Eastern Europe/Ukraine

vic · Post by **vic** » 19 Mar 2014 10:37

This new Yats guy leading the Nazis of Ukraine seems to have pretty dead eyes, doped out?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 11:56

In reference to Putin speech that the West threatened internal unrest in Russia , I think US will increase its support to Chechen Terrorist to destablise Russia internally and tie it down.

Washington’s “Civil Society”: CIA Financing of Chechen and Caucasus Regional Terrorists

They had also provided Assylum to Chechen terrorist in past

U.S. gave asylum to accused Chechen terror leader

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 12:18

Wats with these Japanese .....did they sanction US when it invaded Iraq without Security Council Approval or wihen Kosovo Referendum was held

Japan PM threatens Moscow with more sanctions over Crimea

19 Mar 2014

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Wednesday condemned Russia for violating Ukraine's territorial integrity and threatened to impose further sanctions against Moscow over its role in the Crimean crisis.

TOKYO: Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Wednesday condemned Russia for violating Ukraine's territorial integrity and threatened to impose further sanctions against Moscow over its role in the Crimean crisis.

President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday signed a treaty claiming the Black Sea region as Russian territory after more than 97 per cent of Crimeans voted in favour of Kremlin rule in a disputed referendum.

The West, which has imposed sanctions of its own, condemned Moscow's actions as a blatant annexation of Crimea.

"(Russian action) violates Ukraine's unity, sovereignty and the integrity of its territory, and we condemn it," Abe told a parliamentary committee.

"Our country cannot overlook an attempt to change the status quo by force," he added.

Japan's foreign ministry on Tuesday announced it was suspending negotiations with Russia on easing visa requirements and would not be starting talks on a new investment accord.

"We will consider further measures, while cooperating with G7 nations and other countries," Abe said Wednesday, without elaborating.

The mass-circulation Yomiuri newspaper said that additional action would include restricting visas and freezing assets.

Abe also said Wednesday that, if his schedule permitted, he would attend a G7 summit in the Hague next week called by US President Barack Obama to discuss the escalating showdown with Russia.

Japanese trade minister Toshimitsu Motegi, who was scheduled to attend a Russian investment forum in Tokyo on Wednesday, was "unable to attend" because he had to be in parliament, a ministry official told AFP on Tuesday.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/wor ... 40888.html
***************

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 19 Mar 2014 12:24

The butt kicking they got in WW II in Manchuria and getting booted off Sakhalin and Keurile Islands must still be hurting them.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2014 12:43

The US intention to station US troops in the Baltic states and still support their illegal puppet regime in Kiev is dangerously bringing conflict with Russia closer.The deliberate sniper attacks,similar to those in the Maidan,which was used as justification for the putsch by the Kiev clique,which included western mercenaries,is going to see another standoff in the eastern parts of Ukraine,where the mood of the people is mostly pro-Russia,who are demanding their own referendums to join Russia as the Crimea has done.If the Ukranian troops provoke Russian forces by sniper attacks and other provocative acts,we may very well see a full scale Russian counterattack and the chance of US and Russian troops facing each other.

Here is a western viewpoint,but ignores the fact that the Kiev baptist preacher-pretender,has appealed to the Russian ethnic peoples of the Ukraine too late,about preserving the Russian language,etc,,etc.What did he do on seizing power? He abolished these very same rights that he is now offering after losing the Crimea! This is because he knows that the snowball effect is going to be inevitable as the remnants of his country are a basket case,desperately requiring billions of EU money (which it can't afford) to survive.Once the economic catastrophe hits ordinary Ukranians,they will overthrow Arsenic-Yuck just as Yanukovych was done in and his predecessors,the original puppets of the Orange Revolution.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... heartlands
The focus is on Crimea, but next is the fight for Ukraine
Despite today's shooting, the west must not forget that the pivotal struggle is over control of the eastern heartlands

Remember, remember: this is about the whole of Ukraine, not just Crimea. Vladimir Putin knows that. Ukrainians know that. As the reported killing of a Ukrainian soldier shows, there is nothing the government in Kiev can do to restore its control over Crimea. The crucial struggle is now for eastern Ukraine. If the whole of Ukraine, including the east, participates in peaceful, free and fair presidential elections on 25 May, it can survive as one independent country (minus Crimea). It will also be back on an unambiguously democratic, constitutional path. In everything the EU and the west does over the next two months, that should be our first priority.

Only the criminally naive or the hardened fellow-traveller could maintain that the pro-Russian groups now working to produce chaos, disorientation and violence in cities such as Donetsk and Kharkiv are not actively supported by Moscow. In Tuesday's New York Times there was a fine eyewitness account of one such stage-managed demo in Kharkiv. At the base of a giant Lenin statue, a huge banner read: "Our homeland: USSR!" As the reporters pointed out, this was all made for Russian television. Whatever Putin finally decides to do, the media narrative will be prepared: whether for an escalating intervention or, as he would undoubtedly prefer, to blackmail the whole country back into the Russian sphere of influence.

It would be equally naive, however, to pretend that there are not real fears among many in eastern Ukraine. Start by abandoning the labels "ethnic Ukrainians" and "ethnic Russians". They mean almost nothing. What you have here is a fluid, complex mix of national, linguistic, civic and political identities. There are people who think of themselves as Russians. There are those who live their lives mainly in Russian, but also identify as Ukrainians. There are innumerable families of mixed origins, with parents and grandparents who moved around the former Soviet Union. Most of them would rather not have to choose. In a poll conducted in the first half of February, only 15% of those asked in the Kharkiv region and 33% around Donetsk wanted Ukraine to unite with Russia.

In the same poll, the figure for Crimea was 41%. But then take a month of radicalising politics and Russian takeover, with Ukrainian-language channels yanked off TV. Add relentless reporting on the Russian-language media of a "fascist coup" in Kiev, exacerbated by some foolish words and gestures from victorious revolutionaries in Kiev. Subtract Crimean Tatars and Ukrainians living in Crimea, who largely boycott the referendum. Season with a large pinch of electoral fraud. Hey presto, 41% becomes 97%.

It is not just Russian "political technology" that changes numbers and loyalties. What happens in such traumatic moments is that identities switch and crystallise quite suddenly, like an unstable chemical compound to which you add one drop of reactant. Yesterday, you were a Yugoslav; today, a furious Serb or Croat.

So everything that is done in and for Ukraine over the next weeks and months must be calculated to keep that identity-compound from changing state. Shortly before President Putin's amazing imperial rant in the Kremlin on Tuesday, another speech was broadcast on a Ukrainian TV channel. Speaking in Russian, the interim Ukrainian prime minister, Arseniy Yatseniuk, said that "for the sake of preserving Ukraine's unity and sovereignty" the Kiev government is prepared to grant "the broadest range of powers" to the mainly Russian-speaking regions in the east. This would include giving cities the right to run their own police forces and make decisions about education and culture.

That was exactly the right thing to do. Now he and his colleagues should go to these places, and say it again and again – in Russian. They should support Russian as an official second language in these areas. They should not dismiss talk of federalisation simply because Moscow also favours it. They should actively want there to be a pro-Russian candidate in the presidential election. And they should do everything they can to ensure that election is free and fair, including diversified media coverage in Russian and Ukrainian – unlike the vote in Crimea.

The west in general, and Europe in particular, can support this in numerous ways. The OSCE, EU and other international organisations should flood the place with election monitors. Western governments must make sure Ukraine's authorities have the money to pay the bills right now. Political parties and NGOs can send advisers. The west can also up the ante. It can make the medium- to long-term economic offer of relations with the EU more attractive. It can threaten Moscow with sanctions far worse than those currently imposed, not just if Putin takes his marked or unmarked forces anywhere else in eastern Ukraine, but if he keeps on trying to destabilise it by proxy.

The time has also come to talk turkey with Ukrainian oligarchs such as Rinat Akhmetov, who is as powerful as any state institution in eastern Ukraine. Quietly but firmly they must be shown carrot and stick: a rosy future for your businesses in the world economy if you help Ukraine survive as an independent, self-governing state; financial strangulation and endless court proceedings if you don't. (One of the eastern oligarchs, Dmitro Firtash, has already been arrested in Austria on an FBI extradition request. It's all about an investment project back in 2006, they say; nothing to do with current politics, you understand.) If Putin's Olympic sport is hardcore wrestling, we cannot confine ourselves to badminton.

None of this is to suggest that what has happened in Crimea does not matter in itself. In his Kremlin speech, Putin scored a few telling hits on US unilateralism and western double standards, but what he has done threatens the foundations of international order. He thanked China for its support, but does Beijing want the Tibetans to secede following a referendum? He recalled Soviet acceptance of German unification and appealed to Germans to back the unification of "the Russian world", which apparently includes all Russian-speakers. With rhetoric more reminiscent of 1914 than 2014, Putin's Russia is now a revanchist power in plain view.

Without the consent of all parts of the existing state (hence completely unlike Scotland), without due constitutional process, and without a free and fair vote, the territorial integrity of Ukraine, guaranteed 20 years ago by Russia, the US and Britain, has been destroyed. In practical terms, on the ground, that cannot be undone. What can still be rescued, however, is the political integrity of the rest of Ukraine.

As for the sons of Nippon.They have lost the true bushido spirit.Post WW2,they've been reduced to shooting their lip from Uncle Sam';s shoulder.A great pity because their unique characteristic is being suppressed by their American masters.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:08

Paul wrote:The butt kicking they got in WW II in Manchuria and getting booted off Sakhalin and Keurile Islands must still be hurting them.

The Japanese are just following their Western Master ...... but to be fair to Japanese even in dispute with Russia over Sakhalin or Kuril they did not resort to any provocative acts and kept dispute at diplomatic level.

Any further serious action by Japan would also mean Russia would not remain neutral in China-Japan disputes

Although we need to discriminate serious action from rhetoric as the latter is for domestic consumption in West , Japan and so called West leaning Free Loving Nations

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:09

Crimea protesters storm Ukrainian Navy base in Sevastopol

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:13

Philip , US has the right to station troops in NATO country and can do confidence building exercise thats fine and within their treaty , Infact US still has Nuclear Weapons in Europe and that can been the bone of contention between US/NATO and Russia over reduction of non-strategic nuclear weapons.

WRT to NATO , Putin has clearly drawn the redline with Ukraine , so any prospects of Ukraine joining NATO is remote and if it does he will simply take over the East and North of Ukraine.

The Crimea episode would cool down the Hot Heads at NATO and any action on NATO expansion they would have to calculate the cost

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 19 Mar 2014 13:24

The Russian pop of Moldava would be the next flashpoint along with Odessa. Putin is bound to ask for guarantees for the safety of Russian speaking populations in the regions as quid pro quo.

Paul · Post by **Paul** » 19 Mar 2014 13:28

We could see a repeat of these ethnic scrimmages in the UK within a couple of generations if Scotland were to break away from the UK.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:35

Paul wrote:The Russian pop of Moldava would be the next flashpoint along with Odessa. Putin is bound to ask for guarantees for the safety of Russian speaking populations in the regions as quid pro quo.

I dont think so he will do any thing now , The Ukraine crises was just forced on him when on Feb 21 the maidan took over the Government and West Quickly recognised it and he had to act or loose Ukraine.

Prior to that there was Nuland distributing food and Western Politician visit Maidan and openly supporting them ...... no other country would have allowed that to happen.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:40

Far Right MPs Attack TV CEO, Force His Resignation, Throw Him Into A SUV 18Mar2014

Justice Maidan Style

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 13:42

^^ More Details

Ukrainian nationalists humiliate, violently force state TV channel head to resign

vic · Post by **vic** » 19 Mar 2014 13:53

I do not think Putin will try to partition Ukraine by breaking off East Ukraine. He will allow the EU to suffer the liability of financing and funding bankrupt east Ukraine and then act when discontent is at the highest. Russia may wait a long time before acting on Eastern Ukraine.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 14:05

vic wrote:I do not think Putin will try to partition Ukraine by breaking off East Ukraine. He will allow the EU to suffer the liability of financing and funding bankrupt east Ukraine and then act when discontent is at the highest. Russia may wait a long time before acting on Eastern Ukraine.

I was talking in context of Ukraine joining NATO which right now does not look possible ......As far as it joining EU AA yes they can and on Mar 21 the Maidan gov will sign the political agreement.

Ofcourse Ukraine being a sovereign nation can choose to join NATO then Russia has to deal with this issue in a different way and need take over South or North Ukr.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 19 Mar 2014 14:23

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/m ... ian-troops

Ukraine navy's Black Sea HQ stormed by pro-Russian troops
Russian flag flies above Sevastopol after Putin hails Crimea annexation and Ukraine accuses Moscow of war crime

Stationing US forces in a NATO nation is par for the course,but in the current scenario increasing tension.a stupid act.Putin equally has every right to install missiles on the Polish border and conduct "troop exercises" there,plus naval exercises in the Baltic. The crux of the problem is that the US and the West do not want an equal relationship with nations outside their sphere of influence,they only want servile lackeys who will carry out their looting and asset stripping as was done in the colonial era,apart from making these nations whose population is in the billions,a mass market for their goods and services.

Just as China wants India to bee pushed back behind the Himalayas,the West would love to see Russia similarly pushed back behind the Urals.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/po ... 00692.html

Donald Macintyre's Sketch: Europe appears to have a severe shortage of both sticks and carrots

Donald Macintyre
Tuesday 18 March 2014
Some Eurocratic wit – it may have been the unusual British diplomat Robert Cooper – was the first to define the EU motto on foreign policy as: “Speak softly but carry a big carrot.” In the scornful view of several MPs, that was about as far as the Europeans had gone in standing up to Russia over Ukraine.

In the aftermath of Vladimir Putin’s statement declaring Crimea a “sovereign and independent state” – it’s reassuring to know that the old tsarist habit of issuing draconian decrees has survived through the Soviet era to the present day – there were MPs across the party divide in favour of wielding the big stick instead.

Among those questioning the widespread consensus – held by William Hague and his supportive shadow, Douglas Alexander, and others – that military options were a non-starter, Labour’s Chris Bryant promised MPs that he was “not arguing for war” but contrasted the approach to Russia with that of not ruling out military action against Iran.

“I want to ask now why we ruled out any military intervention, in whatever set of circumstances… from the very beginning of Putin’s advances into Ukraine,” he said.

The right-wing Tory Gerald Howarth went even further. Noting that Russia was “repeatedly” conducting exercises on Ukraine’s border, he suggested: “Nato should have a maritime exercise in the Black Sea to serve notice on the Russians: ‘You do not go near Odessa.’”

The problem with these threats from the safety of the Commons, however, is that they had the ring of the old Glasgow bar-room joke: “You want a fight? I’ll hold your coat.” Former Foreign Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, who condemned the “pathetic and feeble” measures so far taken by the EU, did not suggest military measures.

Instead Rifkind, who in the 1980s played a key ministerial role in Margaret Thatcher’s “Ostpolitik”, culminating in her political love affair with Mikhail Gorbachev, urged real financial sanctions which would oblige Putin “to live with a Russian economy in which no other part of the world would invest and in which billions were coming off the Russian stock exchange”.

You didn’t need to be a Bletchley decoder to realise he meant sanctions that might actually hurt the City of London.

Far from being alone in invoking pre-Second World War appeasement, Rifkind, speaking as usual without a note, added: “We must be able to look ourselves in the eye and say that we did all that we could… to ensure that the horrors of the 1930s were not repeated, not in exactly the same form, but in a form that will damage European security and stability for a generation to come.”

Against this background, it was pretty brave of his fellow Tory Sir Edward Leigh to be the lone voice appealing to MPs to appreciate the “sensibilities” of Russians over Ukraine.

Declaring an interest – namely his absorption with Russian history and culture “since my wedding to my Russian Orthodox wife” – Leigh insisted that he was neither “pro Russian nor pro-Ukrainian” but said: “We must stop playing power games. It is too dangerous a situation, and the West must realise that it cannot tear Ukraine away from Russia.”

Earlier, Hague had been at his most eloquent in warning, more sharply than before, that there is a “grave risk that we have not seen the worst of this crisis” and that “the credibility of the international order would be at stake” if it did not stand up to Putin’s “profound breach of international agreement”.

But while he promised that Britain would push for further EU sanctions, he acknowledged only that “preparation is under way” for the kind of measures that might satisfy Rifkind.

So Hague spoke not softly but harshly. It was hard, nevertheless, at the end of the debate to escape the feeling that faced with Putin’s determination, the Europeans lack a carrot, let alone – so far at least – a big stick.

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 19 Mar 2014 19:31

Austin wrote:
vic wrote:I do not think Putin will try to partition Ukraine by breaking off East Ukraine. He will allow the EU to suffer the liability of financing and funding bankrupt east Ukraine and then act when discontent is at the highest. Russia may wait a long time before acting on Eastern Ukraine.
I was talking in context of Ukraine joining NATO which right now does not look possible ......As far as it joining EU AA yes they can and on Mar 21 the Maidan gov will sign the political agreement.

Ofcourse Ukraine being a sovereign nation can choose to join NATO then Russia has to deal with this issue in a different way and need take over South or North Ukr.

I have feeling that if EU gives Ukrainians permission for visa free migration to anywhere in Europe........then Russia looses. It is very easy for EU to win this game. That is why they say that Economy is best defense.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 19 Mar 2014 19:49

Isn't Odessa in Crimea? And hasn't Crimea already become independent?

Muppalla · Post by **Muppalla** » 19 Mar 2014 19:51

Austin wrote:A Distorted Lens Justifying An Illegitimate Ukrainian Government

Why does Western media ignore critical information about the snipers that killed Euromaidan protesters in Ukraine?

This article is very important article that give a model of how to overthrow an elected government with external interference. I am reading this thread from an angle of how AAP or its several children that are being manufactured in various states can do their business once Modi become PM. These are all tools of the mafia that is ruling India. For India, to safegaurd its national security, it will have to look into all these models. I diasgree with those who think that an Orange Rev could not be orchestrated in India.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2014 20:06

I too was thinking Maidan is AAP on steroids.

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 19 Mar 2014 20:23

Austin wrote:Wats with these Japs .....did they sanction US when it invaded Iraq without Security Council Approval or wihen Kosovo Referendum was held

National interests are not subservient to principles and consistent application for the same. Further Japan's FP has always supported the west, so why the surprise? Same with China, there is a reason why China used the historical narrative principle, and the reason has everything to do with its view of "outer manchuria" and its 100 years of shame.

What was India's reason to stick to the same statement as Ombaba? Soverignity arguments are for those who are either weak or have settled and satisfied borders. When does this truncated state wake up and realize that our own civilizational view and interests that stem thereof take a precedence over and above legalistic arguments.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 19 Mar 2014 20:49

from WP - as i had predicted, some of those `' masked militias`' were spetsnaz units

David Ignatius
Opinion Writer
What we learned in Crimea

By David Ignatius, Wednesday, March 19, 5:11 AM E-mail the writer
From the photographs we’ve seen of the Russian special operations, or Spetsnaz, troops that intervened in Crimea, several things are obvious: They are secretive, moving without insignia and often covering their faces; they’re disciplined and they’re decisive.

The diplomatic response to the Russian intervention is continuing. But Pentagon officials are beginning to assess the military “lessons learned.” The bottom line is that Russia’s move into Crimea was a study in the speedy deployment of special operations forces to achieve a limited objective.

David Ignatius

Ignatius writes a twice-a-week foreign affairs column and contributes to the PostPartisan blog.
Archive
@IgnatiusPostFacebookRSS
Gallery

Tom Toles goes global: A collection of cartoons about international news.
You may also like...
Russia’s Western enablers
Anne Applebaum
Russia’s Western enablers
Obama’s mandate on Ukraine
Fareed Zakaria
Obama’s mandate on Ukraine
Click here to subscribe.

“What has been most striking to me so far has been the apparent levels of discipline, training and cooperation among the Russian forces,” noted Paul Saunders, executive director of the Center for the National Interest, in an interview this week with the military blog War on the Rocks.

The Russians deployed quickly in the hours surrounding reports of their initial movement on Feb. 26. Two days later, when President Obama warned that there would be “costs” for invading Crimea, the Russian forces were already in place and the intervention was nearly a fait accompli.

The Russians are thought to have had roughly 15,000 troops in Crimea when the crisis began, and quickly added about another 5,000, mostly special operations troops. The Russians are allowed up to 25,000 military personnel in Crimea under their 30-year lease of the Black Sea naval base at Sevastopol.

Military analysts note some interesting characteristics of the Russian deployment: President Vladimir Putin, a former KGB lieutenant colonel, chose something closer to a paramilitary “covert action” than a normal military attack. Because the troops didn’t have Russian insignia, there was a thin veil of deniability, which the Russians exploited.

At a news conference March 4, Putin denied that Russian troops had invaded, despite photographic evidence to the contrary. “You can go to a store and buy a uniform,” insisted Putin. This “deniability” was maintained by Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu, who said March 5 it was “complete nonsense” that Russian troops had invaded Crimea and that he had “no idea” how Russian military vehicles had gotten there.

These bland denials of reality were useful in several ways: They maintained a fig leaf of legitimacy for an illegal intervention; they allowed Russia a chance (not yet taken) to de-escalate an operation that hadn’t officially been acknowledged; and they distanced Putin in case things went badly and Ukrainians were killed.

Putin also showed a notable willingness to take risks. So far, there has been almost no bloodshed between Russians and Ukrainians, but Putin couldn’t have known this when he began. That’s why the precision and discipline of Russian forces were crucial. Their professionalism reduced the risk of an incident that could have spiraled out of control.

Finally, Putin prepared a rationale for his intervention — along with the attendant propaganda. He insisted he was acting to protect Russian citizens and Russian speakers in Crimea. His troops were welcomed by a generally supportive Crimean population, and his action was lauded back home. This model suggests that Putin might be prepared to move, similarly, to protect Russians in neighboring countries, such as eastern Ukraine or the Transnistria region of Moldova.

Analysts think Putin would be less likely to move against neighboring states, such as Lithuania and Latvia, that have significant Russian-speaking populations but that are NATO members. Such operations would require far more force — and would test NATO’s “Article 5” commitment to U.S.-led mutual defense, a risk that is probably greater than Putin is willing to tolerate.

The well-organized Crimea operation also suggests improvement in the quality and training of the Russian military. Their troops had operated with far less precision a decade ago in Chechnya and in the 2008 invasion of Georgia . A botched attempt to free 850 hostages in a Moscow theater in 2002 resulted in the deaths of 130 of the captives.

Russia evidently has been getting results for increased spending on its military: The 2012 edition of an annual survey by the International Institute for Strategic Studies estimated that Russia would spend 3.78 percent of its GDP on defense in 2013, by far the highest amount in more than a decade. Aging or incompetent Russian officers have been purged as part of a modernization campaign.

This Russian army, in short, is not the one that proved so feeble in Afghanistan. It is well-trained and stealthy and effectively uses a “small footprint.” And Putin clearly wasn’t deterred by NATO military moves that signaled a commitment to protect member states — but didn’t convey a willingness to check Russian black operations in a friendly, neighboring region.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2014 20:58

Well let him write an equally well researched article on the snipers at Maidan and then we can see his objectivity.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Mar 2014 21:17

India won't back western sanctions against Russia over Crimea: sources

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 19 Mar 2014 21:22

I recommend reading what "Saker" wrote about this 19 days ago.

Feb. 28, 2014: http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/ ... rimea.html

This night sure was interesting. It appears that a group of unidentified armed men took control of the Belbek and Simferopol airports and, according to some reports, of an air-traffic control facility, then left. They kept a low profile, were extremely polite and said that they had come to prevent a "Ukrainian paratrooper force" from landing, but that this had been a false alarm. They then apologized and left. The pro-nationalist media first accused the Black Sea Fleet, which immediately issued a denial, then they blamed the Russian Spetsnaz GRU for the operation. Interestingly, a group of Mi-24 attack helicopters was seen flying in the direction of the Belbek airport the same day, and filmed by a civilian driver on the highway. Check it out ....

Finally, it was reported that a Turkish airliner which was scheduled to land in Crimea decided to turn around and fly back upon hearing the news of the seizure of the airports.

What does all that mean?

I will be honest with you and immediately admit that I don't know for sure. My sense is that something triggered an alert on the Russian side, possibly the arrival of the Turkish aircraft. After all, why did it turn back instead of either landing like other aircraft did, or land somewhere nearby? Could it be that there was something aboard this plane which the Turks did not want the Russians to seize?

Concerning the helicopters seen: these are Mi-24 which the Black Sea Fleet does not use. As far as I know, the only Mi-24 unit of the Russian Navy is the 125th Independent Helicopter Squadron of the Baltic Fleet and it is based in Chkalovsk, near Kaliningrad, very far from the Ukraine.

Again, I might be mistaken (maybe the footage is ancient, or filmed elsewhere), but I have the feeling that the nationalists are saying the truth when they claim that Russian combat helicopters have crossed the border and executed some mission in the Crimea. I counted a dozen Mi-24 in this video, which is *a lot* of firepower. Also, each Mi-24 can fit up to 8 soldiers, so in this case we could assume that each could carry at least 4 heavily armed soldiers and their gear, for a total of 48 combatants. But since there is no shortage of local manpower, my guess is that these were flying as fire support for another unit, probably those who seized the airports.

But if Russia thought that some threat justified sending in 12 Mi-24s is broad daylight, could it also have sent in some Spetsnaz units? I would say that yes, this is possible. So, again, I think that the nationalist who claim that what they saw was a Spetsnaz GRU operation might well be right. Lastly, and very subjectively, that very polite and low profile attitude towards bystanders is very typical of Russian Spetsnaz forces, I saw that with my own eyes in Moscow in 1993 when the arrogant and big-mouth forces which has crushed the Parliament were replaced by real Spetsnaz units: these guys were all very polite, very distant and, frankly, very scary in highly focused attitude.

So my sense is that there was some threat which was perceived serious enough by the Russian military to send in troops from across the border, probably not because of any shortage of manpower locally, but because specialized troops were better suited to the mission. The Russian Spetsnaz secured the airports, the Naval Infantry unit blocked the Ukrainian Border Guard while the local volunteer militias were used to shut down the roads and assure general protection. The threat than receded, and Russians left their positions and withdrew.

Here's what "Saker" wrote the next day, March 1, 2014. http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/ ... rimea.html

Some kind of attack on Crimea definitely happened yesterday and it was repelled. I don't think that the attacking side was controlled by the new regime in Kiev as Iatseniuk and Turchinov had nothing to gain from such an action and much to lose. I think that the attacking side was a third party, most likely some kind of assault force of Ukrainian and/or Tatar nationalists organized and controlled by US special forces. I believe that this force tried cutting off the communication lines of the local authorities and attempted to storm the Internal Ministry building to seize control of the local police. The Russian military clearly believed that some kind of force would be sent to the Crimea by air and that triggered a move by the Russian to seize the airports and defend them by force if needed. When they saw that their move had been detected and preempted, the attacking force withdrew. The US was clearly worried enough about the Russian reaction to have Obama issue a public threat about a "price to pay" should Russia invade the Ukraine. As for the Russians, they are clearly incensed and key political figures have all expressed their demand that the Kremlin take action to protect Crimea. Both sides are clearly in shock over what took place last night.

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2014 21:34

Avarachan, In hindsight there are many undiscovered pieces of information that are ignored due to volume of data and our own bias of the mind.
Ver clearly this person sensed on March 1 itself the goings on in Ukraine.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 19 Mar 2014 21:43

Austin wrote:Wats with these Japs .....did they sanction US when it invaded Iraq without Security Council Approval or wihen Kosovo Referendum was held

Japan PM threatens Moscow with more sanctions over Crimea
19 Mar 2014

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Wednesday condemned Russia for violating Ukraine's territorial integrity and threatened to impose further sanctions against Moscow over its role in the Crimean crisis.

TOKYO: Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe on Wednesday condemned Russia for violating Ukraine's territorial integrity and threatened to impose further sanctions against Moscow over its role in the Crimean crisis.

President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday signed a treaty claiming the Black Sea region as Russian territory after more than 97 per cent of Crimeans voted in favour of Kremlin rule in a disputed referendum.

The West, which has imposed sanctions of its own, condemned Moscow's actions as a blatant annexation of Crimea.

"(Russian action) violates Ukraine's unity, sovereignty and the integrity of its territory, and we condemn it," Abe told a parliamentary committee.

"Our country cannot overlook an attempt to change the status quo by force," he added.

Japan's foreign ministry on Tuesday announced it was suspending negotiations with Russia on easing visa requirements and would not be starting talks on a new investment accord.

"We will consider further measures, while cooperating with G7 nations and other countries," Abe said Wednesday, without elaborating.

The mass-circulation Yomiuri newspaper said that additional action would include restricting visas and freezing assets.

Abe also said Wednesday that, if his schedule permitted, he would attend a G7 summit in the Hague next week called by US President Barack Obama to discuss the escalating showdown with Russia.

Japanese trade minister Toshimitsu Motegi, who was scheduled to attend a Russian investment forum in Tokyo on Wednesday, was "unable to attend" because he had to be in parliament, a ministry official told AFP on Tuesday.

http://www.channelnewsasia.com/news/wor ... 40888.html
***************

Makes the neighbourhood uncomfortable for Japan

ramana · Post by **ramana** » 19 Mar 2014 21:46

Jarita, I think Japan thinks PRC might get ideas and do a Crimea in South China Seas.

Jarita · Post by **Jarita** » 19 Mar 2014 21:50

^^^ Both China and Russia. Sharing borders changes perspectives

Rony · Post by **Rony** » 19 Mar 2014 22:18

ramana wrote:Jarita, I think Japan thinks PRC might get ideas and do a Crimea in South China Seas.

Also Japan has the kuril island dispute with Russia

Prem · Post by **Prem** » 19 Mar 2014 23:02

With Ukraine now being nothing but Pain in Vain, Only Paki route left for retreat from Afghanistan with lots of money thrown in for the crawlers in Jihadi Drain and Uighurs getting $ vigor to bleed China.Leaving Kabul but taking Kiev could have saved H&D but will there be retreat from Kabul at all when Kiev provide good excuse to stay there? I am thinking Kiev on Fire, Kabul on Fire, Kandhar for Hire,Kashgar on Fire and how long for India's K go on fire again? Kremlin, Peking , Delhi all stuck with
L to experience KLPD. .

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 19 Mar 2014 23:23

This has certainly made the position of the Japanese very difficult. Shinzo Abe was out to solve the longstanding dispute with Russia and turn Japan into a `normal country`. He has met Putin 5 times in last year alone and spoken of personal relationship. Was one of the few west aligned countries` head to visit Sochi.

If Japan goes ahead and imposes sanctions, it means Russia-Japan relations remain deadlocked for another 20 years. If Shinzo Abe`s condemnation remains just that or if only mild sanctions are imposed, that would mean, Japan is on course to solve its disputes with Russia and could indeed turn into a `normal state` (not dependent on Washington for security). Relations with Russia will eventually decide how tightly Japan stays in US embrace.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 20 Mar 2014 00:20

The Russians will never give up the Kuril Islands. Never. Anybody who thinks otherwise is kidding themselves. Therefore there is no use in the Japanese buddying up to the Russians. I mean they can do it if they want to, but it's a useless proposition.

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 20 Mar 2014 01:03

Here is the official--and now complete--English transcript of President Putin's speech: http://eng.kremlin.ru/news/6889

At the same time, we are grateful to all those who understood our actions in Crimea; we are grateful to the people of China, whose leaders have always considered the situation in Ukraine and Crimea taking into account the full historical and political context, and greatly appreciate India’s reserve and objectivity.

Here is another version of the same transcript, with some useful headings added for improved readability:
https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Pu ... March_2014

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 20 Mar 2014 01:25

I think it's time to look heroic again. Where IS that "RUSSIA S*CKS" bumper sticker to put behind the gun rack on my red pickup??

chetak · Post by **chetak** » 20 Mar 2014 01:27

^^^^^^

Historically, no country in the vicinity or one having come into violent contact with the japanese will never forget the atrocities and the horrors of the japanese occupation.

So a lot of present day behavior is simply seen as payback.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 20 Mar 2014 03:54

If Amirkhan/EU does bring sanctions on, what will Russia do?
1. Stop selling gas to Europe in Winter(about 6 months away)
2. Stop supporting US negotiations with Iran
3. Sell US treasury bills so that the 10 year yield climbs just over 3%( Amirkhan will fear 3% a lot as default becomes a clear and present danger)

I do wonder 'the haircut in search of a brain' Kerry and 'underwear male model' ombaba seem to be clueless. May be Yellen is not yelling enough in their ears.

TSJones · Post by **TSJones** » 20 Mar 2014 04:46

chetak wrote:^^^^^^

Historically, no country in the vicinity or one having come into violent contact with the japanese will never forget the atrocities and the horrors of the japanese occupation.

So a lot of present day behavior is simply seen as payback.

I would note that in the battle of Okinawa, America lost 14,000 soldiers, sailors and marines killed including an US Army Lt. General, with 65,000 casulaties of all sorts. The US lost 20 ships sunk including 2 a/c carriers severly damaged. The US had to kill 77,000 Japanese infantry and also 44,000 - 150,000 civilians, some of which we could not keep from committing suicide. Yet...yet.... we gave Okinawa back to Japan in 1972.

Russia? 'nuff said. Off topic.

vina · Post by **vina** » 20 Mar 2014 05:09

The US had to kill 77,000 Japanese infantry and also 44,000 - 150,000 civilians, some of which we could not keep from committing suicide.

How touching, along with how many 100,000s in Hiroshima and Nagasaki ? Why not just demonstrate the power of the A Bomb off Tokyo bay ? But no, you had to drop an A Bomb and kill and maim a million of an already defeated nation .

Face it, the Japanese were a tough, and ruthless enemy and the Americans were simply mad at the Japanese in WWII. It was not a "oh , we were forced to, we really didnt want to " kind of thing. You were hopping mad, you wanted to and you did.

Yet...yet.... we gave Okinawa back to Japan in 1972.

Russia? 'nuff said. Off topic.

Difference is, Sakhalin and other Kurile islands are largely ethnic Russian today, unlike in Okinawa. How about handing Hawaii back to the natives and undoing the forcible occupation in 18** by US Navy/Marines , led by the missionaries (the usual storm troopers) and the deposing of the Hawaiian queen? That would be the equivalent of handing back Sakhalin, not Okinawa.

Vayutuvan · Post by **Vayutuvan** » 20 Mar 2014 05:16

UlanBatori wrote:Isn't Odessa in Crimea? And hasn't Crimea already become independent?

Odessa is not in Crimea. It is in Western Ukrain.