For whom General Milley’s high treason tolls

MOSCOW, 23 Sep 2021, RUSSTRAT Institute.

The chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff of the US armed forces is, in our opinion, practically the Minister of Defence. In the American national security construct, the Secretary of Defence is a civilian responsible for political issues, general bureaucracy, and control of the military budget. Whereas the chairman (head) of the Joint Chiefs of Staff directly commands the troops.

Now imagine that this military man, having received an order to prepare an offensive against the enemy from his president, calls the chief of the general staff of the enemy army by phone and warns about the upcoming offensive. In any normal country, this is considered high treason. Whatever it was caused by, the traitor would have dashed out of office with a loud fuss and a lifetime wolf ticket. And, most likely, he would have received another serious term “without the right to parole”.

But this is in a normal country, the category of which the current US, as has long been seen, does not belong in. Because journalists Bob Woodward and Robert Costa, after a thorough analysis of many official documents, as well as interviews with various leading US politicians and officials, wrote a book called “Peril”, in which they described the functioning of the US state apparatus during the last presidential election of 2020.

The authors claim that the head of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army General Mark Milley, twice (October 30, 2020 and January 8, 2021) called the chief of the PLA General Staff, General Li Zuocheng, in China with a promise to warn his colleague if the United States decides to attack the PRC.

And what? Nothing. No investigation of their own counterintelligence, no hearings in the Senate, no outrage in the press. The Supreme Commander-in-Chief, aka US President Joe Biden, did not even remove the general from his post. The owner of the Oval Office even publicly praised the military, stressing that he supports and approves “the work that Mark Milley is doing.”

Of course, one could say that we are not interested in the internal problems of America with apparatus discipline. But there is a description of another episode in the book. Somewhere around the day of the storming of the Capitol, Milley gathered senior officers “to consider the procedure for launching nuclear weapons,” which is strange in itself, since its composition has long been approved and repeatedly clearly worked out.

Moreover, at least twice a year, the Pentagon conducts full-scale exercises with the participation of all “top officials” involved in the procedure, including the president. So there is no need for the procedure to consider anything else.

Then why did he gather the highest command staff of the American army? As follows from the book, “telling them that it is very important that not only Trump, but also him, took part in making the decision on the launch. According to the book, Milley asked each of them to ‘swear’ to confirm that they understand his role in this procedure.”

In other words, this means the most natural military conspiracy. And the fact that no one, including Milley, even thinks of denying anything or even at least making excuses, confirms the authenticity of what the journalists said.

A natural question arises: so in whose hands are nuclear weapons in America today? What, and on the basis of what, can guarantee the fulfilment by subordinates of any international agreements “signed by the American president”? And if they decide that “the president has gone mad”, as it was in relation to Donald Trump?

And it is good if the matter ends with their refusal to fulfil the order of their commander-in-chief to “press the button”. And if, on the contrary, the military comes to the conclusion that their head of state is “too soft”, what will stop them?

However, something else is more important. The authors of “Peril” did not just talk about the inner kitchen of the modern American higher state politicum. They showed that more than one “chief general” committed treason there. Nancy Pelosi, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and a number of other high-ranking leaders of the country had their own view on the concept of state discipline.

And this is already a real threat. First of all, for the rest of the world. The understanding of even such a fundamental question as: and America – who is it explicitly? Who exactly should we negotiate with there? Whose words  there “cost and how much”? It is clear that America is obviously not led by Joe Biden, but then by who? In whose hands exactly is the world’s largest nuclear arsenal?

Institute for International Political and Economic Strategies – RUSSTRAT


Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on pinterest
Share on linkedin
On Key

Related Posts


Russtrat world

A diplomat instead of a child prodigy

MOSCOW, 16 Oct 2021, RUSSTRAT Institute.   Formally, the current crisis in Vienna lasted no more than a weekend. On Saturday, 35-year-old Chancellor Sebastian Kurz,