to the Ukraine. He had obviously come under pressure from the Americans who are not interested in a peace deal. This was made very clear in statements by the United States defence secretary who expressed his wish to see the Russians broken.
The Americans also made it clear that regime change was a high priority for them, although it is difficult to see the logic of this. If Mr Putin is removed as Russia’s leader there is every likelihood that his successor would be even less tolerant of United States behaviour in the region. The Russians are acutely aware of what happened in the 1990s and have no desire to see any repeat of that period.
The Russians for their part, separate from the offensive launched in the Donbass, have demanded a meeting of the United Nations Security Council to present further evidence of the use of United States bio labs in Ukraine. This evidence will be presented by the Russians irrespective of any United States or British attempts to thwart it.
The Russian unmasking of the United States bio weapons research in Ukraine is unlikely to deter the Americans. This is obvious from the United States orchestrated anti-Russia moves that were introduced following the February 2022 involvement in the war by Russia. The orchestration of the Europeans in the anti-Russia stance just became harder with the Ukraine blocking the transit of Russian gas through Ukraine to Germany. This may prove to be a massive error of judgement by the Ukrainians. Europe is unable to survive without Russian gas which provides 40% of their needs, including both domestic heating and the running of their factories.
There is little doubt that the Ukrainian move was at the instigation of the Americans. It is difficult to understand the logic of the move. The reduction of Ukrainian gas will have dire effects upon the Europeans who are unlikely to appreciate the United States moves that are obviously to their detriment. The Europeans lack a viable alternative to Russian energy supplies and will be forced to negotiate with the Russians, notwithstanding the appallingly self-destructive proposals by the European Commission, led by the fanatically anti-Russian Ursula van der Leyen.
Ironically, one of the consequences of the Ukrainian move may be further negotiations on the opening of Nord Stream 2, currently in a frozen state thanks to German intransigence. It may be too late. The Russians are obviously tired of European gamesmanship and are making major moves to send the gas Eastwood to the welcoming arms among others of China and India.
It is a classic case of European nations shooting themselves in the foot. Their refineries are designed to treat Russian gas. Even if there were alternative sources of supply, which there are not, their ability to process those supplies are severely limited. The Europeans have only themselves to blame. The reality is finally penetrating the brains of some European national leaders and an increasing number are refusing to abide by the dictates of Brussels.
The war in Ukraine is also not going well for the Ukrainians, notwithstanding the desperate attempts by the Western media to portray tactical Russian retreats as a “defeat”. Russia’s exposure of the United States – Ukraine attempts to introduce bio weapons is also proving a major tactical error. The Europeans are well aware that their proximity equally puts them at grave risk of being contaminated.
The United States attempt to introduce bio weapons to the Donbass is a saga that still has some way to play. It may well prove to be their greatest mistake.
James O’Neill, an Australian-based former Barrister at Law, exclusively for the online magazine “New Eastern Outlook”.
