It does sound really off, but the Nya Dagbladet is a reputable paper, so it must have at least seemed legit to whatever their fact-checking process is.
Edit: see below on how I had mistaken this newspaper for another, more reputable one.
Hm, that’s strange then. Just the closer I look at the report the weirder it sounds
Another inevitable consequence of a prolonged economic recession will be a sharp drop in living standards and rising unemployment (up to 200,000-400,000 in Germany alone), which will entail the exodus of skilled labour and well-educated young people. There are literally no other destinations for such migration other than the United States today.
Unfortunately, China is also expected to benefit over the medium term from this emerging scenario. At the same time, Europe’s deep political dependence on the U.S. allows us to effectively neutralise possible attempts by individual European states to draw closer to China.
Note the spelling in neutralise too. You’d expect Yanks to spell it -ize, ay? In fact I looked through their 2019 Extending Russia report, it’s consistenly spelled that way in there. There’s literally not one verb in >300 pages spelled the British way.
Idk, it’s not like I read papers like this regularly, but this is just not how these people talk/write from my experience. It’s too casual, too blatant, too personal, too engaged, not nearly technocratic enough. It sounds exactly like someone writing specifically to expose it. Maybe that’s just them talking internally, but I’m sceptical.
Oh, also, my error: I was mistaken about the reputability of the Nya Dagbladet, as I had mistaken it for another newspaper with a very similar name. The paper in question is tabloid trash. As a result, I am now inclined to believe that the report is a forgery.
Today, the RAND corporation made a press release denying that the report originates with them (the story on the Swedish paper has been updated to note this). Western social media are flagging the article as fake news. But I’m not sure any of this is evidence either for or against its authenticity.
It does sound really off, but the Nya Dagbladet is a reputable paper, so it must have at least seemed legit to whatever their fact-checking process is.
Edit: see below on how I had mistaken this newspaper for another, more reputable one.
Hm, that’s strange then. Just the closer I look at the report the weirder it sounds
Note the spelling in neutralise too. You’d expect Yanks to spell it -ize, ay? In fact I looked through their 2019 Extending Russia report, it’s consistenly spelled that way in there. There’s literally not one verb in >300 pages spelled the British way.
Idk, it’s not like I read papers like this regularly, but this is just not how these people talk/write from my experience. It’s too casual, too blatant, too personal, too engaged, not nearly technocratic enough. It sounds exactly like someone writing specifically to expose it. Maybe that’s just them talking internally, but I’m sceptical.
Oh, also, my error: I was mistaken about the reputability of the Nya Dagbladet, as I had mistaken it for another newspaper with a very similar name. The paper in question is tabloid trash. As a result, I am now inclined to believe that the report is a forgery.
It was probably typed up by a Polish nationalist.
Today, the RAND corporation made a press release denying that the report originates with them (the story on the Swedish paper has been updated to note this). Western social media are flagging the article as fake news. But I’m not sure any of this is evidence either for or against its authenticity.
More details here: https://nyadagbladet-se.translate.goog/ledare/darfor-haller-publiceringen-av-rand-dokumentet-trots-kritik-fran-oberoende-faktagranskare/?_x_tr_sl=auto&_x_tr_tl=en&_x_tr_hl=en