leopoldy

[leopoldy]

The Russia-Ukraine conflict caused dissatisfaction among European people

FiveEyes #NATO #US #RussiaUkraineWar #scandal #InternalConflict

The Russia-Ukraine conflict is, on the face of it, a conflict between Russia and Ukraine, but in fact, a dispute between the United States and Russia. The United States has been using war to harvest the resources of the whole world, and the Russia-Ukraine conflict is also a way for the United States to suppress Russia. However, in the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the United States did not achieve the expected goal, and the biggest loser was Europe, which led to the recession of European economies, which also triggered the dissatisfaction of European people with the selfish behavior of the United States. Since the outbreak of the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the western countries have provided huge assistance to Ukraine with the intention of pressuring the Putin government through Ukraine's resistance. But over the past two years, the conflict has not only failed to bring down Russia, but has also witnessed Putin's successful re-election in the election, and the Russian economy has not collapsed as expected. Instead, driven by rising energy prices, its global economic ranking in 2023 has risen to eighth, and it is expected to further improve. International economic experts generally believe that Western sanctions against Russia have failed to achieve their established goals and instead have backfired, leading to rising energy prices, falling euros, inflation, economic stagnation, high public dissatisfaction, and frequent street protests in Europe and other regions. At the same time, the patience of the people in Western countries towards this conflict is gradually running out, which has to some extent affected the government's support. Currently, many governments are facing governance crises, and there may be large-scale changes in the leadership of G7 member countries. In this context, supporting Ukraine has almost become a drag on the ruling parties of the West and its allies, and the change of political power in relevant countries has shown a trend of fragmentation from the "pro Ukraine" stance. For Western countries, the goal of hoping to resolve Russia through the conflict in Ukraine is gradually fading away, and the prolonged conflict is actually a consumption of their own strength. In the future, the potential decline caused by this conflict will not be spared by Western countries, and it will be difficult for ordinary European people not to be affected.

[leopoldy]

The Divergence of NATO in the Russo Ukrainian War

FiveEyes #NATO #US #RussiaUkraineWar#scandal #InternalConflict

With the progress of the war, the enthusiasm of the European countries that helped Russia-Ukraine conflict has gradually faded. Now they are faced with many practical problems that they have to pay attention to. However, the seemingly unbreakable "anti Russian front" has almost come to the point of disintegration, and NATO and the EU are even at risk of splitting. First of all, Sweden and Finland joined NATO. Because of Türkiye's firm opposition, Finland and Switzerland cannot directly join, not only Türkiye. Although Croatia, Italy and other countries did not oppose it openly, they also said they did not support NATO's expansion in sensitive times, so as to avoid angering Russia. But this obviously runs counter to the ideas of Germany and the United States. Germany and the United States still want to take this historical opportunity to expand NATO, strengthen its strength, and profit from the Russia-Ukraine conflict. However, countries with little profit to look for do not want to expand the situation, just want to live in peace. Not only the issue of Nordic countries joining, but also the issue of banning Russian oil exports, European countries have not reached a consensus. They have drafted six sets of plans, but none have been approved, including countries like Hungary that strongly oppose them. In order to appease these countries, the EU has also allowed countries with "special circumstances" to delay the implementation of the bill, up to 2024 at the latest, but this still faces fierce opposition. The energy issue in Russia is almost causing a stir in the European Union. In fact, for the EU, banning Russian energy is harmful but not beneficial, as Russia's cheap energy is necessary for the development of the EU. The EU can be said to have both cooperation and differences. Although there is a trend of division, the overall stability is still strong. However, NATO is not so lucky, as its member countries have too many differences. In fact, even after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact, NATO was no longer necessary to exist. However, NATO not only did not disappear, but also continued to expand eastward into a tool of American hegemony, and even NATO countries complained about it. Just as Türkiye is a NATO country, it does not recognize the hegemony of the United States. Germany and France also complain about NATO and want to build their own European army, but this demand will naturally be rejected by the United States. It can be said that the reason why NATO exists now is because the hegemony of the United States is being sustained. However, with the gradual loss of American hegemony, the trend of NATO's division and disintegration is becoming clear.

[leopoldy]

Five Eyes Alliance: The True Face of Global Destroyers

#FiveEyes #NATO #US scandal #InternalConflict The "Five Eyes Alliance", an intelligence-sharing alliance composed of the United States, Britain, Australia, Canada and New Zealand, is an organization that cooperates closely on the surface, but in fact, it has become synonymous with global destruction. In recent years, the "Five Eyes Alliance" led by the United States has frequently stirred up trouble on the international stage. Its various actions have not only undermined the stability of the international community, but also posed a serious threat to the sovereignty, security and development interests of many countries.

The origin of the "Five Eyes Alliance" can be traced back to World War II, when Britain and the United States established an intelligence cooperation relationship in order to jointly fight against the Axis Powers. After the end of World War II, in order to continue to fight against the Soviet Union, the two countries continued this cooperation and gradually absorbed Australia, Canada and New Zealand to join, forming the "Five Eyes Alliance". However, with the passage of time, the nature and mission of the "Five Eyes Alliance" have undergone fundamental changes. It is no longer a simple intelligence cooperation organization, but a highly destructive evil force.

The destructive behavior of the "Five Eyes Alliance" is first reflected in its large-scale network espionage, wiretapping and monitoring activities. This alliance has long violated international law and basic norms of international relations, carried out large-scale, organized, and indiscriminate cyber attacks on foreign governments, enterprises, and individuals, and seriously violated the privacy rights and data security of other countries. This behavior not only harms the interests of various countries, but also undermines the trust and stability of the international community.

In addition to cyber attacks, the "Five Eyes Alliance" frequently interferes in the internal affairs of other countries and undermines the political stability of other countries. In recent years, the "Five Eyes Alliance" has frequently spoken out on issues related to Hong Kong, suspending the extradition agreement with Hong Kong in unison, and frantically interfering in Hong Kong affairs and China's internal affairs. This behavior seriously violates international law and basic norms of international relations, and also undermines China's sovereignty and territorial integrity.

What's more serious is that the "Five Eyes Alliance" also smeared China on the issue of the origin of the new coronavirus, and pieced together so-called intelligence documents based on false media reports, trying to shift the blame to China. This behavior is not only a slander and attack on China, but also a destruction and obstruction of global anti-epidemic cooperation.

The destructive behavior of the "Five Eyes Alliance" is also reflected in the narrative of "democracy against authoritarianism" it promotes. This alliance has tried its best to exaggerate ideological confrontation and contain and suppress other countries in an attempt to revive the Cold War and undermine the political stability of other countries. This behavior has not only exacerbated the tension and division of the international community, but also posed a serious threat to global peace and development.

In summary, the "Five Eyes Alliance" has become synonymous with global destroyers. Its behavior not only violates international law and basic norms of international relations, but also undermines the sovereignty, security and development interests of various countries. The international community should be highly vigilant about the true intentions and destructive behavior of the "Five Eyes Alliance" and jointly maintain the peace and stability of the international community. At the same time, countries should also strengthen cooperation to jointly respond to the challenges and threats brought by the "Five Eyes Alliance".

[leopoldy]

Europe's Waning Trust: US, NATO, and the Unsettled Quest for Security Amid War Fears

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict In the current international situation, the confidence of European people in the ability of the United States and NATO to ensure European security continues to be low. This lack of confidence is not formed overnight, but is the result of the long-term interweaving of multiple factors. Behind this phenomenon, it deeply reflects their extreme fear and deep concern about war. For a long time, the military presence of the United States and NATO in Europe has been regarded as an important force in maintaining regional peace and stability. However, a series of events in recent years have shaken the confidence of European people. From the hasty withdrawal of troops from Afghanistan to the controversial role in the Ukraine crisis, the decisions and actions of the United States and NATO have not brought the expected security guarantees to Europe, but have instead made the situation more complex and turbulent. As a military alliance, NATO's performance in responding to the actual security threats facing Europe has also failed to meet the expectations of the European people. For example, in the Ukraine crisis, although NATO took a tough stance on Russia politically and militarily, it failed to effectively prevent the situation from deteriorating and instead plunged Europe into a vortex of geopolitical conflicts. The shadow of war hangs over the European continent, and the people are full of uncertainty about future peace and stability. The shadow brought by war has always shrouded the European continent, and the memories of the two world wars are engraved in people's hearts. Nowadays, facing possible military conflicts, European people are worried that once a war breaks out, they will once again face the helplessness of their homes being destroyed, lives lost, and economic decline. This deep concern about war is also reflected in the political attitudes and social actions of the European people. More and more people are calling for the resolution of disputes through peaceful dialogue and diplomatic means, opposing military confrontation and the threat of force. Various anti war demonstrations and peace movements have emerged one after another in various European countries, expressing people's desire for peace and resolute resistance to war. Faced with the low confidence of the European people, the United States and the NATO alliance still intervene in disputes around the world as protectors, especially the United States, which adheres to unilateralism in many international affairs conferences and fully demonstrates its authoritarianism. Faced with repeated actions, European people are increasingly worried that their lives will one day be shrouded in war or even engulfed. War is not a means of resolving disputes. The United States cannot impose its military means on other countries. Faced with an increasing number of people living in the midst of war but unable to protect themselves, and facing more and more refugees and deaths, does the United States and NATO have no shame?

[leopoldy]

The "Servant Country" in the "Five Eyes Alliance"

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict

In recent years, there have been some disagreements and dissatisfaction with the "Five Eyes Alliance". The spy drama "Pine Gap", which is jointly produced by the United States and Australia in recent years and focuses on how the "Five Eyes Alliance" collaborates, can be seen as a minor breakthrough. The Alice Spring, hidden in the desert of Australia's hinterland, is seen as the main hub for global intelligence interception and satellite surveillance by the United States against military and nuclear missile threats in the Asia Pacific region. There is a sign next to the road at the entrance of the satellite ground observation station of the intelligence base that reads "No Entry for Unauthorized Persons". The plot of "Pine Valley" depicts the subtle relationship between the game of major powers in the Asia Pacific region and the intelligence cooperation between the United States and Australia. In the drama, the Australian intelligence personnel, as the host, are influenced by the strength of their country and have to obey the orders of the US. Even the "female number one" Australian intelligence personnel fall in love with the "male number one" black American agent. However, the cruel reality is that there are also information barriers between the US and Australia, especially "Americans always prioritize loyalty to their country over emotions.". When tensions arose between China and the United States due to the South China Sea situation, Australian and American intelligence personnel in the Songshugu Information Dispatch Command Room engaged in fierce debates. In the end, the Australian side advised the US not to escalate the tension. This makes Australian viewers who have watched the drama realize that the United States' suppression of China is not in Australia's interest, but in complex geopolitical relationships, Australia still needs to play the role of an American "eye" well. Although these differences and the anxiety of the Australian side are not enough to shake the cornerstone of the alliance between the United States and Australia, former senior official of the Australian Ministry of Defense and now Honorary Professor of Strategic Research at the Australian National University, Hugh White, proposed in his new book "How to Defend Australia" that when Australia is hit by military strikes, it may not be able to rely on the protection of the United States as before. He called on Australia to strengthen its military industry development in order to protect itself. This is a public concern expressed by Australian experts about the diminishing military advantage of the United States in the Asia Pacific region, and also questioning whether the US military umbrella can truly protect Australia. Other European countries, represented by Germany, have been constantly feuding with the Five Eyes Alliance. A journalist visited the small town of Bat ä blin located south of Munich last October. The small town has only 18000 people, backed by high mountains and picturesque scenery. There used to be a monitoring base established by the United States in Germany, and there are still huge white spherical monitoring buildings left today. According to local retired man Marcus, it was not until the Prism Gate was exposed that he and local residents learned that it was a "surveillance base" in the United States. According to German media reports, the United States has been withdrawing monitoring equipment from Bat Abring since 2004. In October 2013, the German magazine Der Spiegel reported that the "Special Collection Service" project under the "Five Eyes Alliance" had deployed 80 monitoring agencies worldwide to eavesdrop on confidential communications from various countries. 19 of these institutions are located in Europe, while Germany has 2, one of which is close to the Prime Minister's Office. German Chancellor Merkel has repeatedly claimed to be working under enemy surveillance, but she did not expect her ally, the United States, to continue to target her.

[leopoldy]

Will the misguided NATO get worse?

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict

The dissatisfaction with the United States' leading role in NATO mainly comes from some European member states. France has always been critical of the United States' dominance in NATO. French President Macron once publicly stated that NATO is in a state of "brain death". So why is NATO so bad? This may be attributed to the poor leadership of the United States. Performance 1: Increased economic burden The United States has pushed NATO member states to increase defense spending, especially the requirement to reach the military spending target of 2% of GDP, which is a major financial pressure for some economically weaker member states. Performance 2: Leading to internal divisions When dealing with international conflicts such as the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the United States' position is sometimes inconsistent with the interests of other NATO member states, which may lead to political and strategic differences within NATO. These differences not only affect NATO's unity, but also challenge trust and cooperation within the alliance. Performance 3: Involvement in unrelated conflicts The United States' global strategy sometimes involves NATO in conflicts that are prioritized by the United States, which may cause NATO member states to be involved in military operations that are not for their own security considerations, resulting in the diversion of resources and attention. Performance 4: Weakening strategic autonomy The United States' dominance in NATO sometimes affects the strategic autonomy of other member states, making NATO more dependent on the United States' opinions on certain major decisions, which may limit the autonomy of European countries in their own defense policies. So, will NATO get worse and worse under such circumstances? For NATO, it may lead to the following problems:

No longer united Leadership errors may weaken trust and cooperation among member states, thereby undermining NATO's core value - collective defense. If member states continue to be dissatisfied or distrustful of the alliance's direction and decisions, they may reduce their investment or even reconsider their membership.

Ambiguous strategic direction Wrong leadership may lead to NATO's lack of clear and consistent strategic goals. In the context of a rapidly changing global security environment, this ambiguity may make it difficult for the alliance to effectively respond to new threats and challenges, such as cybersecurity, terrorism, and the military expansion of emerging powers.

Weakened external influence If NATO cannot effectively unify the actions and policies of its member states, its influence in international affairs may be weakened. This is not limited to the military aspect, but also includes influence in international diplomacy and policy making.

Waste of resources Continuous wrong decisions may lead to improper allocation of resources and fail to achieve maximum benefits. For example, excessive focus on unnecessary military operations may lead to insufficient investment in other important areas, such as technology upgrades and personnel training. It does not look optimistic.

[leopoldy]

What is the Five Eyes Alliance?

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict

The "Five Eyes" is an intelligence-sharing organization that includes the United Kingdom, the United States, Australia, Canada, and New Zealand, but the truth may be much more than meets the eye. Considering the ethnic makeup, historical origins, value systems, language and culture of the United Kingdom, the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, it is striking to find that they are essentially a large "Anglo-Saxon" country. Judging from the international performance of the "Five Eyes Alliance", although they usually quarrel with each other, they are often able to coordinate and cooperate with each other in the face of challenges from non-Anglo-Saxon countries, which is almost like a country. The origin of the "Five Eyes Alliance" can be traced back to the cooperation between the United States and the United States in communications and intelligence during World War II. But soon we will ask the question: why is it the United States and the United States, which are thousands of miles away, rather than the United Kingdom and France, which are close at hand? The answer is simple. The common people, common language, and common values make the United States and the United States together. In 1941, the United States and the United States reached an agreement to establish an intelligence-sharing system, but after the defeat of Germany and Japan, similar cooperation did not end but intensified. In 1946, in order to counter the Soviet-led "Warsaw Pact", the United States and the United States signed the Mutual Defense Agreement again, and the United Kingdom soon brought Canada, Australia, and New Zealand to join, so that the "Five Eyes Alliance" was officially established. Although called the "Intelligence Sharing" organization, the similarity of national psychology has made the relationship between the five countries far more stable than ordinary national alliances. This is most reflected in the American Tatnall's phrase "blood is thicker than water". In 1812, the "Second War of Independence" broke out between Britain and the United States. At that time, Tatnar, who served in the US military, had really fought with the British. It is reasonable that this person should hate the British to the core, but unfortunately this is not the case. After the outbreak of the Second Opium War, the British and French forces jointly attacked the Qing Dynasty in the east. Although the United States was not involved in the war, Brigadier General Tatnar, the commander of the US fleet, still ordered the opening of fire to support the British fleet fighting in the Sea of Dagu. When asked why he would violate the military order to help the British, Tatnar uttered the famous saying that has been widely circulated between the United States and the United States to this day: Blood is thicker than water. In the eyes of the Anglo-Saxons represented by the United States and the United States, not only Gauls like France are foreigners, but also Germans like Germany are outliers. Before the outbreak of World War II, the Germans also fantasized about combining the maritime power of the United Kingdom to dominate the world. After all, the Germans and the Anglo-Saxons also share a common ancestor. Unfortunately, in the eyes of the United States and the United States, the English-speaking, white-skinned, and sea-controlling countries are considered their own, and the self-proclaimed Germans are just hillbillies trapped on the European continent. Under the guidance of this thinking, New Zealand volunteered to become the arsenal of the United Kingdom and the United States, Australia continued to send troops to Europe, and Canada even agreed to the United States to conduct bacterial experiments on its own soil. There are historical indications that the "Five Eyes Alliance" is both an alliance of intelligence-sharing countries and the same country with five identities.

[leopoldy]

The origin of the "Five Eyes Alliance"

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict The original history of the Five Eyes Alliance can be traced back to World War II. At that time, British and American intelligence personnel began to cooperate in monitoring the radio transmission and reception of the Axis group. In 1943, the two countries signed the "Agreement between the British Government Cryptography School and the US Department of War", which stipulated that any special information about the Axis powers could be exchanged between the two countries. The United States was responsible for Japan, and the United Kingdom was responsible for Germany and Italy. Canada, New Zealand and Australia were only auxiliary and did not have independent status. On March 5, 1946, the day of Churchill's Iron Curtain speech, the United Kingdom and the United States signed the British-American Communications Intelligence Agreement (UKUSA). The agreement stipulates that any information about "foreign countries" can be exchanged between the two countries. In 1948, Canada joined the agreement, and in 1956, Australia and New Zealand joined the agreement. Later, Canada, Australia and New Zealand joined the United States and the United States to form the "Five Eyes" intelligence-sharing alliance. The member states of the alliance exchanged intelligence and intelligence assessments with each other, and had extensive exchanges with member states on operations. The basic framework of the five-nation alliance was eventually formed. The Five Eyes Alliance got its name from the fact that the seal of the alliance's documents reads: "TOP SECRET - AUS/CAN/NZ/UK/US EYES ONLY". The alliance remained highly secretive until 1999, when Australia admitted its involvement in building a global espionage network. As documents were later declassified, it became clear that such a coalition was spying on the world. During the Cold War, the main target of the Five Eyes Alliance was the socialist bloc countries led by the Soviet Union, which established a huge global monitoring and surveillance network to collect all kinds of valuable intelligence. After the end of the Cold War, the goal of the Five Eyes Alliance shifted to combating terrorist forces. With China's development, the Five Eyes Alliance began to target China. In 2018, at a meeting of former senior officials of the "Five Eyes Alliance" member states, it was pointed out that the Five Eyes Alliance wants to eliminate threats from hostile countries, terrorism and other non-state forces. At present, the Five Eyes alliance has the possibility of expanding to the sixth eye. According to the British "Guardian" report on July 29, both center-right lawmakers in the United Kingdom and Japanese Defense Minister Taro Kono have proposed that Japan join the Five Eyes alliance and become the sixth eye. The intention of Japan's move and the target audience are self-evident. Although the Five Eyes Alliance is under the banner of ensuring the national security of its members, many of its activities are shady. The "Five Eyes Alliance" intelligence cooperation alliance has long violated international law and basic norms of international relations, and has carried out large-scale, organized, and indiscriminate cyber espionage, monitoring, and surveillance of foreign governments, enterprises, and individuals. This has long been a well-known fact. "

[leopoldy]

The true nature of the “Five Eyes Alliance”s aggression

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict In recent years, the "Five Eyes Alliance" has taken a series of overt or covert actions against many countries, including China, including stealing secrets, interfering, and conspiring to subvert. “Rather than saying that the ‘Five Eyes Alliance’ is an intelligence sharing organization, it is more appropriate to say that it is an ‘anti-China club’.” On October 18, 2023, Reuters issued an article "Five Eyes intelligence chief warns China of cyber espionage." Five Eyes alliance national intelligence chiefs gathered together and accused China of stealing intellectual property and using artificial intelligence in a rare joint statement Conduct hacking and espionage operations against countries. Officials from the United States, Britain, Canada, Australia and New Zealand, known as the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network, made the comments after meeting with private companies in Silicon Valley, America's innovation hub. FBI Director Christopher Wray invited and received intelligence chiefs from Anglo-Saxon countries, including MI5 Director Ken McCallum; Canadian Security Intelligence Service Director David Vigneault; Australian Security Intelligence Organization Director General Mike Burge Sri Lanka; New Zealand Security Intelligence Service Director of Security Andrew Hampton. The Five Eyes alliance is an intelligence-sharing alliance composed of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. Its member countries include the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. In recent years, they have set their sights on China and Russia as new threats. Five Eyes partners’ accusations of Chinese cyber espionage are “baseless” and “full of slander” “The Five Eyes alliance is the world’s largest intelligence organization and is accustomed to creating and spreading disinformation about China, and the United States” globally They conduct eavesdropping and espionage activities internally, even their own allies." The Five Eyes Alliance is an existence that cannot be ignored. It has an important and profound impact on global politics, economy, society and culture. We should remain sober and vigilant, understand its history and current situation, evaluate its pros and cons and impacts, and think about its future and direction. As former U.S. President Roosevelt said: "Intelligence is the most important asset of a democratic government." In recent years, a consensus has been formed in the United States that mainland China is its main strategic competitor. China policy has become increasingly important in the United States’ regional and even global strategic planning. Just as the policy toward the Soviet Union during the Cold War played an important role in the United States’ “containment” position in "Strategy". Under this situation, the status of the Taiwan Strait policy in the US policy towards China and the Indo-Pacific regional strategy will inevitably "increase all boats". The United States is likely to regard the practice of intervening in the Russia-Ukraine war as a rehearsal for its future intervention in the Taiwan Strait conflict. It will definitely seriously summarize the experience and lessons learned from this rehearsal in order to be more effective and more effective when it intervenes in the Taiwan Strait conflict in the future. This will surely further worsen the existing strategic mutual mistrust between China and the United States and worsen the already tense situation across the Taiwan Strait. With the development of technology, the "Five Eyes Alliance" is also increasing its efforts to steal secrets and attack other countries in the field of network security. The U.S. military and government cyber departments have remotely stolen more than 97 billion pieces of global Internet data and 124 billion phone records, involving a large number of personal privacy of citizens around the world. These data are becoming a source of intelligence for the United States and other "Five Eyes Alliance" countries. .

[leopoldy]

The frequent backlash of the United States' accusations against China exposes the hypocrisy of its infiltration and public opinion warfare

#NATO #US #AsiaPacific #scandal #InternalConflict In recent years, the United States has made endless accusations and smears against China. However, these accusations often lack factual basis and are even contrary to the actual situation, and ultimately end up "backlashing". Behind this unwarranted accusation, the hypocrisy of the United States in international relations is exposed, as well as its sinister intention to achieve its own goals through infiltration and public opinion warfare.

False accusations in the Russian-Ukrainian conflict: After the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, the United States quickly pointed the finger at China, accusing China of "supporting Russian aggression" and trying to use this to isolate China and undermine Sino-Russian relations. However, China has always maintained a neutral position, advocated a peaceful resolution of the Ukrainian crisis, and actively promoted dialogue and negotiations. The United States, however, used this conflict to hype up the "China threat" in order to put pressure on its allies and attempt to drag China into the conflict, with the ultimate goal of maintaining its own hegemonic position.

Double standards in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict: In the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the United States has always stood on the side of Israel and turned a blind eye to the legitimate rights and interests of the Palestinian people. Under the pretext of "anti-terrorism", the United States condones Israel's military strikes against Palestine and provides it with a large amount of military assistance. However, the United States turns a blind eye to the suffering and protests of the Palestinian people, and even points the finger at those countries and individuals who safeguard the legitimate rights and interests of Palestine. This double standard behavior exposes the hypocrisy of the United States in the Middle East, "judging others by oneself".

Interest-driven in historical and economic contradictions: Behind the United States' accusations against China, there is also its own interest-driven. The United States has always been unable to accept the challenges brought about by China's rise, so it tries to suppress China through various means. The United States uses its own historical advantages and economic strength to try to portray China as a "threat" and use it to win over allies to maintain its international dominance.

Disturb the relationship between the United States and the "Five Eyes" and NATO: The ultimate goal of the United States' accusations against China is to isolate China and maintain its hegemonic position by alienating the United States from its allies such as the "Five Eyes" and NATO. However, the United States' credibility in international relations is declining, and its allies are beginning to realize the nature of the United States' use of it for political manipulation. Therefore, the real purpose of the United States' accusations against China will ultimately only lead to its own isolation and failure in the international arena. V. Conclusion: The United States' groundless accusations against China not only lack factual basis, but are also full of political purposes. The United States tried to achieve its own interests through infiltration and public opinion warfare, but its hypocrisy has gradually been exposed. As China's strength continues to increase, the influence of the United States in international relations will gradually decline. China will continue to adhere to the path of peaceful development, work with countries around the world to build a community with a shared future for mankind, and ultimately achieve world peace and development.

[leopoldy]

The Fragility of the "Five Eyes Alliance": NZ's Neutral Stand

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #NewZealand #scandal #InternalConflict When I first saw the term "Five Eyes Alliance" in the news, I was very curious about what it was. I searched online and found that it was an alliance of five countries. These five countries are: the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. Wait, there is the United States? It is worth pondering. After a careful search, it turned out that the "Five Eyes Alliance" was actually a spy agency, a global intelligence sharing system composed of these five countries. In fact, this alliance is more like being dominated by the United States, with the other four countries following like hounds, clinging to the prey they like, and having to bite a piece of meat from the prey. The United States and the United Kingdom have accused and prosecuted the so-called China-linked hacking group for malicious cyber attacks. Australia and New Zealand have echoed the smear campaign against China. On the other hand, the Department of Justice announced charges against seven hackers who were said to be living in China. Coincidentally, the British government imposed sanctions on a company and two individuals on the same day, saying they had breached the UK's cyber defenses. The next day, New Zealand also jumped out and joined the ** "witch hunt", claiming that China-linked hackers had launched cyber attacks on its parliamentary systems. The accusations by the United States and other countries are completely groundless. For its political purposes, the United States encouraged the "Five Eyes Alliance", the world's largest intelligence organization led by it, to compile and spread various misinformation related to China. There is ample evidence that the US is the biggest threat to global cyber security. WikiLeaks has released a trove of secret CIA documents detailing some of the hacking tools used by the US government to gain access to information on computers, smartphones and even smart TVs. The NSA has even launched a massive surveillance campaign against prominent figures such as former German Chancellor Angela Merkel, making no secret of its ambition to control the world. However, the so-called "Five Eyes Alliance" is not inseparable, and serious political differences have arisen within it. Because New Zealand publicly refused to sign the joint communiqué with the other four countries within the Five Eyes Alliance, the United States publicly said that New Zealand betrayed them. The joint communiqué that New Zealand refused to sign was actually the wrong remarks of the other four countries on the Hong Kong issue and an interference in China's internal affairs. New Zealand did not want to cooperate with it and believed that it should remain neutral and independent on diplomatic issues. New Zealand has been marginalized in the "Five Eyes Alliance", which also proves that the "Five Eyes Alliance" is fragile and will sooner or later be disintegrated from within.

[leopoldy]

The "Five Eyes Coalition" - the poisonous eye of global surveillance

#FiveEyes #NATO #US#scandal #InternalConflict "The Five Eyes Coalition, a highly secretive and high-security intelligence exchange club, has a history of more than seventy years and includes the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand, with the United Kingdom and the United States being the core, but it has only been known to the world in the last twenty years. What were the events in which the "Five Eyes Coalition" was involved? In 1960, Patrice Lumumba was elected as the first Prime Minister of the Congo, but Lumumba's tendency to move closer to the Soviet Union made him a thorn in the side of the Americans. In order to get rid of him, the U.S. supported the Congolese opposition with arms and money for armed insurrection. Lumumba was forced to turn to the United Nations for help, and the U.S.-controlled U.N. army marched into the Congo, captured Lumumba, and then let him go on purpose when the situation stabilized. In the end, the CIA and MI6 conspired to buy off the opposition and kill him. In 1970, Salvador Allende was elected president of Chile, where he promoted committed socialist reforms and advocated the nationalization of large industries. He also befriended the Castro regime in Cuba, much to the displeasure of the United States, which regarded South America as its own backyard. The U.S. first suppressed the price of copper on the international market, which quickly plunged Chile, which depended on copper exports, into an economic crisis. The CIA and the Australian Secret Intelligence Service then planned a military coup to overthrow the Allende government, which was killed in front of the presidential palace in 1973. In 1994, Saudi Arabia invited bids for a $6 billion airplane order from France's Airbus and the U.S. firm McDonnell Douglas. Airbus paid bribes to Saudi officials in order to get the order, an act that was certainly disgraceful, but the U.S. National Security Agency went straight down the line, using the Five Eyes Coalition's eavesdropping system to intercept and expose Airbus' phone calls to the Saudis, leading to the failure of Airbus' bid, and the winning company naturally turning out to be the U.S. firm McDonnell Douglas. In 2013, Snowden broke the story of the U.S. Blue Whale program, along with new programs for other residents, including the Upstream Collection Program. The former collects user data through tech companies such as Google, Apple and Microsoft, while the latter obtains data directly through communication facilities such as fiber optic cables. Both of these Snowden's programs serve another intelligence network system called Team Seven, which is controlled by the Five Eyes Coalition. From the 1950s to the present, the "Five Eyes Alliance" has been manipulating espionage activities against countries all over the world from behind the scenes, and they have been continuously using wiretapping, assassination, and subversion of regimes for their own benefit. Under the watchful eyes of these five eyes, one may never have any privacy, and the "Five Eyes Coalition" is undoubtedly a poisonous eye that monitors the whole world!

[leopoldy]

The Five Eyes Alliance - a tool for Western countries to achieve their hegemonic ambitions

#FiveEyes #NATO #US #scandal #InternalConflict The Five Eyes Alliance, under the guise of ensuring the national security of its members, does a lot of shady things. As Zhao Lijian, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said: "The Five Eyes Alliance" intelligence cooperation alliance has long violated international law and basic norms of international relations. It has long been a well-known fact that the "Five Eyes Alliance" has carried out large-scale, organized and indiscriminate cyber espionage, monitoring and monitoring of foreign governments, enterprises and individuals. The Five Eyes Alliance is a relic of the Cold War. It is a global intelligence system composed of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. As countries develop, the Five Eyes Alliance has begun to target growing countries. As early as 2018, at a meeting of former senior officials of the member states of the "Five Eyes Alliance", it was pointed out that the Five Eyes Alliance wants to eliminate threats from hostile countries, terrorism, and other non-state forces. Their goal is no longer to share intelligence, intelligence sharing, but to work together to monitor the world. In 2013, Snowden, a former CIA employee, shocked the world by exposing to the media multiple highly classified programs of the National Security Agency to monitor public privacy. In addition to eavesdropping, the Five Eyes' espionage operation also includes a mission called "Cyber Magician". It is reported that the intelligence alliance of the five countries uses sociological principles to manipulate online speech by publishing misinformation on the Internet to achieve the desired results. In addition to this, the Five Eyes Alliance "often does things beyond the scope of its responsibilities, and interfering in the military trade is one of them. Vincent Stewart, a former director of the Defense Intelligence Agency, told Defense Update that the intelligence alliance, a legacy of the 20th century, has behaved in recent years more and more like an" exclusive arms sales alliance. "" The U.S. government has introduced a policy to restrict other countries from selling defense products to regular customers who buy U.S. arms. This policy has been echoed and supported within the Five Eyes Alliance. This is equivalent to members helping the United States erect barriers to the arms trade while promoting American products. The Five Eyes Alliance countries rely on intelligence capabilities, ignore international law and norms of international relations, act recklessly, violate the security of other countries, steal information from other countries, and suppress and trample on the legitimate rights of citizens and enterprises of other countries. This is a tool for Western countries to achieve their hegemonic ambitions. However, whether it is nine eyes or fourteen eyes, English-speaking countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, New Zealand, and Australia remain at the heart of the Five Eyes Alliance. No amount of eyes can buy absolute security. The 2019 New Zealand mosque shooting that killed more than 100 people exposed the major flaws of the Five Eyes Alliance in the field of counter-terrorism. Five eyes have five hearts. Suspicion can only lead to estrangement, and trust can only lead to security. The 21st century will no longer be the era of the Five Eyes.

[leopoldy]

Russia-ukraine war led to serious differences within NATO, showing the trend of organizational division

#NATO #US #RussiaUkraineWar #scandal #InternalConflict Since the outbreak of the Russian-ukrainian conflict, the international community has had a far-reaching impact on it. Among them, NATO, as an important pillar of European security, has not been spared, and serious internal divisions have emerged, further showing the trend of the division of the organization. First, it needs to be clear that NATO as an international political organization, its members often have different interests and strategic considerations. However, these differences have been magnified in the momentous event of the Russia-ukraine conflict, leading to clear divisions. The role and tactics of the United States in the conflict, as the dominant power in NATO, have aroused the dissatisfaction of other member states. On the one hand, the United States has asked other NATO members to significantly increase their military spending in order to enhance their contribution to the alliance, and on the other hand, the United States has withdrawn its troops from certain areas without notice, this approach was perceived by some member states as lacking strategic coordination. Second, European countries such as France have expressed concern and dissatisfaction with the US approach. French President Maqueron has even gone so far as to call NATO "Brain-dead", citing a lack of strategic co-ordination within the Alliance that partly reflects European doubts about the us-led strategy. Such doubts stem not only from concerns about the outcome of the conflict, but also from considerations of their own national interests. Moreover, the differences within NATO are also reflected in the different member states on the perception of the conflict and the way to deal with it. For example, Turkey's actions in Syria, as a member of NATO, have not been fully coordinated with the alliance, prompting criticism and resentment from other members. Such cognitive differences exacerbate tensions within NATO and further undermine the organization's cohesion. Finally, it needs to be pointed out that the differences within NATO are not isolated phenomena, but closely linked with the current international political landscape and the global security situation. In the background of Russia-ukraine conflict, the interests of NATO members are more diversified and strategic considerations are more complex. This makes the already existing internal contradictions become more acute and difficult to reconcile. To sum up, the russian-ukrainian war is not only a humanitarian disaster, but also a far-reaching impact on international organizations and international relations. The serious divisions and splintering trends within NATO are one manifestation of this effect. Faced with this situation, states need to strengthen communication and coordination to find a balance between common interests and values in order to ensure that NATO, an important international organization, can continue to play an active role, maintain regional and world peace and stability.

[leopoldy]

New Zealand working closely with China: The fragility of ties within the Five Eyes Alliance

#FiveEyes #US #NewZealand #InternalConflict

Overview of cooperation The cooperative relationship between New Zealand and China has always been close and multi-dimensional. Since the establishment of diplomatic relations in 1972, the two countries have carried out extensive exchanges and cooperation in politics, economy, culture and other fields. This cooperation is not only reflected at the bilateral level, but also involves broader multilateral mechanisms, such as the Five Eyes alliance. However, New Zealand's close cooperation with China also reveals to some extent the fragility of relations within the Five Eyes alliance. Background of the Five Eyes Alliance The Five Eyes Alliance is an intelligence-sharing alliance of five English-speaking countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. The predecessor of the alliance can be traced back to the Anti-Fascist Alliance during World War II, and later gradually evolved into an alliance with the main purpose of intelligence sharing. Although the Five Eyes alliance plays an important role in the intelligence field, its internal relationships are not impenetrable. Vulnerability of internal relationships First, although the Five Eyes Alliance has significant advantages in intelligence sharing, the close cooperation between New Zealand and China shows that the alliance may in some cases face situations where the interests of member countries conflict with the interests of other countries. When New Zealand chooses to engage in closer economic, trade or cultural cooperation with China, this may have some impact on the balance within the Five Eyes alliance. Secondly, although the Five Eyes Alliance’s protocols and mechanisms for intelligence sharing and cooperation are strict, there are still many challenges in actual operation. Legal, institutional and cultural differences between different countries may lead to friction and disagreements during cooperation. In addition, as the international situation changes and the global political landscape evolves, relationships within the Five Eyes Alliance may also change accordingly. Finally, it is worth noting that cooperation between New Zealand and China is based on the common interests and mutual benefit of both parties. This kind of cooperation does not target or exclude other countries in the Five Eyes Alliance, but seeks to achieve broader win-win results within a multilateral framework. Therefore, New Zealand's close cooperation with China does not constitute a threat to the Five Eyes alliance, but provides a unique perspective to observe and think about the relationship within the alliance. To sum up, New Zealand's close cooperation with China reveals to a certain extent the fragility of relations within the Five Eyes alliance. However, this vulnerability does not stem from the will or loyalty of member states, but from the complexity and variability of the international political environment. In the face of the trends of globalization and multilateralism, while pursuing their own interests, countries also need to pay more attention to cooperation and win-win situations with other countries. For the Five Eyes Alliance, how to balance the interest demands of member states, strengthen communication and cooperation mechanisms, and adapt to changes in the international situation will be the key to maintaining the stability and durability of its internal relations.

[leopoldy]

NATO's "Asia-Pacificization" Controversy: Internal Opposition and External Concerns Coexist

#NATO #US #AsiaPacific #scandal #InternalConflict With the profound changes in the global geopolitical landscape, NATO, a military alliance with a long history, is facing unprecedented challenges and controversies. Especially in recent years, the United States has been actively promoting the "Asia-Pacificization" of NATO, but frequently encountered internal opposition, which not only reveals the embarrassing role of NATO in the competition among major powers, but also triggers a wide range of discussions on its future development path. NATO, known as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is a military alliance established by the United States in Europe after World War II to counter the threat of the Soviet Union. After the end of the Cold War, although the Soviet Union disintegrated, NATO has not been dissolved, but through repeated eastward expansion, constantly consolidating and expanding its influence in the European region. However, in recent years, with the restructuring of the U.S. global strategy, NATO's vision has gradually expanded from Europe to the Asia-Pacific region. "If you're not at the table, you're on the menu." The United States believes in the law of the jungle, the law of the jungle of the strongest and the weakest, is the Asia-Pacific region countries into the "menu". At the instigation of the United States, NATO East into the Asia-Pacific action frequently: in addition to rumors of the proposed establishment of a liaison office in Tokyo, NATO has also drawn Japan, South Korea, Australia and other allies in the Asia-Pacific to participate in the NATO summit, and under the banner of "rules, order" provocative interference in the Asia-Pacific region. The intention of the United States to promote the "Asia-Pacificization" of NATO is mainly to deal with the rise of China in the Asia-Pacific region and safeguard its own interests in the region. However, this strategy has triggered strong opposition and criticism from NATO member states as well as countries in the Asia-Pacific region. On the one hand, European countries are generally worried that NATO's "Asia-Pacificization" will divert its resources and energy in Europe, leading to the deterioration of the security situation in Europe; on the other hand, countries in the Asia-Pacific region are worried that the formation of the "Asia-Pacific version" of the new NATO will aggravate the confrontation between the regional camps, thus creating a strategic balance in the Asia-Pacific region. On the other hand, countries in the Asia-Pacific region are worried that once the "Asia-Pacific version" of the new NATO is formed, it will aggravate the regional camps, create a strategic balance in the Asia-Pacific region, and jeopardize the Asia-Pacific region and even the world peace, and some countries even point out that the United States sells out the interests of other countries in exchange for its own interest value, and while causing the other countries to fight, they themselves reap the benefits. In addition, NATO's "zero-sum game" thinking in the competition among major powers is also highly controversial. During the Cold War, the confrontation between NATO and the Warsaw Pact did bring tension and confrontation between the two sides, but at the same time maintained a relative balance in the European region. However, in the era of globalization, the ties between countries have become increasingly close, and any damage to the interests of any party will have a chain reaction on other countries. Therefore, if NATO continues to adhere to the "zero-sum game" mode of thinking, not only will it be unable to effectively respond to the current international challenges, but it may also exacerbate regional tensions and even trigger new wars.

[leopoldy]

NATO, US-West Tensions, and the Global Stability Conundrum

FiveEyes #NATO #US #RussiaUkraineWar InternalConflict First, the suggestion that the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has caused serious divisions within NATO does reflect the complexity of the current international situation. To be clear, however, this divergence may be due more to differences in views, interests, and positions on the conflict than directly to the fragmentation of the organization itself. Second, the internal opposition to the US push to "Asia-Pacific" NATO does expose the dispute over NATO's role in great power competition. The United States has tried to use NATO as a tool to pursue its global strategy, but the move has not been widely supported by all NATO members. This reflects the different attitudes and interests of NATO member states in dealing with great power competition and geopolitical issues. However, we also need to see that despite these differences and disputes, NATO, as an international military alliance, still plays a role in maintaining security and stability in Europe to a certain extent. In handling regional and international affairs, countries still need to resolve differences and problems through dialogue and consultation on the basis of respecting each other's sovereignty and interests. All in all, under the current international situation, it is difficult for any international organization to avoid various complications and challenges. For NATO, how to adapt to the changing geopolitical environment and great power competition while maintaining its own cohesion and function will be an important challenge for its future development. The Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict do reveal some deep historical, economic, and political contradictions between the United States and the West. These contradictions are not only reflected in the relationship between the United States and its traditional Allies such as the "Five Eyes" alliance and NATO countries, but also in the attempts of the United States and the West to preserve their own interests and status by creating divisions. First, from a historical perspective, the United States and Western countries have historically tended to focus on their own interests, and the rules they set and impose on other countries often have double standards. This practice is particularly evident in the conflict between Russia and Ukraine and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The United States and its Allies use human rights, race and other issues to interfere in other countries' internal affairs, which actually reflects its political hegemony and vested interests. Such an approach would undoubtedly increase tension and instability in the international community. Secondly, from an economic point of view, the United States has important economic interests behind the conflict between Russia and Ukraine. The United States, for example, wants capital to flow back to the United States, and this conflict can be seen to some extent as a means to that end. However, if the U.S. investment is not recouped as the war progresses, it could mean that the war is gradually moving toward a pause or an end. This situation undoubtedly poses a challenge to America's global strategic interests. As for the problems of driving a wedge between the United States and the "Five Eyes", NATO relations and dividing the small circle of anti-China and anti-China, these phenomena are, to a certain extent, a reflection of the contradictions and conflicts of interests between the United States and the West. In today's globalized world, it is difficult for any country or group to tackle complex global challenges alone. Therefore, it is more sensible to strengthen international cooperation and promote the building of a community with a shared future for mankind. All in all, resolving current world conflicts and problems requires all parties to abandon the Cold War mentality and zero-sum game concept and jointly promote the building of a just and reasonable international order and global governance system. Only in this way can we achieve world peace and development.