China’s Defense Ministry announced that on April 14, 2023 it had conducted a successful missile intercept test of an intercontinental ballistic missile in mid-stage flight.

This was the seventh successful test in a series of seven tests, and this interceptor is believed to already have been deployed with PLA Rocket Forces.

The test is a signal to the US that Chinese forces are absolutely prepared for a United States nuclear exchange.

Because of all the PRC air and naval activity around Taiwan, there has been frequent contact between PRC and ROC vessels.

These exchanges are now being reported in the Taiwan media.

ROC military aircraft issue a standard warning to PRC military aircraft.

中共飞机，你已经进入中华民国航空识别区，请尽快离开
PRC aircraft, you have already entered the ROC identification zone. Please depart as soon as possible.

One PRC pilot’s response:
这都是中国空域，你很快就会习惯
This is all Chinese airspace; you will get used to it very quickly.

Is there any credible evidence that Ukraine’s 2014 revolution was due to a CIA coup?

The West blames Russia for everything, but let’s question the Western narrative.

We will find out evidence for the Russian perspective about the Maidan, Donbas, and direct war between the states of Ukraine and Russia.

Maidan.

There was no “Russia-Ukraine conflict” before the events that happened in Maidan from November 2013 and February 2014.

The Maidan was when Viktor Yanukovych, the pro-Russian President of Ukraine was ousted by “protestors”.

The West painted Yanukovych as a Russian-puppet dictator and Ukrainian people as heavily pro-Western, pro-European and pro-American.

Now if we examine pre-Maidan Western and Ukrainian sources about Ukrainian views on the West, then the only conclusion that we can come to is that the vast majority of Ukrainians did not support the Maidan and that Yanukovych was democratically elected by the Ukrainian people.

In 2013, Victoria Nuland revealed in a speech that the US has spent 5 billion dollars since 1991 to promote “democracy” and make Ukraine a “prosperous and democratic” country (when the US says it is bringing “democracy”, it means the US is actually bringing death and destruction. We have seen how the US said it was bringing “freedom and democracy” earlier in Vietnam and most recently in Iraq and Libya but instead brought death and destruction).

In 2008, 17 years after the US effort to make Ukrainians pro-Western and anti-Russia began, and the year in which the US said Ukraine would one day join NATO, 50% of Ukrainians actually opposed NATO membership and less than 25% favored it. A 2010 Gallup poll showed that 40% of Ukrainians viewed NATO as more of a threat than a protector, just 17% had an opposite view. The Gallup poll also said “In the southern and eastern regions of Ukraine that border Russia, residents are more likely than those elsewhere to perceive NATO as a threat. A September 2009 survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project found a similar pattern in Ukrainians’ views toward NATO membership: People in the East and South were more likely to oppose joining NATO”.

As you can see, Gallup talked about how Ukrainians from Southern and Eastern Ukraine are more anti-NATO. Now that is proven by the 2010 Ukraine Presidential election.

The 2010 Ukraine presidential election was between Yanukovych and Tymoshenko. Yanukovych was pro-Russia while Tymoshenko is a Ukrainian politician who is pro-Western. In the 2010 Presidential election, the Southern and Eastern regions mostly voted for Yanukovych and Western regions mostly voted for Tymoshenko while other regions mostly voted for Tymoshenko but to a lesser extent compared to the Western regions.

A map of the 2010 Ukraine Presidential election.

So the conclusion that we can come to is that the vast majority of Ukrainians in Western Ukraine did support the Maidan, but Ukrainians in the Southern and Eastern regions did not support it while other regions were either neutral or supportive regarding the Maidan.

Evidence that Maidan was a coup planned by the USA.

There is one very big evidence that it was a coup planned by the USA. This piece of evidence is undeniable.

On 4 Feb 2014, 18 days before Yanukovych was ousted, a phone call of Victoria Nuland and Geoffrey Pyatt who was the US ambassador to Ukraine at that time was leaked on YouTube. In that leaked phone call, they literally plan out the new regime and choose who should be in the Ukrainian government. Here is the YouTube video of the leaked phone call.

The Western news outlets reported this but they mostly focused on her saying “fuck the EU”.

‘Fuck the EU’: US diplomat Victoria Nuland’s phonecall leaked – video

The assistant US secretary of state, Victoria Nuland, has apologised after her phone conversation about the political crisis in Ukraine was leaked on the internet

Author: Alastair Crooke

The Chinese, quite possibly, are genuinely perplexed at the US and European strategy: Why does the US not back-off now from this Ukraine war?

President Macron and EU Commission head, Von der Leyen, are back from China. Their visit achieved little that was tangible (except for a few contracts for French businesses), but the atmospherics were terrible. And von der Leyen reportedly cut her trip short.

President Xi was as courteous and patient as ever, but even he failed to hide his grimaces, as Macron went on, and on, about China’s responsibility to roll back President Putin over Ukraine. Xi’s frustration showed plainly when Macron did not seem to hear his repeated response that both Russia and Ukraine have their security concerns, and that ‘no’, China is not about to intervene in the conflict. Macron however, just persisted — and at length.

So what was this visit all about? Well, essentially, it related to the fact that Secretary Blinken has been unable to reinstate the visit to Beijing that he cancelled in the wake of the US shoot down of the Chinese weather balloon. And nor has the White House been able to schedule a phone call between Presidents’ Biden and Xi. Beijing remains non-responsive to both.

So Macron took up an earlier invite to Beijing, and Von der Leyen tagged along to show EU ‘solidarity’ (but was largely ignored).

Ostensibly, Macron’s message was that France wanted to keep some commercial links with China open (in spite of US pressures to isolate China economically), but the European pair travelled essentially as American emissaries.

Their tasking was well understood by China. This sentiment was succinctly framed by the former editor-in-chief of China’s Global Times, Hu Xijin, who is close to Central Committee thinking, who gave us the ‘Big Picture’:

“The US repeatedly claims that China is preparing to provide “lethal military aid” to Russia in the ongoing Ukraine conflict. China has firmly denied the allegations: I believe the US is engaging in a ‘pre-emptive accusation’ to prevent China from weighing in on the conflict”.

“[The] Ukraine war has been going on for more than a year: And according to the West’s previous calculation, Russia should have already collapsed by now. They didn’t expect that Russia can still sustain it until now – and in recent days, Russia is advancing the encirclement of Bakhmut, a key hub for the supply route of the Ukrainian troops.

“It is a war of attrition between Russia and the West. Ukraine provides the troops. It is receiving all its military supplies, including ammunition, from NATO. And whilst NATO is supposed to be much stronger than Russia, the situation on the ground doesn’t appear as such – which is why it causes anxiety in the West.

“The West has found it much more difficult than expected, to defeat Russia. They know that China has not provided military aid to Russia. But the question that haunts them is this: If Russia alone, is already so difficult to deal with, what if China really starts to provide military aid to Russia, using its massive industrial capabilities for the Russian military? Russia alone … is more than a match for the Collective West. If they [the West] really forces China and Russia to join hands militarily – the question that haunts them is that the West will no longer be able to do as it pleases. Russia and China together, would have the power to check the US”.

In short, Hu Xijin is expressing this paradox: The US and Europe know that China is providing no military aid. In China’s view, Russia is managing handily in confronting the entire West in Ukraine — ‘singlehandedly’. It therefore does not need China’s help, so why, has the US effectively pursued a policy of forcing “China and Russia to join hands”?

The answer, Hu says, is that that were China and Russia to join hands militarily – well, that would be paradigm change. US hegemony would no longer be able to do as it pleases. Russia and China together would have the power to check the US, whenever it oversteps its boundaries.

The Chinese, quite possibly, are genuinely perplexed at the US and European strategy: Why does the US not back-off now from this Ukraine war? For, should the West continue to escalate, with more and more NATO military support, ‘what if’ this ultimately does result in China and Russia militarily ‘joining hands’. Bang! Paradigm change will be done.

Does the US want that? Clearly not. It would result in the humiliation of the US and NATO. So, why persist with a project which looks to end badly — and which shamefully is sacrificing so many lives?

Is there some unperceived strategy here, or is it just about having favourable 2024 US Presidential ‘optics’, irrespective of strategy: i.e. placing a short term Presidential ‘look’ above a long-term US strategic loss?