Ray McGovern on Russia’s Humanitarian ‘Invasion’

Ray McGovern, August 23, 2014

Before dawn broke in Washington on Saturday, “Ukrainian pro-Russian separatists” – more accurately described as federalists of southeast Ukraine who oppose last February’s coup in Kiev – unloaded desperately needed provisions from some 280 Russian trucks in Luhansk, Ukraine. The West accused those trucks of “invading” Ukraine on Friday, but it was a record short invasion; after delivering their loads of humanitarian supplies, many of the trucks promptly returned to Russia.

I happen to know what a Russian invasion looks like, and this isn’t it. Forty-six years ago, I was ten miles from the border of Czechoslovakia when Russian tanks stormed in to crush the “Prague Spring” experiment in democracy. The attack was brutal.

Once back in Munich, West Germany, where my duties included substantive liaison with Radio Free Europe, I experienced some of the saddest moments of my life listening to radio station after radio station on the Czech side of the border playing Smetana’s patriotic “Ma vlast” (My Homeland) before going silent for more than two decades.

I was not near the frontier between Russia and southeastern Ukraine on Friday as the convoy of some 280 Russian supply trucks started rolling across the border heading toward the federalist-held city of Luhansk, but that “invasion” struck me as more like an attempt to break a siege, a brutal method of warfare that indiscriminately targets all, including civilians, violating the principle of noncombatant immunity.

Michael Walzer, in his War Against Civilians, notes that “more people died in the 900-day siege of Leningrad during WWII than in the infernos of Hamburg, Dresden, Tokyo, Hiroshima and Nagasaki taken together.” So the Russians have some strong feelings about sieges.

There’s also a personal side for Russian President Vladimir Putin, who was born in Leningrad, now Saint Petersburg, eight years after the long siege by the German army ended. It is no doubt a potent part of his consciousness. One elder brother, Viktor, died of diphtheria during the siege of Leningrad.

The Siege of Luhansk

Despite the fury expressed by U.S. and NATO officials about Russia’s unilateral delivery of the supplies after weeks of frustrating negotiations with Ukrainian authorities, there was clearly a humanitarian need. An International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) team that visited Luhansk on Aug. 21 to make arrangements for the delivery of aid found water and electricity supplies cut off because of damage to essential infrastructure.

The Ukrainian army has been directing artillery fire into the city in an effort to dislodge the ethnic Russian federalists, many of whom had supported elected President Viktor Yanukovych who was ousted in the Feb. 22 coup.

The Red Cross team reported that people in Luhansk do not leave their homes for fear of being caught in the middle of ongoing fighting, with intermittent shelling into residential areas placing civilians at risk. Laurent Corbaz, ICRC head of operations for Europe and Central Asia, reported “an urgent need for essentials like food and medical supplies.”

The ICRC stated that it had “taken all necessary administrative and preparatory steps for the passage of the Russian convoy,” and that, “pending customs checks,” the organization was “therefore ready to deliver the aid to Luhansk … provided assurances of safe passage are respected.”

The “safe passage” requirement, however, was the Catch-22. The Kiev regime and its Western supporters have resisted a ceasefire or a political settlement until the federalists – deemed “terrorists” by Kiev – lay down their arms and surrender.

Accusing the West of repeatedly blocking a “humanitarian armistice,” a Russian Foreign Ministry statement cited both Kiev’s obstructionist diplomacy and “much more intensive bombardment of Luhansk” on Aug. 21, the day after some progress had been made on the ground regarding customs clearance and border control procedures: “In other words, the Ukrainian authorities are bombing the destination [Luhansk] and are using this as a pretext to stop the delivery of humanitarian relief aid.”

‘Decision to Act’

Referring to these “intolerable” delays and “endless artificial demands and pretexts,” the Foreign Ministry said, “The Russian side has decided to act.” And there the statement’s abused, plaintive tone ended sharply – with this implied military threat:

“We are warning against any attempts to thwart this purely humanitarian mission. … Those who are ready to continue sacrificing human lives to their own ambitions and geopolitical designs and are rudely trampling on the norms and principles of international humanitarian law will assume complete responsibility for the possible consequences of provocations against the humanitarian relief convoy.”

Despite all the agreements and understandings that Moscow claims were reached earlier with Ukrainian authorities, Kiev insists it did not give permission for the Russian convoy to cross its border and that the Russians simply violated Ukrainian sovereignty – no matter the exigent circumstances they adduce.

More alarming still, Russia’s “warning” could be construed as the Kremlin claiming the right to use military force within Ukraine itself, in order to protect such humanitarian supply efforts – and perhaps down the road, to protect the anti-coup federalists, as well.

The risk of escalation, accordingly, will grow in direct proportion to the restraint exercised by not only the Ukrainian armed forces but also their militias of neo-fascists who have been dispatched by Kiev as frontline shock troops in eastern Ukraine.

Though many Russian citizens have crossed the border in support of their brethren in eastern Ukraine, Moscow has denied dispatching or controlling these individuals. But now there are Russians openly acknowledged to have been sent by Moscow into Ukraine – even if only “pilots” of “Russian military vehicles painted to look like civilian trucks,” as the White House depicted the humanitarian mission.

Moscow’s move is a difficult one to parry, except for those – and there are many, both in Kiev and in Washington – who would like to see the situation escalate to a wider East-West armed confrontation. One can only hope that, by this stage, President Barack Obama, Secretary of State John Kerry and the European Union realize they have a tiger by the tail.

The coup regime in Kiev knows which side its bread is buttered on, so to speak, and can be expected to heed the advice from the US and the EU if it is expressed forcefully and clearly. Not so the fanatics of the extreme right party Svoboda and the armed “militia” comprised of the Right Sector. Moreover, there are influential neo-fascist officials in key Kiev ministries who dream of cleansing eastern Ukraine of as many ethnic Russians as possible.

Thus, the potential for serious mischief and escalation has grown considerably. Even if Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko wants to restrain his hardliners, he may be hard-pressed to do so. Thus, the US government could be put in the unenviable position of being blamed for provocations – even military attacks on unarmed Russian truck drivers – over which it has little or no control.

Giving Hypocrisy a Bad Name

The White House second-string P.R. team came off the bench on Friday, with the starters on vacation, and it was not a pretty scene. Even if one overlooks the grammatical mistakes, the statement they cobbled together left a lot to be desired.

It began: “Today, in violation of its previous commitments and international law, Russian military vehicles painted to look like civilian trucks forced their way into Ukraine. …

“The Ukrainian government and the international community have repeatedly made clear that this convoy would constitute a humanitarian mission only if expressly agreed to by the Ukrainian government and only if the aid was inspected, escorted and distributed by the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC). We can confirm that the ICRC is not escorting the vehicles and has no role in managing the mission. …

“Russian military vehicles piloted by Russian drivers have unilaterally entered the territory controlled by the separatist forces.”

The White House protested that Kiev had not “expressly agreed” to allow the convoy in without being escorted by the ICRC. Again, the Catch 22 is obvious. Washington has been calling the shots, abetting Kiev’s dawdling as the supply trucks sat at the border for a week while Kiev prevented the kind of ceasefire that the ICRC insists upon before it will escort such a shipment.

The other issue emphasized in the White House statement was inspection of the trucks: “While a small number of these vehicles were inspected by Ukrainian customs officials, most of the vehicles have not been inspected by anyone but Russia.” During a press conference at the UN on Friday, Russia’s UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin took strong exception to that charge, claiming not only that 59 Ukrainian inspectors had been looking through the trucks on the Russian side of the border, but that media representatives had been able to choose for themselves which trucks to examine.

Regardless of this latest geopolitical back-and-forth, it’s clear that Moscow’s decision to send the trucks across the border marked a new stage of the civil war in Ukraine. As Putin prepares to meet with Ukrainian President Poroshenko next week in Minsk – and as NATO leaders prepare for their summit on Sept. 4 to 5 in Wales – the Kremlin has put down a marker: there are limits to the amount of suffering that Russia will let Kiev inflict on the anti-coup federalists and ethnic Russian civilians right across the border.

The Russians’ attitude seems to be that if the relief convoys can be described as an invasion of sovereign territory, so be it. Nor are they alone in the court of public opinion.

On Friday at the UN, Russian Ambassador Churkin strongly objected to comments that, by its behavior, Russia found itself isolated. Churkin claimed that some of the Security Council members were “sensitive to the Russian position – among them China and the countries of Latin America.” (Argentina and Chile are currently serving as non-permanent members of the Security Council.)

The Polemic and Faux Fogh

Charter members of the Fawning Corporate Media are already busily at work, including the current FCM dean, the New York Times’ Michael R. Gordon, who was at it again with a story titled “Russia Moves Artillery Units Into Ukraine, NATO Says.” Gordon’s “scoop” was all over the radio and TV news; it was picked up by NPR and other usual suspects who disseminate these indiscriminate alarms.

Gordon, who never did find those Weapons of Mass Destruction that he assured us were in Iraq, now writes: “The Russian military has moved artillery units manned by Russian personnel inside Ukrainian territory in recent days and was using them to fire at Ukrainian forces, NATO officials said on Friday.”

His main source seems to be NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who famously declared in 2003, “Iraq has WMDs. It is not something we think; it is something we know.” Cables released by WikiLeaks have further shown the former Danish prime minister to be a tool of Washington.

However, Gordon provided no warning to Times’ readers about Rasmussen’s sorry track record for accuracy. Nor did the Times remind its readers about Gordon’s sorry history of getting sensitive national security stories wrong.

Surely, the propaganda war will be stoked by what happened on Friday. Caveat emptor.

Ray McGovern works with Tell the Word, the publishing arm of the ecumenical Church of the Saviour in inner-city Washington. After serving as an Army infantry/intelligence officer, he spent a 27-year career as a CIA analyst. He is co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity (VIPS).

Reprinted with permission from Consortium News.




43 Responses to “Ray McGovern on Russia’s Humanitarian ‘Invasion’”

  1. "shown the former Danish prime minister to be a tool of Washington"

    He's just a tool. Period.

    What happened to that civilian convoy that was nuked presumably by Ukrainian forces? Disappeared from the news cycle? What happened to the bizarre story of "russian armored columns" being decimated by Ukrainian forces? Disappeared from the news cycle, too?

    I would also remind the protesting Madame Merkel of the Berlin Airlift. Some heavy violation of the territorial integrity of the Soviet Occupation Zone, innit?

  2. WE ARE ALL AWARE OF THE LIES COMMING FROM THE WHITE HOUSE IN ITS DESPERATION TO TRY TO COVER UP ITS INVOLVEMENT IN THE CIVIL WAR IN UKRAINE….ITS AS IF THEY WOULD LIKE A FULL OUT WAR ON THE EUROPEAN CONTINENT JUST SO THEY CAN GET THEIR WEAPONS INDUSTERY NEW CONTRACTS AFTER ALL THAT IS THE ONLY INDUSTERY THAT SEEMS TO MAKE ANY MONEY, AND IF THE ORDERS FOR WEAPONS WAS TO STOP THEN THE AMERICAN ECOMENY WOULD COLLAPS

  3. We must try and make decisionmakers understand that Nuclear Primacy is counterproductive as it's SUICIDAL. Launch On Warning by 2017 followed by Suicide ? Rasmussen is a war criminal like Bush and Blair. Bush is twice a war criminal, 1. The Invasion of Iraq. 2. Torture. Rasmussen should never have been PM as he was fired as a Tax Minister for lying to Parliament and fixing the Ministry's economy in "creative ways", i.e. fraud. His worst sin is his lie that European Phased Adaptive Approach is to defend us from something Iran doesn't have and according to 16 US Intelligence Agencies Iran IS NOT developing nuclear weapons. Of course, the Russians don't believe that fairy tale. Do they expect the Russians to do nothing ? Are they crazy ? If the push it as they do, the result may very well be Launch On Warning. Bloody fools in the Pentagon !

  4. Professor J. Ed Anderson: There is no doubt in my mind that deployment of anti-missile missiles in Eastern Europe is part of a first-strike strategy.
    Missile engineer Bob Aldridge -www.plrc.org : Whether they are on ships or land, they are still a necessary component for an unanswerable first strike.
    Dr Bob Bowman, Chief "Star Wars" Program: Missile defence is the missing link to first strike.
    Professor Paul Rogers: The warheads on Minuteman-3 and Trident-2 are designed to minimize nuclear winter effects if used against missile silos.
    According to Bob Aldridge the US Navy can track and destroy all enemy submarines simultaneously. But unfortunately, there is no defence against Launch On Warning. Bloody fools in the Pentagon !

  5. Its interesting to read about the situation in East Ukraine with this perspective. I have several russian speaking friends who are from the Lugansk region and they think more or less the same.

  6. I'm beginning to suspect that the evidence available to Washington about MH17 points pretty conclusively at the Kiev regime or its forces being responsible. Washington is now covering for the Kiev regime in the hope that the regime can complete the destruction of the federalist forces before that information becomes public and Washington is forced to withdraw support from the Kiev regime. Expect the shelling to become even greater in the coming week or two as the Kiev regime puppets struggle to satisfy Washington's demands.

  7. Unless Putin puts his foot down, we'll just see more innocents die for no reason other than Poroshenko's bloodlust.

  8. Excellent blog here! Also your site loads up
    very fast! What web host are you using? Can I get your affiliate link to your host?
    I wish my site loaded up as quickly as yours lol

  9. I am truly grateful to the owner of this web page
    who has shared this wonderful paragraph at at this time.

  10. Yes, another disappearing "invasion" yesterday (Russians heading through Ukraine to Azoz on the Black Sea" then disappeared today fro the news. An "armored column" invasion that vanished?
    I hope so. I guess too many Ukrainian vodkas and you begin to hallucinate Russian invasions.

  11. Any mention of Rasmussen should begin with the words ” serial war criminal and confirmed liar” Serbia,Iraq,Libya,Syria as we used to say in the old days the man could not lie straight in bed.

  12. cant say somthn jogos de moto

  13. […] McGovern, dans Antiwar.com parlait le 23 août 2014 de l’“invasion” en cours, celle du convoi alimentaire russe (l’“invasion” précédente […]

  14. What a folly! The neocons want to start a war because they hate Putin (for I guess personal reasons), the West Ukraine has foolishly trusted upon the mercies of the European and American central bankers to rescue their failed economy, the eastern Ukraine is being given the Gaza "treatment", and the American public is being dragged into the garbage by a weak president. When the smoke clears, we will see a divided Ukraine with the East being part of Russia, and the West Ukraine having been raped by the capitalistic vultures and on the trash heap with Greece. The neocons will move onto their next target and dazed, further impoverished Americans will be waving giant flags and chanting U S A, U S A, I S R A E L, U S A

  15. Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wished to say that I’ve truly enjoyed
    surfing around your blog posts. After all I’ll be subscribing in your feed and I hope
    you write again soon!

  16. Wars are violence and violence begets violence,so wars make wars they don't end them,as many believe.The problem is not many consider wars as violence,but as nobel and patriotic,even though wars kill innocent people.

  17. Wars are self righteous,politicians swear on the Bible taking public office,the same Bible that warns the world,civilization,will end as we know in the worst war ever,Armageddon.And isaiah 2:4,says,the nations will be judged and people rebuked for their wars,beating swords(guns)to plowshares and spears(bombs)to pruning hooks,with nation not lifting up sword against nation,and learning war no more. Best thing is to not vote for them,and expose these politicians now,and not do what they do,war,and many lives can be saved.

  18. Wars are self righteous,politicians swear on the Bible taking public office,the same Bible that warns the world,civilization,will end as we know it in the worst war ever,Armageddon.And isaiah 2:4,says,the nations will be judged and people rebuked for their wars,beating swords(guns)to plowshares and spears(bombs)to pruning hooks,with nation not lifting up sword against nation,and learning war no more. Best thing is to not vote for them,and expose these politicians now,and not do what they do,war,and many lives can be saved.

  19. The Revolutionary War,the Civil War,World Wars 1 and 2,had Christians killing Christians,and World War 2, saw 6 million Jews killed,Jesus was a Jew,and I'm sure he wouldn't condone Christians killing Christians.Yet,all these wars are condoned by many perople.So the truth needs to be revealed,as Jesus says,the truth will set you free,even from the bonds of the sins of wars.

  20. The Bible says,Everything Happens for The Best to Them that Love God&Are The Called According to His Purpose&His Purpose is to Save Mankind By His Cross,Not Wars.

  21. There were no wars before man's fall at Eden,it was Paradise,and there's no wars in God's Kingdom on earth,so wars are of man's fall,and so not of God,but of man's sin at Eden .And only Jesus Christ can restore man's relationship to God,and it can only be through Jesus Christ's Cross and Gospel,not by man,and not by wars,man can't save himself,and wars are an effort to do that.

  22. Wars can't kill the evil in a man's soul,men die in wars with the evil in their soul,and all souls are eternal,so wars of guns and bombs can't kill evil.And Satan gets evil souls,Jesus died on the Cross so that Satan wouldn't get evil souls,to save evil souls from Satan. Wars are a stumbling block to the Cross. In going to the Cross,Jesus said to his own disciple,all who take the sword perish by the sword.And Jesus sent his disciples without swords to spread his Gospel,which means,good news,and wars are not good news.

  23. Politicians say,we have noChoice,but toWar-God willAlways give you a Choice,He won't take away your ability toChoose-so that's Not ofGod-God is love,says theBible,&love is a choice.

  24. The Bible says,don't render evil for evil,you will be destroyed by it,evil destroys evil-case in point: Satan's man,the beast666,the antichrist,Revelation 13:4,says,Who is able to make war with him?War itself is evil,and he will be destroyed by his own evil.Why is war evil,because wars can't save or kill souls,only Christ can save souls,and all souls are eternal,wars of guns and bombs can't kill them,but wars spill innocent blood,a sin.Wars take God's power of life and death,and sin with it.

  25. Galatians 6:7&8: Be not deceived,God is not mocked,whatsoever a man sows,that will he also reap.Sow to the flesh&reap of the flesh destruction,sow to the spirit&reap everlasting life.Wars sow to the flesh,man's sinful nature&reap of the flesh,man's sinful nature,sin.Don't be deceived by men playing God,mocking God,sowing&reaping sin,sow to God's Holy Spirit,which Jesus left with us&reap eternal life,make it a Spiritual fight to change hearts&minds to repent of the sins of wars.

  26. RUSSIA LIED ABOUT MAIDEN, LIED ABOUT EU AND NATO INVOLVEMENT, LIED ABOUT GEORGIA, LIED ABOUT CRIMEA AND LITTLE GREEN MEN, LIED ABOUT NAZIS, LIED ABOUT MH17, LIED ABOUT SHELLING FROM RUSSIA, LIED ABOUT HUMANITARIAN CONVOYS, LIED ABOUT WEAPONS, LIED ABOUT BEING IN UKRAINE, IS LYING ABOUT DEAD RUSSIAN SOLIDIERS, IS LYING ABOUT THE REASON EU IS INCREASING SANCTIONS, RUSSIA IS LYING TO WORLD!

  27. Out of the Roman Empire came Holy Wars the Crusades& a new religion,Islam&theirJihads,more HolyWars-Jesus sent his disciples without swords to spread his Gospel,the Roman Empire sent men with swords to spread the Gospel&eventually fell in wars.Pope JohnPaul The 2nd apologized for the Crusades,Holy Wars.

  28. Wars are not Holy,mo matter who fights them. The Bible in Genesis says,after God Created everything,God said it was all good-but after man's fall at Eden man began to make wars&destroy God's Creation,even of mankind. So wars are not of a Holy God& so wars are not Holy.

  29. ars are not Holy,m no matter who fights them. The Bible in Genesis says,after God Created everything,God said it was all good-but after man's fall at Eden man began to make wars&destroy God's Creation,even of mankind. So wars are not of a Holy God& so wars are not Holy.

  30. The sword Jesus has is the Word of God,sword of the Spirit, it's a double edged sword,obey it&it can save,disobey it&it's sin that can destroy. The good edge of the sword is good seed,God'sWord to sow in men's hearts&it can save,the bad edge is bad seed to sow in men's hearts,it's sin&it can destroy.Galatians 6:7.Be not deceived,God is not mocked,whatsoever a man sows,that will he also reap,says God's Word,good seed. Wars of guns&bombs are bad seed to sow in men's hearts,they reap wars in return. It's a Spiritual fight,the good fight,by God's Word,even the Word himself,Jesus Christ,to change hearts&minds to repent of the sins of wars.Jesus says,God is a Spirit&must be worshiped in spirit&truth,not by guns&bombs of wars that spill innocent blood a sin.

  31. It's really a Sick world with people willing to kill themselves in Wars,so that they can kill others in Wars&Jesus heals the Sick. Jesus says,do unto others,as you want others to do unto you,so if you don't want men to Kill you in Wars,don't Kill men in Wars.

  32. If a man went about killing others,so that others must kill him,we know that man is sick-but inWars that's what happens to men.

  33. We Believe The Enemy's Evil&They Believe us Evil&Wars of Guns&Bombs Can't Kill Evil,The Evil Souls of Men,Like All Souls,are Eternal (TheBible).

  34. We Believe The Enemy's Evil&They Believe Us Evil&Wars of Guns&Bombs Can't Kill Evil,The Evil Souls of Men,Like All Souls,are Eternal (TheBible). The Only Way Anyone Can Be Saved From Evil is By The Cross&Gospel of Jesus Christ. That's Why Jesus Said,No One Comes to God, but By Me.

  35. Only God can send a soul to Hell,or save a soul from Hell-&you wouldn't want it any other way.

  36. One ofTheBasicHumanRights is theRight toLlife, itComes from God,Wars take away thatRight,Wars areNot ofGod,WarsPlayGod&Take it Away-this isn't good seed to sow in the hearts of men,it will be reaped again and again.

  37. 1John2:18: even now there's many antichrists,whereby we know the last one.So there's more than one antichrists,most people believe there's only one.Another way Satan deceives people,the antichrist spirit is of Satan&he goes about like a roaring lion seeking whom to devour.

  38. It's not a coincidence that with the growth of the Media,came the growth of wars in the world.The politicians use the Media to hawk fear&in God's name,usually without naming God,but by inference,such as today,Biden saying we'll follow you to the gates of Hell,something Satan probably kiled hearing,a place no one should go any where near.And this helps them get elected&stay elected.The inference also is that wars are Holy,something the terrorists also like to hear,they believe in Holy wars,jihads,it helps them recruit men for their wars.Right now,we're involved in a Holy war in Iraq,taking sides there with one Holy sect against another,sunnis against shiites&others.But wars are not Holy&not of a Holy God,if wars were Holy,God wouldn't end ALL wars,as Isaiah2:4,says in the Bible,but God would only end the unrighteous,or self righteous wars,not ALL wars.

  39. It's not a coincidence that with the growth of the Media,came the growth of wars in the world.All Media the world over glorifies wars in movies,tv,books,etc.And the politicians use the Media to hawk fear&in God's name,usually without naming God,but by inference,such as today,Biden saying we'll follow you to the gates of Hell,something Satan probably liked hearing,a place no one should go any where near.And this helps them get elected&stay elected.The inference also is that wars are Holy,something the terrorists also like to hear,they believe in Holy wars,jihads,it helps them recruit men for their wars.Right now,we're involved in a Holy war in Iraq,taking sides there with one Holy sect against another,sunnis against shiites&others.But wars are not Holy&not of a Holy God,if wars were Holy,God wouldn't end ALL wars,as Isaiah2:4,says in the Bible,but God would only end the unrighteous,or self righteous wars,not ALL wars.

  40. It's not a coincidence that with the growth of the Media,came the growth of wars in the world.All Media the world over glorifies wars in movies,tv,books,etc.And the politicians use the Media to hawk fear&in God's name,usually without naming God,but by inference,such as today,Biden saying we'll follow you to the gates of Hell,something Satan probably liked hearing,a place no one should go any where near.And this helps them get elected&stay elected.The inference also is that wars are Holy,something the terrorists also like to hear,they believe in Holy wars,jihads,it helps them recruit men for their wars.Right now,we're involved in a Holy war in Iraq,taking sides there with one Holy sect against another,sunnis against shiites&others.But wars are not Holy&not of a Holy God,if wars were Holy,God wouldn't end ALL wars,as Isaiah2:4,says in the Bible God will end ALL wars,but God would only end the unrighteous,or self righteous wars,not ALL wars.So wars are not Holy,&so not of a Holy God.

  41. Politicians are Using a Trick they Used Before,re-naming things,so they're acceptable,but they're all of the SameGroup,Terrorists,Jihadists-so that the wars will become more acceptable to the public&using the Media to do it.

  42. TheWorld with itsWars kill innocent Fetuses,Children&their Mothers&&make Orphans ofChildren&Widows ofWives,soWars areNot ofGod.

  43. […] McGovern, dans Antiwar.com parlait le 23 août 2014 de l’“invasion” en cours, celle du convoi alimentaire russe (l’“invasion” précédente […]

Leave a Reply