BRUSSELS, September 9, 2022—In a joint assessment released today, the Government of Ukraine, the European Commission, and the World Bank, in cooperation with partners, estimate that the current cost of reconstruction and recovery in Ukraine amounts to $349 billion (€349 Billion). This figure is expected to grow in the coming months as the war continues.
The Rapid Damage and Needs Assessment (RDNA) presents the first comprehensive evaluation of war impacts across twenty different sectors following the Russian invasion. It also lays out the financing needs for a resilient, inclusive, and sustainable recovery and reconstruction and provides a roadmap for planning.
https://freewestmedia.com/2022/08/06/monsanto-and-blackrock-are-buying-up-ukraine/
Ukraine is being sold off. The mendacious Western struggle for the "soul of Ukraine" is actually for the monopolies, Monsanto, Vanguard and BlackRock - to pick the country apart.
The Ukrainian land reform law, which after 20 years was passed by the Ukrainian Verkhovna Rada in 2021, made it possible for international agricultural conglomerates – belonging to the western zone of influence – to buy up large amounts of Ukrainian soil. At the same time, ordinary people were led to believe that ultimately the opposite was true: The sponsors of the bill brazenly lied about the alleged protection of Ukrainian farmers and their fertile land.
The international players involved in getting the law passed are agribusiness and biotech giants Cargill, DuPont and Monsanto. Together, these US companies bought about 17 million hectares in eastern and southern Ukraine. These are the regions with by far the most fertile soil, not only within Ukraine but even in this world.
The Australian National Review recently provided an illustrative comparison: The 16,7 million hectares already make up the entire cultivated area of Italy. In short, the stakes are high.
NATO acting as a policeman for corporate interests?
Behind each of these international exploiting companies there are completely different, mostly even more powerful companies that figure as motivated shareholders, but are also networked with the much-cited “military-industrial complex” of the United States of America. In this network, of course, NATO has been acting as the clumsy, executive tool. But in the economic-legal processes of property transfer of land, as described here, need to be operated with a little more finesse. The deceptive camouflage of these corporate raiders is called “participation in the free, global market”.
Basically, BlackRock and the Vanguard Group also symbolize an embodiment of Wall Street and its interests. Their enormous influence has placed them in their very own, exclusive category of companies. For example, the two are by far the largest shareholders in Wall Street’s 10 most powerful banks – including Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Citigroup, and JPMorgan Chase.
Focus on Odessa
Just last year, just as Ukraine’s infamous land reform was being passed, Cargill announced that it had become the majority owner of the deep-water port terminal called Neptune in the Pivdenny Port – formerly Yuzhnoye – in the Odessa region on the Black Sea.
In its own press release, the President of Cargill’s Agriculture and Supply Chain business in Europe, Philippa Purser, further explained: “Investing in Neptune allows Cargill to better leverage its operations to feed a growing population by shipping grain to areas around the world where it’s needed most.”
Among other things, this supremacy in the food chain is what is currently at stake in the showdown in this region. But this is just one of many Western investment projects that would be completely lost if Russia succeeded in its denazification and demilitarization, in this case in the Odessa region. Especially if referendums are held afterwards, which would undoubtedly result in independence from the Kiev regime.
Land ownership is not only decided by referendums, wars or military operations, but also by sneaky under-the-table sales. The clique of oligarchs that make up the Kiev regime relegated the latter to the fast lane in good time.
War Within the War: The fight over land and genetically engineered agriculture
The marketization of farmland is part of a series of policy “reforms” that the International Monetary Fund stipulated as a precondition enabling Ukraine to receive $8 billion in loans from the IMF.[2]
Even amid the pandemic there has been “wide-ranging opposition from the Ukrainian public to reversing that ban, with over 64 percent of the people opposed to the creation of a land market, according to an April 2021 poll.”[3]
Additionally, the IMF loan conditions required that Ukraine must also reverse its ban on genetically engineered crops, and enable private corporations like Monsanto to plant its GMO seeds and spray the fields with Monsanto’s Roundup. In that way, Monsanto hopes to break the boycott by a number of countries in Europe of its genetically engineered corn and soy.
U.S. agriculture relies on two main inputs: migrant farm labor and the monocropping of genetically engineered corn, soy, and other crops designed to tolerate—and thus be saturated with—Monsanto’s cancer-causing herbicide Roundup. The government’s regulatory process is broken, if it ever worked properly at all: Corporations such as Monsanto, Bayer, Dow, DuPont, Syngenta, Novartis, BASF and the other pesticide and pharmaceutical manufacturers are allowed to mask the truth about the dangers of their products.
They are facilitated in this by the complicity of federal (and global) regulatory agencies, allowing them to intentionally thwart the Precautionary Principle. Where the introduction of a new product or process whose ultimate effects are disputed or unknown, that product or process should be rejected.
Six years ago, Russian President Vladimir Putin sought to seize economic opportunities around the growing of food by opposing genetically engineered agriculture and Monsanto’s Roundup, the world’s most widely used herbicide; he initiated a program to eliminate pesticides and genetically engineered crops from Russia’s fields. The goal was to out-compete the U.S. and Canada as the world’s number one and two grain exporters by going organic, which mattered especially in Europe with its stricter laws regarding the import and planting of GMOs.
Monsanto had planned to open its first plant in Russia,[13] but in June 2016 Russia’s State Duma adopted a government bill banning the cultivation and breeding of genetically modified plants and animals, except as used for scientific research purposes.[14] A few weeks later, Putin signed federal law No. 358 prohibiting cultivation of genetically engineered crops. The law also made it illegal to breed genetically engineered animals on the territory of the Russian Federation.[15]
https://www.oaklandinstitute.org/blog/who-really-benefits-creation-land-market-ukraine
Who Really Benefits from the Creation of a Land Market in Ukraine?
Although Ukraine has large swaths of the most fertile farmland in the world, the wealth of its agriculture sector has long remained largely out of reach of the country’s farmers. In the country known as the “breadbasket of Europe,” agriculture has been dominated by oligarchs and multinational corporations since the privatization of state-owned land following the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991. For the past thirty years, no government has been able to meaningfully challenge that status quo.
Thirty years after the disastrous privatization of land that took place with their support in the 1990s, international financial institutions such as the IMF and World Bank have succeeded in lifting the moratorium that had been established to prevent the takeover of Ukraine’s land by a minority of private interests.
The above analysis makes it clear that imposing the creation of a land market in Ukraine will further concentrate control of land in the hands of oligarchs and large agribusinesses, while favoring the interests of foreign investors and banks. It is unfortunately the vast majority of Ukrainian farmers and citizens who will have to pay the cost.
https://medium.com/@andrey_p/corporations-are-the-new-conquistadors-ukraine-4387c73bc54b
The US Government’s Role in GMO colonialism.
Within this increasingly layered picture of corporate intervention into Ukraine’s agriculture can be found the key player in Ukraine’s current state of affairs. The US government, while telling the world it is simply brokering a transition in Ukraine, is in fact playing a central role shaping the nation’s economy. The aforementioned ISAAA which claims to be “a small, responsive, non-bureaucratic, international network”, is in fact sponsored directly by the US state department, department of Agriculture and USaid. The ISAAA is instrumental in organising the dissemination of biotechnology into “developing countries through public-private partnerships”.
The concerted campaign of these corporations, with the help of USaid and even direct US government assistance, is already paying dividends for the future profits of these companies. The Ukrainian Minister of Agricultural Policy and Food, Mykola Prysyazhnyuk, announced in 2013 that GMO feed trials for livestock had begun. The IMF loaned Ukraine 17 billion dollars, but with one of the terms being that Ukraine needs to eventually open itself to biotechnology and GMO products.
Ukraine is renown for its ‘black soil’, which is extremely fertile and high yielding. It has long been used by local farmers to supply much of Europe and the world with corn and wheat. For the immensely wealthy international corporations this is the chance to make more money, and with the current situation in Ukraine, it will be relatively easy to do so.
Once the biotechnology and GMO laws are altered it will be too late for small farms and businesses to compete on a local scale, let alone an international one.
While the tragedy of the potential ruination of Ukraine’s unique soils and environment is enough to warrant alarm. It is the fact that the benefits of this corporate invasion will only be shared by the companies themselves and the few oligarchs whose land they have purchased. Ukraine as a whole will receive little to no benefit in the long term. For a country ruined by a war with no end in sight as well as decades of corruption, this spells disaster on a grand scale.
The CIA was acutely aware of Bandera’s fascist views but they understood that if he was captured by the Soviet Union he would not be accorded the same mercy that was granted due to American interests in post-war Europe. The following series of images details the lengths to which the CIA went in order to keep Bandera out of Soviet hands and to further avoid branding him a ‘war criminal’.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1303432/total-bilateral-aid-to-ukraine/
https://www.statista.com/chart/27278/military-aid-to-ukraine-by-country/
https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Ukraine/foreign_aid/
https://www.cadtm.org/Ukraine-Between-a-rock-and-IMF-conditionality
https://www.cadtm.org/IMF-Interference-Plunges-Ukraine
https://www.cadtm.org/History-of-Ukrainian-Debt
Wow, good write up! Thanks.
I would like to add another couple of points.
One of the controlled Dutch Politicians, called Paternotte, said that the biggest batch of casualties of the Ukraine war were the MH-17 passengers ....
Dutch PM Rutte said: it is our war. (note the our, knowing that this is Klaus Schwab's lapdog, in it with UK King Charles III and the Oranges)
So I think we have a conflagration of several interests.
Cui bono? Well, in 2014 when Biden acted as point man for Obama, it is clear the EU did not benefit.
Think about it: 1 What is TTIP/ TPP? What would it create? When did it fail? 2. What actually is the WEF? 3. What is the Great Reset? 4. What is society 4.0? 5. What are ESDG' s and SDG? 6. What is the purpose of the Covid hoax from a legal point of view?
It is to create a system controlled by big corporations, where governments execute the will of these corporation, and the people, well the people .....forget about the people. You either do as you are told, or you get canceled.
Excellent points, Sir! (while I was only doing copy-pasta)
-> Isn't that what fascism is all about?