US Aggression vs. Germany--UPDATE: RAND Corp. Denies Authenticity, Authorship of Document in Question (while spouting misinformation elsewhere)

Questions as to RAND's credibility remain, though, as the history of the 'Pentagon Papers' indicates--as well as a bunch of other stuff on their website

So, as it happens, RAND felt it necessary to denounce the report that was circulating for two weeks and which I discussed in these pages.

US Aggression vs. Germany is the Real Driving Force in the Russian-Ukrainian Quagmire

US Aggression vs. Germany--UPDATE as 'alternative' / legacy media begins to pick up on the file + a comment by Thomas Röper

The news item—which isn’t that easy to find (as in, it’s not highly visible on the website)—consists of a few lines only:

So, my gut feeling turns out to have been quite a bit off on this one—some of you, dear readers and commenters, have already said so, yet I would add two things here:

1) It is maintained that the ‘supposedly leaked RAND report'…is fake’.

While I maintain that I voiced doubts from the beginning, I’d also add that this particular document may not have come from RAND, there’s no denying of a couple of crucial facts, such as the two analytical-synthetic accounts by Michael Hudson and Yves Smith.

I suppose that we should all continue to judge the deeds, and not the words, of any one individual or country, and if we do that, things look indeed quite a bit like the scenario outlined in the fake report. I do stand corrected on calling this one, and I offer my unreserved apologies for doing so (prematurely).

That said, there’s something else I’d like to add, which relates to the preceding paragraph: shouldn’t we also hold those declaring things to be ‘fake’ (or not) to the same standards?

2) RAND claims Russia’s invasion was ‘unprovoked’

If one clicks on the linked words (‘this page’) in the second paragraph of the above statement, one gets to see the following (my emphases):

As I’ve highlighted on numerous occasions, the quagmire in Ukraine is many things, but I would question the veracity of RAND’s claim that the ‘invasion’ was ‘unprovoked’.

As explained in the below-linked post (incl. many references):

'We Stand With Ukraine', Norwegian Style, Pt. 2: 'Germany-Gate', or: False Flags in Norway Abound, co-sponsored by the EU, most notably by Germany

Highlights incl. the following issues:

Ukrainian Paramilitary Formations, incl. Neo-Nazi Troops

It’s well-known and acknowledged by a wide variety of governmental institutions and media outlets that the Azov formations consist of far-right extremists, as reported by, e.g., USA Today. These facts be damned, Western legacy media considers any mentioning of this ‘Russian propaganda’ (e.g., Le Monde), yet the widespread presence of Neo-Nazis is confirmed by, e.g., the Times of Israel, members of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and the US Army’s Combating Terrorism Center at West Point Military Academy.

How Old is the Conflict? It began in 2014, say Ukrainians

Here’s a link to another piece that appeared in Bergens Tidende on 15 Feb. 2022. It reveals a number of issues that warrant attention.

The Ukrainians’ Association in Bergen holds that Norwegians don’t understand that Ukraine has been at war for eight years: ‘People die every day’, says Volodymir Novosad—almost two weeks before Mr. Putin is alleged to have invaded Ukraine ‘unprovoked’.

An OECD Report Notes an Increase in Ukrainian Shelling of the Donbass in the Days Prior to 24 Feb. 2024

Curiously, the above-cited media piece appeared literally the day before the Ukrainian army and paramilitary began firing into the Donbass across the line of contact, which, as is known, precipitated the Russian ‘special military operation’. This information derives from the OSCE’s Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine, as per their report dated 21 Feb. 2022, which you can download directly here (the below graphs are from pp. 2-3, respectively).

As to the Refugees, we should help them—but note, in passing, what the UN has to say about them

A whooping 81.4% of all conflict-related civilian casualties in Ukraine from 2018 up to 31 Dec. 2021 occurred on the territory held by the Donbass ‘separatists’. This means that 4 out of 5 of these casualties were most likely due to fire originating from the Kyiv régime-held side of the line of contact, according the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (as the below table, found on p. 2, clearly shows):

More Ukrainian Voices

Back to the above-cited Bergens Tidende piece from 15 Feb. 2022, which cites Hanna Veits (28), a native of Lugansk in the Donbass who fled to Bergen where she’s now a musical student (she plays the violin; my emphasis):

‘For eight years, no one thought that Russia would invade, but now we know better and think one must be prepared for everything. Suitcases are packed and she works hard to get travel documents for the cat. The hope is that if something happens, she can quickly apply for asylum in Norway’, says Veits.

Bottom Lines

Two wrongs don’t make one right, and my incorrect intimation about the alleged RAND paper stands. I shall also include dedicated links to this here posting in the two related pieces, but for the same of accountability I shall keep them as they were written.

As to credibility, well, that’s a trickier one. I would call out RAND for spewing factually questionable information on their website, especially as this is linked to calling out that (fake) paper. Personally, if the subject wouldn’t be that tragic, I’d call this a most hilarious prank, but then again, once we factor into this entire mess other instances of RAND’s questionable conduct, I suppose we’re on firmer ground:

I do this here in my spare time while RAND is a US$ 350m per year enterprise with a clear aim in this context (Extending Russia: Competing from Advantageous Ground, 2019). RAND isn’t a neutral actor.

Furthermore, the muddied waters of the Ukrainian quagmire are certainly not RAND’s only transgression when it comes to ‘creative history’, as this website on ‘Russian misinformation’ and how to combat it (it’s also linked in that brief statement on top of this post) shows:

You’re probably not surprised if I tell you about the ‘2008 incursion into Georgia’, which, as the after-action report by the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on the Conflict in Georgia, which was financed by the EU, i.e., ‘the West’, holds, that the Georgian escalation in August 2008 came about when,

on the night of 7 to 8 August 2008, a sustained Georgian artillery attack struck the town of Tskhinvali…

The Georgian troops were then soon stopped by

a counter-movement [of] Russian armed forces

The quotes are on p. 10 of that above-linked report.

And I haven’t even mentioned the fact that, (even) according to the Ministry of Truth, the ‘Pentagon Papers’ originated with the RAND Corp. While the papers were finally made public by the U.S. National Archives (see here), let it be known that as recently as 2021 (!), the NYT permitted an op-ed by Gabriel Schoenfeld (bio here) entitled ‘Leaking the Pentagon Papers Was an Assault on Democracy’.

In closing, I suppose that the ‘Credibility Gap’ continues to exist, hence I suppose it’s a bit too soon to tell whether or not RAND is actually telling the truth on this one.