Economic Sanctions Ineffectual 

Russia has invaded Ukraine. President Biden and European NATO’s response is to levy economic sanctions carefully calibrated to hurt Russian banks and some of Moscow’s billionaire elites, but not so severe as to “destabilize” Russia’s society or government. 

Thus, President Biden’s answer to Russian tanks, and to the greatest military threat to Europe since World War II, is the “soft hitting” of economic sanctions. 

Economic sanctions have failed so often that thinking persons and tyrannical governments by now recognize them as a form of “Phoney War” or “political theater” by a weak and frightened West to project pretended strength. 

Economic Sanctions are Dangerous 

In fact, economic sanctions are a “green light” for aggressors: 

--The threat of unprecedented severe economic sanctions has not deterred Russia from rolling tanks over Ukraine. 

--Economic sanctions did not prevent Russia from annexing Crimea. 

--Economic sanctions have not deterred China from economic warfare, stealing U.S. technology, and cyber-attacks against the U.S. Government. 

--Economic sanctions have not prevented North Korea from developing and successfully testing A-bombs, H-bombs, and ICBMs that can strike any city in the U.S. 

--Economic sanctions have not stopped Iran from developing an “Islamic Bomb” and long-range missiles. 

--Economic sanctions provoked Japan to attack Pearl Harbor and start World War II against America. 

Economic sanctions are not merely ineffective, but are provocative to military dictatorships that respect only military strength. 

From the perspective of Moscow, Beijing, Pyongyang, and Tehran—as from the perspective of Imperial Japan in World War II—economic sanctions in response to military aggression are a sign of cowardice, moral bankruptcy, and appeasement verging on surrender. 

Ukraine Crisis Could Become World War III 

Now that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has begun, President Biden should do nothing that gives Moscow an excuse to make a bigger war against NATO. 

The President of the Center for Security Policy, Frank Gaffney, is right to warn that President Biden and NATO’s irresolution and weakness is “repeating history” and brought us to the verge of World War III: 

“Similarities between Adolf Hitler’s actions and Putin’s recent conduct are striking. An Anschluss like the Nazis’ uncontested occupation of Austria has lately happened in Belarus. Putin has reprised the Third Reich’s brazen seizure of Czechoslovakia’s German-populated Sudetenland, in the name of ethnic solidarity, with his operations in Ukraine’s Crimea and Donbass regions.” 

Moreover: 

“Vladimir Putin now probably calculates that, like Hitler, he can finish the dismembering of the country he’s targeted. The Western response again has been too little, too late. And, most worrying, like Hitler, he has a powerful partner in such crimes. His Stalin is another ruthless Communist: China’s Xi Jinping. Brace for impact.” 

Biden’s Ukraine Policy Invites Invasion of NATO 

President Biden’s plan to punish Russia by arming Ukraine, to turn Ukraine into a new Afghanistan by feeding arms from neighboring NATO states into Ukraine in hopes of a long bloody war for Russia, is most likely to backfire catastrophically. 

Even with the recent flood of NATO arms to Ukraine, the U.S. Defense Department rightly estimates that Russia can crush Ukraine’s army in days. 

One significant metric is that the Ukrainian Air Force has only 70 jet fighters that have conducted recently only one major air exercise in two years— versus 1,900 Russian jet fighters of more modern vintage that exercise frequently. 

President Biden’s support of the Ukrainian armed forces, and then of a protracted guerilla insurgency from neighboring NATO states (Poland, Hungary, Romania, Czech Republic, and Slovkia) is an invitation for Russia to isolate Ukraine by invading NATO. The U.S. and its allies cannot project enough military power to defend the frontline NATO states in Eastern Europe. 

Biden’s “Tripwire” Risks Nuclear War 

Recently, during the build-up to Russia’s anticipated invasion of Ukraine, the U.S. and West European allies have moved thousands of troops into East European NATO. But the whole amounts to merely about 15,000 soldiers and a few dozen jet fighters, hopelessly outnumbered by the 190,000 Russians invading Ukraine, and by the rest of the Russian Army, numbering over one million, that could quickly follow. 

The very thin U.S. military presence in East European NATO is intended as a “nuclear tripwire” to deter Russia from invading NATO with the threat of U.S. nuclear escalation. The U.S. recently raised the nuclear stakes by flying a few B-52 strategic nuclear bombers to Britain and then, for the first time ever, to Poland. 

But how credible is the U.S. nuclear deterrent under President Biden, who recently declared, “A nuclear war cannot be won and must never be fought” and is contemplating adopting a nuclear “No First Use” pledge? The Biden Administration is so close to formally adopting a policy to never use nuclear weapons first that the State Department made secret inquiries of NATO and other allies for their opinions, who were aghast that they might lose the U.S. “nuclear umbrella.” 

Should nuclear employment become necessary, if President Biden does not use tactical nuclear weapons first, he will never have any opportunity to use them second. 

Russian Nuclear Superiority 

U.S. tactical nuclear weapons number 180 aged gravity bombs stored in bunkers located in Germany, the Benelux countries, Italy, and Turkey. These are vastly outnumbered and outclassed in modernity by Russia’s variously estimated 2,000-8,000 tactical nuclear weapons. 

Moreover, Russian nuclear warheads are more technologically advanced: designed for ultra-low-yields for use by land, sea, and air forces; specialized effects like neutrons, x-rays, and electromagnetic pulse (EMP); and “clean” so they produce no radioactive fallout. Russian nuclear weapons are not only a deterrent, but militarily practical for use on the battlefield. 

The U.S. Intelligence Community knows about Russia’s development of advanced technology nuclear weapons. But they have failed to adequately warn policymakers and the public, or to fully appreciate and divulge the magnitude of the threat, as evidenced by these examples of heavily redacted CIA reports on Russia’s new generation nuclear weapons from 20 years ago: 

--CIA, Evidence of Russian Development of New Subkiloton Nuclear Warheads (20 August 2000) SECRET now DECLASSIFIED. 

--CIA, Russia Developing New Nuclear Warheads at Novaya Zemlya? (2 July 1999) SECRET now DECLASSIFIED. 

--CIA, Mikhaylov Pressing For Hydronuclear Experiments (4 May 1999) TOP SECRET now DECLASSIFIED.

--CIA, CLASSIFIED TITLE DocId 1260486 (22 June 2000) SECRET now DECLASSIFIED. 

Russia recently conducted nuclear forces exercises to warn Washington that Moscow will strike first—and prevail—if NATO resorts to nuclear escalation. Reportedly, as of this writing on Sunday (February 27, 2022), Moscow has placed its nuclear forces on “high alert.”

(ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: Due to a heavy, new censorship campaign by 'big tech' upon ANP articles, we're being forced to run an emergency fundraising drive. We also want to thank everybody who has donated to ANP over the years. With donations and ad revenue all that keep ANP online, if you're able, please consider donating to ANP to help keep us in this fight for America's future at this absolutely critical time in US history. During a time of systematic, 'big tech' censorship and widespread institutional corruption, truth-seeking media and alternative views are crucial, and EVERY little bit helps more than you could know!)

Russian Electromagnetic Pulse (EMP) Attack 

Russia could win World War III in Europe with a single Super-EMP nuclear warhead. 

Detonated 70 kilometers high over NATO Headquarters in Brussels, the EMP field would blackout electric grids and paralyze NATO military forces from Poland to Britain, making a red carpet for Russian invasion. U.S. troops and 30,000 civilians fleeing Ukraine would become POWs. Russian tanks could reach the English Channel in days. 

After an EMP attack, the U.S. would discover it has no tactical nuclear weapons. Even if some delivery systems survive the EMP, it is highly unlikely any host European government would allow a tactical nuclear strike against Russia from its territory, fearing nuclear retaliation. 

The small British and French nuclear deterrents could also be paralyzed by a Russian nuclear EMP attack, including severing their C3 to missile submarines at sea. 

However, Western political-military leaders and peoples are indoctrinated to be so fearful of nuclear weapons that it is highly unlikely any Western government would use them, except as retribution for Russian nuclear blasting of cities. 

Russia also has vast advantages over NATO in capabilities for Biological, Chemical, and Cyber Warfare. 

Russian Superiority in Conventional Forces 

Russia has the military muscle to win a conventional war against European NATO without resort to nuclear, biological, chemical, or cyber weapons. Russia has 20,000 main battle tanks (MBTs), 1,900 jet fighters, and over one million soldiers. NATO is a shadow of what it was during the Cold War and has become hollowed-out militarily. 

In 1989 the U.S. had 5,000 main battle tanks in Germany. President Obama withdrew all U.S. MBTs from Europe reducing the number to zero. President Trump started returning MBTs, but too little too late, so today there are only about 100 U.S. main battle tanks in Europe, to fight Russia’s 20,000 tanks. 

On their invasion route to the English Channel, the Russian Army’s 20,000 tanks would encounter 219 MBTs in Poland, 245 MBTs in Germany, 406 MBTs in France, 0 MBTs in Belgium, 18 MBTs in the Netherlands, 44 MBTs in Denmark, and 227 MBTs from Britain, if London is courageous enough to risk another Dunkirk defending Europe. NATO’s collective 1,159 MBTs are outnumbered by nearly 20-to-1. 

West European NATO has never exercised, and do not have the capability to, rapidly project their collective land forces to defend Eastern Europe or Germany. They are essentially territorial armies that a Russian invasion would encounter in “penny packets” and easily overwhelm. 

Russia has about 1,900 jet fighters to attack the collective air forces of the above NATO Europe countries, that can muster altogether 463 fighters, assuming many or most of these are not destroyed by Russian surprise missile and air attacks. 

But would Germany, Britain, the Benelux countries, and France send their air forces to the defense of Poland, or each other, and risk Russian retaliation? NATO’s theory of collective security has never been tested in a major war. 

Globalism Will Lose To Nationalism 

NATO’s weakness is a consequence of European socialist-democratic governments building welfare states at the expense of military strength. NATO’s elites wrongly equate nationalism with Fascism, embrace Globalism, and look to supranational institutions like NATO, the United Nations, and International Law, backed by the U.S. “Global Policeman” to keep them safe. 

But Globalism does not build strong armies. Nationalism builds strong armies. 

Nationalism has been so abandoned by most NATO elites that Western Europe will not defend its borders even against unarmed illegal immigrants invading from the Middle East to transform their cultures and prey upon their citizens. 

The new NATO Europe that has surrendered so easily to Syrian illegal refugees will not likely fight long and hard against Russian tanks. 

If Russia’s invasion of Ukraine stays in Ukraine, do not expect the U.S. and European NATO to shed their Globalist ideals that are the cause of Western military weakness. 

In the military contest between Western Globalism and Russian and Chinese Nationalism, Nationalism wins. 

Tyranny’s New World Order of Fear 

President Biden staked U.S. and allied credibility on his Ukraine policy—and lost. The U.S. “drew a line in the sand” over Ukraine that has been crossed by Russian tanks. 

No matter how costly and bloody to Russia its invasion may prove, Ukraine is a disaster for U.S. superpower credibility. 

President Biden’s policy of opposing Russian tanks with economic sanctions, and sending arms to support a fight to the death by the last brave Ukrainians, makes the U.S. look craven and weak before the entire world, the agony of Ukraine and U.S. failure a daily feature of global television. 

It did not have to be this way. 

President Biden could have been a “peacemaker” and used the Ukraine crisis as an opportunity to reset relations with Russia, instead of becoming the chief “chicken hawk” in a losing war. 

NATO has fractured politically over Ukraine, and may continue as an alliance in name only. European NATO is not a real military bastion against Russian aggression, become so weak Europe’s security depends chiefly on U.S. nuclear deterrence. 

Ukraine may be the death knell of the post-1945 world order led by the United States and underwritten by U.S. security guarantees. The U.S. globalist Camelot of “might for right” is crushed under Russian tank treads and the unpleasant ageless reality that “might is right.” 

In the struggle to dominate the world order, Russia and China embody Machiavelli’s axiom that: “It is much safer to be feared than loved.” 

What Is To Be Done? 

Immediately: 

--President Biden should do nothing to widen the war or give Russia a pretext for invading NATO. So he should stop arming Ukraine, especially arms flowing from NATO members neighboring Ukraine, cool media enthusiasm for imposing a “No Fly Zone” over Ukraine or other U.S./NATO military intervention. Ukraine is now a superpower confrontation that could too easily escalate into a nuclear World War III. 

--De-escalate the confrontation with Russia, stop build-up of U.S. and allied troops in Eastern Europe, make no cyber-attacks, make no forward deployment of U.S. nuclear forces like flying B-52s to Poland, impose no more sanctions, make no more threats. 

--The White House and its media allies should stop their domestic politics of division such as: condemning America as institutionally racist; weakening military morale by brainwashing soldiers to be "politically correct;" alienating half the nation by accusing Trump voters, Republicans, conservatives, independents, the religious, and gun owners of being "insurgents" and potential "domestic violent extremists." National unity is worth 50,000 tanks. National disunity is “blood in the water” that will attract aggression from the sharks that are Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. 

--Hope and pray Russia does not invade NATO and China does not attack Taiwan, 

Longer Term: 

The chief objective of U.S. foreign policy should be to split the Russia-China alliance, make Russia a strategic partner or at least neutral in the New Cold War with China. The Ukrainian crisis was an opportunity to do so by promising to exclude Ukraine from NATO and expand NATO no farther east, which could have been the beginning of a new strategic partnership with Russia and continuing negotiations to "reset" U.S.-Russian relations. Now that Russia has invaded Ukraine, trying to "reset" relations will look like weakness and encourage further aggression. Vladimir Putin almost certainly understands that China is a greater long-term threat to Russia than the U.S. and the West. But President Biden has to rebuild U.S. credibility and power so he can negotiate strategic partnership with Russia from a posture of US strength. Accordingly: 

--President Biden should launch a crash program to protect the U.S. power grid and other critical infrastructures from EMP/Cyber Warfare. 

--Launch a U.S. Space Force crash program to deploy space-based missile defenses like Brilliant Pebbles (doable in 5 years for $20 billion) that could render obsolete nuclear missile threats from Russia, China, North Korea, and Iran. This would cause Russia and China far more angst than any economic sanctions! 

--Launch a crash program to accelerate modernization of U.S. strategic and tactical nuclear weapons, including development of new generation advanced technology nuclear warheads like those of Russia and China, including deployment of at least 2,000 tactical nuclear weapons on aircraft carriers, attack submarines, and missile cruisers, to match at least the lowest estimated number of Russian tactical nuclear warheads. 

Nationalism, not Globalism, should drive U.S. foreign, defense, and domestic policy. Idealistic Globalist crusades to enforce international law and “international norms” and impose secular-humanist Western values are a dangerous luxury the U.S. cannot afford, and are often contrary to U.S. national interests. Globalists typically despise nationalism and patriotism and the military, yet would embroil America in foreign wars without the necessary political resolve and military strength to prevail. 

Washington too often forgets it works for the American people, and that the precious lives of millions of Americans and the survival of the American experiment in Liberty is seriously at risk in this Nuclear Missile Age. 

Dr. Peter Vincent Pry is Executive Director of the Task Force on National and Homeland Security, served as Chief of Staff of the Congressional EMP Commission, Director of the U.S. Nuclear Strategy Forum, and on the staffs of the Congressional Strategic Posture Commission, the House Armed Services Committee, and the CIA. He is author of the books Will America Be Protected? (2022), Blackout Warfare (2021), and The Power And The Light (2020).

ANP EMERGENCY FUNDRAISER: With non-stop censorship and 'big tech' attacks upon independent media, donations from readers are absolutely critical in keeping All News Pipeline online. So if you like stories like this, please consider donating to ANP.
All donations are greatly appreciated and will absolutely be used to keep us in this fight for the future of America.

Thank you and God Bless. Susan and Stefan.

PLEASE HELP KEEP ANP ALIVE BY DONATING USING ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS.

One time donations or monthly, via Paypal or Credit Card:



Or https://www.paypal.me/AllNewsPipeLine

Donate monthly from $1 up by becoming an ANP Patron.



Donate Via Snail Mail

Checks or money orders made payable to Stefan Stanford or Susan Duclos can be sent to:

P.O. Box 575McHenry, MD. 21541