Eastern Europe/Ukraine

vic · Post by **vic** » 28 Mar 2014 16:13

With new pipelines being laid by Russia, it will be able to export another 100 Billion USD worth of Gas annually in next couple of years.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Mar 2014 16:35

some additional nuggets to consider...

Financial questions seen for US shale gas, tight-oil plays

“What is not clear from higher-level company data is if the industry (both large players and independents) can run a cash flow-positive business in both top-quality and in more marginal plays and whether the positive cash flow could be maintained when the industry scales up its operations.”

Sandrea cites asset write-downs approaching $35 billion since the shale boom began among 15 of the main operators.

“While most of the companies that have made write-downs are not quitting, many players in this industry have already noted that the revolution is not as technically and financially attractive as they expected,” the analyst writes. “However, to deem the [business] model flawed due to the investment write-downs of some large companies would be misleading and too early in the evolution of the business for some players.”

Sandrea also cites a recent analysis by Energy Aspects, a commodity research consultancy, showing 6 years of progressively worsening financial performance by 35 independent companies focused on shale gas and tight oil plays in the US.

“This is despite showing production growth and shifting a large portion of their activity to oil since 2010, presumably to chase a higher-margin business,” he adds. Oil and gas production by the companies represented 40% of output in unconventional plays in last year’s third quarter.

Sustainability concerns

According to the Energy Aspects analysis, total capital expenditure nearly matches total revenue every year, and net cash flow is becoming negative as debt rises. Other financial indicators “add to concerns about the sustainability of the business,” Sandrea says.

Looks like Shale gas is expensive and the current high oil prices (~$100 per barrel) are needed to make the operations financially viable. High Oil and Gas prices benefit Russia whether it sells it to Europe or China/Japan/India.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Mar 2014 16:41

Another nugget

America's Energy Independence Dream Slams Against Shale Oil Costs

Independent producers will spend $1.50 drilling this year for every dollar they get back. Shale output drops faster than production from conventional methods. It will take 2,500 new wells a year just to sustain output of 1 million barrels a day in North Dakota's Bakken shale, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. Iraq could do the same with 60.

..
"We are beginning to live in a different world where getting more oil takes more energy, more effort and will be more expensive," said Tad Patzek, chairman of the Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin.

Drillers are pushing to maintain the pace of the unprecedented 39 percent gain in U.S. oil production since the end of 2011. Yet achieving U.S. energy self-sufficiency depends on easy credit and oil prices high enough to cover well costs. Even with crude above $100 a barrel, shale producers are spending money faster than they make it.

Shale gas will flow only when the price of oil is pretty high and that will only help the Russians. You try orchestrating a fall in oil prices to punish the Russians and the Shale revolution in the US will dry up. It will also impact the other marginal sources of supply like the Athabasca sands of Canada.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Mar 2014 16:59

EU Readies Natural-Gas Plan to Cut Reliance on Russia

European Union leaders want a road map by mid-year for reducing reliance on Russian natural gas as they seek to punish Russia for its annexation of Crimea, according to a draft EU document.

..
The EU’s energy dependency rate is set to rise to 80 percent by 2035 from the current 60 percent, according to the International Energy Agency. Gas from Russia accounted for almost 32 percent and oil for about 35 percent of the bloc’s imports in 2010, according to EU data.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2014 17:04

The problem is less about Shale Gas/Oil price its actually a secondary issue , if the idea is to engineer Oil Price Fall.

The first reason being you cant engineer a price fall what ever US can do is very temporary because their reserves are suppose to be used in times of crises and not to engineer a Oil price fall and it all depends on market Demand and Supply which today has adjusted to $90-100 barrel price.

Let suppose by some magic wand they engineer a price fall by couple of dollar , it will affect more the OPEC nations then Russia.

Russia Budget revenue of Oil and Gas is 51 % , Saudi budget Revenue for Oil and Gas accounts for 90 % of Budget Revenue , for Gulf Oil exporting Nation Oil & Gas around 80-90 % of Budget revenue

http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/11/ ... TH20131112

Despite efforts to diversify the Saudi economy over the past two decades, oil still accounts for 80 percent of export revenue and 90 percent of budget revenue.

So all this talk about lets engineer a price fall to screw Russia is empty rhetoric ......there would be riots in Kingdom due to Oil Price fall before it affects Russia.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2014 17:13

UlanBatori wrote:The purpose of the whole UkBapZi tamasha is to force a Russia/EU wall stopping Russian gas supplies to Oirope. This is because it is a lot cheaper to ship American oversupplies of natural gas (from the fracking bonanza) to Oirope than to Asia. Net effect will be a rise in market value of gas supplies.

No it is not , LNG Transport is always more expensive than piped gas .......Shale Gas is expensive to get and it depends on high Oil/Gas Prices.

LNG market is more attractive in Asia where price is high , So unless US governement is ready to subsidise US Private Gas and Oil Players for loss incurred in selling Gas to Europe its not an attractive destination for Europe unless Europe is willing to pay as high price as Asia , which will effect its end customer

Russia controls the Pipe , It has Gas reserves of 100 years ( thats excluding Huge Shale Gas and other Condensate it has ) . it can easily under cut the market by lowering the price by $50-100 per bcm .....suddenly Shale/LNG just wont be expensive but very expensive.

Check Gazprom chief interview

http://rt.com/business/medvedev-gazprom ... ussia-947/

Russia is very rich with shale gas resources, and probably in the next century the time will come when shale gas production will be considered in Russia, but currently, for the current century, we have enough reserves of traditional resources, and new areas of offshore fields – not to forget the Arctic, and I’m rather sure that cost effectiveness for these reserves will be unbeatable, and that’s why we are rather sure that we were, are, and will stay competitive on the oil and gas market.

panduranghari · Post by **panduranghari** » 28 Mar 2014 17:31

pankajs wrote:Another nugget

America's Energy Independence Dream Slams Against Shale Oil Costs
Independent producers will spend $1.50 drilling this year for every dollar they get back. Shale output drops faster than production from conventional methods. It will take 2,500 new wells a year just to sustain output of 1 million barrels a day in North Dakota's Bakken shale, according to the Paris-based International Energy Agency. Iraq could do the same with 60.

..
"We are beginning to live in a different world where getting more oil takes more energy, more effort and will be more expensive," said Tad Patzek, chairman of the Department of Petroleum and Geosystems Engineering at the University of Texas at Austin.

Drillers are pushing to maintain the pace of the unprecedented 39 percent gain in U.S. oil production since the end of 2011. Yet achieving U.S. energy self-sufficiency depends on easy credit and oil prices high enough to cover well costs. Even with crude above $100 a barrel, shale producers are spending money faster than they make it.
Shale gas will flow only when the price of oil is pretty high and that will only help the Russians. You try orchestrating a fall in oil prices to punish the Russians and the Shale revolution in the US will dry up. It will also impact the other marginal sources of supply like the Athabasca sands of Canada.

theEnergyReport

TER: So, you're still expecting the gas boom to peter out in the next five to seven years? Is that still the timeframe?

BP: I think it's happening sooner than that. Production has been flat in the United States since early 2012. Canada soon will start to export gas to Asia through British Columbia, and the Marcellus is likely to peak in 2014, but despite gas prices that are now over $4/MMBtu, you are still seeing very limited activity for gas-directed drilling. Until that picks up, U.S. supply is going to go down; how far down is still open, but the market is becoming increasingly unbalanced. Shale gas focused companies still cannot generate free cash flow at today's prices and many have severely damaged balance sheets due to the weak prices of recent years. For example, Chesapeake Energy Corp. (CHK:NYSE) just sold 130 million cubic feet per day of production, 40 uncompleted wells and 200,000 acres in the Marcellus, to Chief Oil & Gas (private) because Chesapeake is financially distressed. It still cannot make money at today's prices and it had to sell very good acreage to Chief at a fire-sale price.

People might think this is a one-off or this is just one company, but Chesapeake is the second largest producer of natural gas in the United States. It's the largest shale gas producer in the world. It has drilled more shale gas wells than anybody else. Its gas production declined 10% in 2013 according to its most recent investor presentation and it will fall again in 2014, simply because the company has completely given up drilling gas wells.

It's not just Chesapeake who fired its CEO, replaced several members of its board, largely walked away from the shale gas business and fired 20% of its workforce. The same thing happened with Encana Corp. (ECA:TSX; ECA:NYSE). It fired 20% of its workforce along with its CEO. EOG Resources Inc. (EOG:NYSE) also has walked away from the shale gas business. In 2013 its natural gas production declined 15%. This is not a small company; it is a top-20 producer in the United States. This is very significant; you're seeing the biggest producers largely turn their back on shale gas. Without these large producers accelerating drilling more wells, U.S. production will head into a significant decline.

Now that the inventory of wells in the Marcellus is largely depleted, there's very little chance that U.S. production is going to remain flat in 2014. It will probably decline. This is really going to put upward pressure on prices. The spikes in New England and New York have been largely weather-related, but this is going to happen more and more often, and it will happen on less severe weather. It will happen in other areas of the country, such as California, where the San Onofre nuclear plant has shut down. This summer, when it gets hot in California, we may see spikes similar to what happened at the turn of the millennium.

Up to 50 gigawatts (50 GW) of U.S. coal-fired generation will be shut down in the next two years to comply with MATS, the Mercury and Air Toxics Standards that are being enforced by the EPA. That's between 15% and 20% of U.S. coal-fired generation. There will be more demand for natural gas for electricity generation. Also in 2013, five nuclear plants have closed. These nuclear plants serve a big part of the electricity base load. A lot of that electricity generation is now being pushed toward natural gas. You're seeing the market become more and more unbalanced. This is only going to be exacerbated as Canada diverts more of its gas exports to Asia through British Columbia than to the United States because the prices in Asia are well into the double digits. Even with the recent spike in U.S. gas prices, it's still far more economic to send it to Asia. That will begin later in 2017/2018, when the Kitimat LNG facility opens.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 28 Mar 2014 17:58

IEA chief: Only a decade left in US shale oil boom - CSMonitor

A surge in US oil and natural gas production has lifted hopes about North American energy security, but that growth will plateau and will be difficult to replicate elsewhere, says Maria van der Hoeven, chief executive of the International Energy Agency, in an interview with the Monitor.

And this country is supposed to free Europe from it dependence on Russian oil/gas

When I heard/read all the talking heads/senators/etc urging Obama to just open the gas tap and hose down the Russians I thought perhaps they had at least 30-50 years of excess production coming online.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 28 Mar 2014 18:01

Shale gas ain't all that hale and hearty as made out to be.The costs are high.A pal in the petro industry for decades in the west had a gloomy outlook on its prospects,nothing like sweet cheap crude and gas from the Middle East,etc.

Here is a quote worth reading.

he West owes Vladimir Putin a big thank you. We were forgetting who we were and who our friends were and who they weren’t. Crimea has been a sharp nudge in the ribs.

The G8 was always a curious entity. Russia had no business being in it, its economy being so much smaller than those of the other members. It was admitted in 1998, 13 years after the group was founded, with the intention of trying to keep the big brat in order and teach him some table manners. Well, that didn’t work.

It was part of the West’s programme – patronising, unrealistic and psychologically flawed as it now seems – to persuade the Russians that the collapse of the Soviet Union, the loss of their entire area of influence, the plummeting of their prestige and the arrival of Nato and the EU on the border need not be seen in a bad light, in terms of defeat, but as a precious opportunity to be seized.

This was a classic case of failing to put yourself in the other guy’s shoes. Imagine if things had gone the other way: those of us who lived through at least part of the Cold War remember not only the nuclear terror but the lively fear that, given a few false moves at the negotiating table, the logic of co-existence would collapse and Russian tanks would be at the English Channel – ready to welcome us into the expanded Soviet Union. That’s why we tolerated the nauseating logic of Mutually Assured Destruction, as the best assurance that that would never happen.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 28 Mar 2014 18:02

unless Europe is willing to pay as high price as Asia , which will effect its end customer

Exactly my point. Once you put sanctions on Russia and prohibit Oirope from importing Russian gas, the Oiropeans have no option but to buy American gas, just like they are buying the gas from the WHOTUS and SDO(L)TUS now.

Then a small war in Asia to "level the playing field"... and v r all set to (more infinitely) enrich Those Hu Matter.

vic · Post by **vic** » 28 Mar 2014 18:21

Cutting off Russian Gas supplies will double the energy prices in Europe, devastating it's economy which is already down in dumps. I think Crimea issue will be forgotten after couple of months and Russian Gas export volume will continue to increase massively.

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 28 Mar 2014 18:35

Win-win. Oirope can also be "reconstructed" after the destruction of the EU. So many contracts for Halliburton. There's a reason why the 1950s are remembered as "The Hal(liburton)cyon Dins".

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2014 18:48

Obama urges Russia to move its troops away from Ukrainian border

http://edition.cnn.com/2014/03/28/world ... ?hpt=hp_t2

(CNN) -- Russia could ease tensions with Ukraine if it were to move its troops away from its border with Ukraine and begin direct talks with the Kiev government, President Obama said in an interview aired Friday by CBS News.

"You've seen a range of troops massing along that border under the guise of military exercises, but these are not what Russia would normally be doing," the President said. "It may simply be an effort to intimidate Ukraine, or it may be that they've got additional plans.

"And, in either case, what we need right now to resolve and de-escalate the situation would be for Russia to move back those troops and to begin negotiations directly with the Ukrainian government as well as the international community."

Russia may have 40,000 troops near its border with Ukraine, two U.S. officials told CNN on Thursday. The officials said that this estimate was largely based on satellite imagery and that a firm number is difficult to assess.

However, a spokesman for Ukraine's Council of National Security and Defense, Yarema Dukh, told CNN his government estimates 88,000 Russian troops are at the Ukrainian border.

U.S. officials said they believe the higher estimates may reflect Russian troops on alert farther to the east.

Russia has said its troops are carrying out snap military exercises in the region.

Obama said he believes Russian President Vladimir Putin still harbors a grievance over the 1991 dissolution of the Soviet Union. "You would have thought that, after a couple of decades, there'd be an awareness on the part of any Russian leader that the path forward is not to revert back to the kinds of practices that were so prevalent during the Cold War."

Instead, he said, Putin should be moving toward further integration with the world economy.

Obama said that Putin has described the breakup of the Soviet Union as tragic, and that he may feel that the West has taken advantage of Russia.

"He may be entirely misreading the West," Obama said. "He's certainly misreading American foreign policy. We have no interest in encircling Russia, and we have no interest in Ukraine -- beyond letting the Ukrainian people make their own decisions about their own lives."

He said he rejected the notion that a sphere of influence along its border justifies Russia invading other countries.

"Certainly, they're going to have influence -- because of trade and tradition and language and heritage -- with Ukraine," he said. " But there's a difference between that and sending in troops and, because you're bigger and stronger, taking a piece of the country. That is not how international law and international norms are observed in the 21st century."

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 28 Mar 2014 18:50

vic wrote:Cutting off Russian Gas supplies will double the energy prices in Europe, devastating it's economy which is already down in dumps. I think Crimea issue will be forgotten after couple of months and Russian Gas export volume will continue to increase massively.

They never cut off Gas to Europe even during the height of cold war when East West Relations were at its worse.

Cutting of Gas would just bring bad will of Europe Public in general , will be bad for Russian Economy and would have long term consequences for Russian Oil and Gas business in general in terms of perception.

member_28502 · Post by **member_28502** » 28 Mar 2014 20:55

Austin wrote:
vic wrote:Cutting off Russian Gas supplies will double the energy prices in Europe, devastating it's economy which is already down in dumps. I think Crimea issue will be forgotten after couple of months and Russian Gas export volume will continue to increase massively.
They never cut off Gas to Europe even during the height of cold war when East West Relations were at its worse.

Cutting of Gas would just bring bad will of Europe Public in general , will be bad for Russian Economy and would have long term consequences for Russian Oil and Gas business in general in terms of perception.

Recall at the height of Cold War Russia was net importer of Food Grains(wheat and other cereals) and needed hard currency to pay for imports

rsingh · Post by **rsingh** » 28 Mar 2014 20:59

^^
USSR used to give grain to Cuba and other chamchas in Africa. So not big deal.

vic · Post by **vic** » 28 Mar 2014 21:46

I meant US, Europe and Ukranian Cabal cutting off Russian Gas supplies.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Mar 2014 01:05

Veteran scribe Simon Jenkins puts it in proper perspective,Putin's Crimean gambit and the West's hyperventilating.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfre ... tin-russia
Crimea: all this virile cold war talk won't force Vladimir Putin to slink back
As the most potent symbol of Russia's lost glory, Crimea will never be returned to Ukraine. The west must accept this

Simon Jenkins
The Guardian, Tuesday 25 March 2014

We know where this is likely to end. We will accept Russia's sovereignty over Crimea. Sanctions will be quietly dismantled, Moscow will reassure Kiev with a deal on neutrality. Nato will agree no further eastward expansion. The G7 will again become G8; and Crimea will join Tibet, Kosovo, East Timor, Chechnya, Georgia and other territorial interventions which history students will struggle to remember. But how do we get from here to there?

We all seem much wiser about Russia and Ukraine than we were a month ago. Vladimir Putin is not Hitler and Crimea is not Sudetenland, despite the efforts of Russophobic chest-beaters to pretend so. He is a dictator, brutal, proud, controlling, intolerant of criticism and infused with obsessive patriotism. But we get on fine with the Chinese politburo. The triumphalism of western diplomacy towards Russia since 1989 is now seen as the provocative taunting not just of Putin but of all his still benighted nation.

Putin's Ukraine expert, Sergei Glazyev, declared in 2008 that any further moves to integrate Ukraine with the west would lead to "social and economic chaos". Russia would act for sure to protect what it saw as its security interests. Nato ignored such warnings, declaring that Georgia and Ukraine "will become members of Nato". The EU flirted ceaselessly with Kiev. The west cheered on last month's coup against Ukraine's corrupt but elected president, Viktor Yanukovych. To Putin it all rolled up into his version of the Cuban missile crisis.

The veteran political scientist, John Mearsheimer, wrote in the New York Times two weeks ago that if ever a country was needed as a buffer between the west and Russia, it was Ukraine. The west made "a fatal mistake in backing the [Kiev] protesters" in their coup. It was strategically inept. Russia had lost an empire and was unlikely to accept a further tightening of its zone of interest in Ukraine. Sanctions were not an issue. "When vital interests are at stake," wrote Mearsheimer, "countries are invariably willing to suffer great pain to ensure security."

The west's brinkmanship over Ukraine seems inept. The Guardian's Shaun Walker reported yesterday from Moscow's inner sanctum that those round Putin were as baffled by the west's actions as they were surprised, even shocked, by their leader's impulsive reaction. The Crimean occupation was not long planned. It was Putin's response to the west's rejection of his coalition compromise for power-sharing between Kiev and the eastern region after the Kiev coup.

Putin was hurt and angry, his pride especially wounded by criticism of his beloved Sochi Olympics. Anyone who thinks the Olympics are not about politics can think again. As Putin's general in Crimea boasted, the invasion must be all right as "the international community trusted Russia to hold the Olympic Games". Had Putin's compromise been accepted, so an aide reports, Crimea would still be in Ukraine.

In his passionate if paranoid speech in Moscow last week, Putin wondered at the west accusing him of "violating norms of international law", given its own military interventions. Western countries seemed to believe "that they can decide the destinies of the world, that only they can ever be right". He must have gasped as Britain's David Cameron returned from a friendly visit to Israel and attacked Russia's invasion of neighbouring territory as "unacceptable". When did Downing Street demand even a referendum on the West Bank? It seems it cannot spell the word hypocrisy.

In contrast to the posturing and empty rhetoric in London and Washington is the calm voice of Germany's Angela Merkel. We hear that she and her foreign minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier, have been reading Christopher Clark's The Sleepwalkers, an analysis of the countdown to the Great War. Steinmeier invited Clark to Berlin to debate the topic. Imagine a British politician reading such a book, let alone acting on it.

Clark traces the way highly charged relations between states trap players into losing room for manoeuvre. They caricature their foes and turn their backs on compromise. Merkel grew up in East Germany under the KGB's lash and has tried to see Putin through Russian eyes. She sees the absurdity of Barack Obama preaching international law at Russia, of punishing it over Crimea while scheming to bring Ukraine into the western camp. She sees the 1914 danger, of vague ultimatums, unenforcible red lines and ill-considered alliances.

Putin emerges from this crisis not as clever and calculating but as an emotional, scary figure, lonely and alarmingly bereft of checks or balances. His seizure of Crimea has been popular and, in the scheme of things, no big outrage against international order. But the sabre-rattling along Nato's eastern border is as provocative as were the careless antics of Nato and the EU in Kiev over recent years. Putin too needs a bridge over which to retreat.

The cold war dinosaurs who still tramp the corridors and editorial columns of London and Washington seem almost to pine for the virile certainties of 1945-89. Russia must "pay a heavy price" for Crimea, if only to make cold warriors feel good. That is unlikely to incline the bear to slink back to its cave.

Crimea must be a classic instance of a great power wrestling inside the shrunken straitjacket of imperial retreat, as Britain did, far more violently, half a century ago. As the Russian expert Susan Richards points out in the current issue of Foreign Affairs, Crimea is the most painful and potent symbol of Russia's lost glory. "It was backdrop for more great scenes of Russian culture than anywhere outside Moscow or St Petersburg," the resort and inspiration of Pushkin, Tolstoy, Chekhov and others. Its donation to Ukraine in 1954 was never likely to last.

Nato remains a bulwark against Russian revanchism, already dangerously close to Russia's border. Putin claims to understand it, and fiercely disavows any change to that state of affairs. As for Ukraine, we can chide Russia over respect for sovereign borders, if we have the cheek to do so. We can tell Russia to behave better towards small countries. But Putin will not return Crimea to Ukraine. Trying to make him do so is ridiculous. The real job is somehow to get out of this mess. I imagine Putin agrees.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 08:37

Looks like West are back to their dirty game as we had anticipated

FSB: west steps up attempts to destabilize the internal situation in RF

The Russian Federal Security Service said on Friday that western countries sought to destabilize the internal situation in Russia, following the latest events in Crimea, and called for urgent measures to ensure the security of Russian nationals, including those living in the newly-formed Crimean Federal District.

“The number of external threats to the state has increased. The legal volition of the people of Crimea and eastern Ukraine to be together with Russia are driving the United States and its allies into hysteria. They are trying to destabilize the socio-political and economic situation in this country,” FSB Deputy Director Alexander Malyovanyi said at a ceremony on Friday where President Putin met senior officers who had received new appointments and had been promoted to higher military ranks.

“Under these circumstances we are drawing up and implementing offensive counter-intelligence and intelligence measures aimed at thwarting such aspirations,” Malyovanyi went on to say, pledging to protect Russian nationals from radicals and extremists penetrating into Russia, including in the newly-formed Crimean Federal District.

He added that this year the Russian Federal Security Service had prevented 14 terror-linked crimes and liquidated 76 terrorists and their chieftains who put up armed resistance in the North Caucasus; 235 militants and their accomplices were detained.

“The Russian Federal Security Service continues fighting underground terrorist groups in North Caucasus with an aim to normalize the situation. We are doing everything possible to ensure effective functioning of state power bodies and the region’s economic development as well as constitutional rights of its citizens. We are going to fulfill these tasks,” the FSB deputy director said.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 08:37

What does Offensive Counter Intelligence means ?

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 08:39

Bruegel: Europe may have to pay twice as much for alternatives to Russian gas

If Europe opts for alternatives to Russian gas it should be prepared to pay twice as much, as follows from a just-published survey by Bruegel, a research group in Brussels.

At present about 40 percent of the European gas import comes from Russia. The EU pays about 53 billion dollars a year, Bruegel said. The world gas prices as they are, Europe can hope to attract overseas liquefied natural gas only it is prepared for a 100-percent price hike. Also, one should add the extra costs of building LNG terminals.

If Russian gas were to be replaced with a package of energy resources including Norwegian gas, LNG from the United States and Europe-mined coal, the likely price growth would be not so great, but still significant - 50 percent, Bruegel says.

Also, this solution implying the re-activation of Europe’s coal-fuelled power generation would ruin the EU’s ecological ambitions to cut greenhouse gas emissions, for coal is the dirtiest of the fossil fuels.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 08:41

Beyond increase in Price rise by 50-100 % for end customer ...it will also reduce competitiveness of European Industry in Global Market due to increase fuel cost added ...... a good advantage for American Manuf as they will get cheap shale gas subsidised by Fed money printing.

Just wonder what good it will do to Europe Customer and Industry of Russia under cuts the cost of price of Gas from $400 to say $300

Avarachan · Post by **Avarachan** » 29 Mar 2014 08:53

From: https://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogI ... 1230832186 (a commenter on the "Vineyard of the Saker" blog)

http://www.vz.ru/economy/2014/3/28/679490.html

(auto trans) "Bank "Russia" became the first national bank, which will work exclusively in Russia and only with their pocketbooks. Thus it will protect themselves and their clients from hostile and non-market activities of foreign financial partners and will become an island of security for a large number of companies and entrepreneurs working on domestic consumers, experts believe..."

The bank will be isolated from foreign bankster shenanigans and will only deal with domestic banking and use the Ruble exclusively. The Russians are working on their own versions of "Visa" and their own ratings system. This is expected to be the beginning of a new trend.

In other words, the Russians are fed up with western economic cheating and have decided to create their own economic system that will be insulated from the organised crime in the west that passes for a financial system. Long term, this could be the start of an international independent economic system that is not run by Tel Aviv-New York-London.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 29 Mar 2014 12:43

.@statedeptspox @BarackObama remember when Winston Churchill saved Britain with the hashtag #victory? It was super productive
Prudence Paine ‏@PruPaine Mar 26

@PruPaine @statedeptspox WTH is wrong with these people?
Matt Dawson ‏@SaintRPh Mar 26

we're being ruled by highschoolers. And not Mean Girls. But the doofy glee club RT @policygal @statedeptspox WTH is wrong with these people?
Matt Dawson ‏@SaintRPh Mar 26

Ukraine can sleep tonight know there's a hashtag for them. #ICantEven MT“@statedeptspox: #UnitedForUkraine pic.twitter.com/d82lBbhpoC”
Spencer Irvine ‏@SpencerIrvine Mar 26

@gopfashionista @statedeptspox just another day of Obama's "hey let's use a hashtag to solve the world' problem" solution.
George Eliseo ‏@GeorgeEliseo Mar 26

Instead of dancing it out West Side Story style.. Obama Admin #HashtagsItOut Bro… @spencerirvine @statedeptspox
Spencer Irvine ‏@SpencerIrvine Mar 26

Yeah cuz hashtags solve problems. NOT. MT @statedeptspox: To echo @BarackObama today-proud to stand #UnitedForUkraine pic.twitter.com/Ffj8JhtXQn
Spencer Irvine ‏@SpencerIrvine Mar 26

@gopfashionista @statedeptspox yeah I guess that's the hipster way to hug things out? Doesn't look like Putin will do that anytime soon!
Astonishing FartMan ‏@AstonishingFMan Mar 26

@PruPaine @statedeptspox Makes @dennisrodman seem almost statesmanlike.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 13:08

Russia has no intention of crossing the border of Ukraine, said Lavrov
http://ria.ru/politics/20140329/1001539508.html

Russia has no intention to cross borders and interests of Ukraine, said Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview on "Saturday News Sergei Brilev."

"We have absolutely no intention to cross borders and interests of Ukraine. We just really want to work (settlement of the situation in Ukraine) was a collective and to those excesses that Western countries are trying to sweep under the carpet and present the situation in blissful tones and colors were terminated, that they realized their responsibility "- the minister said, commenting on Western fears about the possible escalation of the situation on the Russian-Ukrainian border.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 15:45

Interview with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov

There is no intention in Moscow to send its troops into eastern Ukraine, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. Hopefully, the growing understanding in the West of Russia’s position will allow for a de-escalation of the tension, he added.

There are reports of radical activists, including those from the notorious Right Sector, moving to eastern Ukraine, Lavrov said.

“One doesn’t have to be a physiognomist to understand their intentions,” Lavrov said in an interview with Vesti news channel, referring to a specialist who judges someone’s character by looking at their face. “They are quite open about them. Many phone leaks point out, that not only members of the Right Sector plant to treat Russians that way.”

‘No isolation of Russia in UN Assembly vote on Crimea’

Question: After the G7 countries announced their decision to withdraw from the G8, it was said that now Russia is isolated in the international arena. In the UN General Assembly 100 countries voted against Russia. The claim of Russia being isolated is true, then?

Sergey Lavrov: “Isolation” is a term invented by our Western partners who act with nostalgic neo-imperial ambitions in mind. The instant something isn’t to their liking they draw out this sanctions stick. The times when such strategy could be employed are long gone. They should think about getting everyone, with no exceptions, to work together, not about isolating their partners.

I’m surprised at how obsessively they’re trying to – create rather than find – proof of Russia’s isolation. I’ve seen a lot in my time, but for major countries to use all their diplomatic resources to twist the arms of the entire world, including our closest partners, in order for them to agree with the argument about Ukraine’s territorial integrity while ignoring the rest of the principles outlined in the UN Charter? I was astonished with the alacrity. Key government institutions expend so much effort on this.

It’s the case with the UN General Assembly vote. Such results are achieved by a combination of several means. First, our Ukrainian neighbors were advised to keep the tone of their draft resolution non-confrontational and level-headed, to send a positive message of the need to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity. Who would oppose that? But that’s not even half of the truth, it’s just a sliver of it. You and our viewers understand what I’m talking about.

Then, some countries that are naïve enough for it are told, “Look, it’s such a great resolution, why don’t you sign it and become a co-sponsor.” The more experienced ones who realize what’s really going on are approached with, “If you don’t support this resolution, there will be consequences.” And then they describe these consequences. We know about that. Our colleagues come to us and confide why this or that relatively small country has to cave in. For example, they were told contracts would not be signed or political dividends would be withheld. If we take into consideration that the West in the broad sense, including Australia, New Zealand, Japan etc., amounts to about 40-something countries, basically 50 states were forced or somehow persuaded to do it.

We hold no grudge against these delegations. It will not affect our relations with them. I can’t but point out another number: about 70 countries voted against this resolution.

Q: And if we count the countries who didn’t cast a vote that would make it 93.

SL: So basically it’s a tie. The Western propaganda machine – there’s really no other way to call it – will hail it as a great victory in the media, but we know the value of this victory.

Q: 100 countries voted against Russia. The number of countries that voted for Russia abstained or didn’t cast a vote comes up to 93. This includes the brave countries that, despite the pressure, made this choice.

SL: This is no doubt a brave thing to do. It’s not anti-Western or anti-Ukrainian. It reflects a deep understanding of what’s going on the part of the countries who didn’t vote in favor and especially those who voted against. This wasn’t about territorial integrity or Ukraine at all.

‘China understands legitimate Russian interests and concerns in Ukraine’

Q: Three weeks ago, on our program, Russian Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said that Russia expects to see moral support from China. China abstained from voting on the resolution. After that President Obama and President of China Xi Jinping held a meeting, during which, as my Western colleagues told me, the Americans were trying to persuade China to scrap gas supply contracts with Russia. And then you met with Xi Jinping. So what is China to Russia?

SL: China is a very close partner of Russia. In our joint documents our relations are defined as comprehensive strategic partnership of cooperation. All of China’s actions reaffirm its commitment to the principles we agreed on. If, as you say, the Americans did try to convince China to review its economic agreements with Russia on the highest level, it’s an off-the-scale naïve or brazen attitude. I would even say that not understanding the essence of Chinese politics and mentality is just inexcusable for the officials in charge of such negotiations.

At the very beginning China said that it takes into consideration the combination of historical and political factors. China strongly opposed using non-diplomatic measures and threats of sanctions to resolve this problem. Our contacts with our Chinese partners show that they not only understand Russia’s rightful interests in this case, but are also hand-in-hand with us in the understanding of the initial causes of the current crisis in Ukraine. There is no doubt about it. President Putin and President Xi Jinping spoke on the phone. On March 24, I met with President Xi Jinping on the sidelines of the Nuclear Security Summit in The Hague. BRICS foreign ministers held talks as well.

Q: Did BRICS work out the joint statement in The Hague?

SL: It’s the chairperson’s statement, which the Foreign Minister of South Africa delivered after our meeting.

Ukraine, not Russia hampered OSCE mission deployment

Q: Last Saturday we informed our viewers that the OSCE agreed on the mandate of a mission to be sent to Ukraine. Why did Russia object to it initially? What’s the mission going to work on?

SL: I would say that it was our Western and Ukrainian partners that initially objected to this mission.

Q: But as usual it was presented the other way around – Russia against the rest of Europe.

SL: We’re used to that. Orwellian talents are still widely used. Russia was willing to send the OSCE mission a week before the decision was finally made. Even though everything was clear by then, our partners demanded with inexplicable determination for Crimea to be included in the mandate as part of Ukraine.

One can completely disagree with our take on the situation, one can refuse to recognize the decisions made by Russia based on the will of the Crimean people and supported by an overwhelming majority. We understand that, it happens. But it’s just diplomatic impudence or complete diplomatic incompetence to fail to comprehend the real political situation and the utter uselessness of their demands after we said we would recognize any outcome of the referendum in Crimea, telling us that despite what the President said the mandate of the mission should include Crimea as part of Ukraine.

Q: Moscow was insisting that the mission should go to western regions of Ukraine as well as eastern. Was that achieved?

SL: Taking into consideration our Western colleagues’ well-proven talents to twist words and interpret provisions, we were insisting that cities and regions be listed in the mandate instead of it just saying “mission to Ukraine.” Of course the list includes cities situated both in western and eastern parts of Ukraine, but none situated on the territory of the Republic of Crimea of the Russian Federation.

‘Denunciations of Right Sector were long overdue’

Q: Maybe then what we see is some progress not only in terms of sending an OSCE mission to Ukraine, but also new Ukrainian authorities, their legitimacy aside, dealing with the Right Sector problem, as evidenced by the last 36-48 hours.

SL: It’s taken them too long, though it’s true that [it’s] better late than never. Over a month ago I raised the issue of the Right Sector and the necessity to dissociate from the radical forces with our Western partners. I asked them a very simple question: “If you agree that we need to defuse the situation, why won’t you publicly say what the Right Sector really is?” Same to a degree goes for the Svoboda party, whose platform references The Declaration of June 30, 1941, which expressed support of Nazi Germany and its efforts to establish a new world order. According to the party’s charter, it’s still committed to this principle.

Our colleagues reacted quite strangely to our requests to at least publicly express their opinion on these forces and exert their influence on the people in Kiev who claim they’re the new authorities so that they do the same. At first they avoided the issue, and then at one of the recent meetings, I think it was in London, US Secretary of State John Kerry told me that after close scrutiny they concluded that the Right Sector was trying to become a political movement. The subtext was that it’s a good thing, and Svoboda is moving towards [the] mainstream. That’s a quote. A lot of people were present at the meeting, so I’m not revealing a secret here. I was giving examples of the opposite trend concerning these groups, starting with their urging the public to shoot Russians in the head and kill them, calling Russians names, and all the way up to the beatings that take place even in the eastern parts of Ukraine where the members of these groups consider themselves at home.

As for what’s been happening in the last few days, let’s hope that the Ukrainian government’s statements and steps are the result of some awareness campaign conducted by our Western partners. Like I said, better late than never.

Let’s see what comes out of it and whether those in power manage to bring to heel the people they relied on to get their current positions. The recent events, that is, when the Right Sector surrounded the Verkhovna Rada [Ukrainian Parliament] building again and demanded for the Interior Minister to be sacked because of [Right Sector leader] Sashko Bilyi’s death, are very telling. Whatever one might think about the circumstances of his death, which, like in any such case, should be investigated thoroughly, one can’t fail to notice the moral boost his death gave to the people wearing Right Sector colors who follow the principles we all know about. It’s a very alarming signal.

It surprised me that while Russian television, including your channel, showed the siege of the Verkhovna Rada and commented comprehensively on the events unfolding between the Right Sector and the members of parliament, on their possible ramifications, Euronews hasn’t said a word about it, with Ukraine mentioned in the context of the IMF deal in the third or fourth news piece.

Sadly, this kind of coverage is also telling. We’ll try to establish the truth through channels alternative to mainstream Western media. I hope that your alternative channels become the mainstream.

‘Sad to see OSCE justify censorship of media in Ukraine’

Q: Alternative channels – that’s another matter, since Ukrainian cable providers were banned from transmitting Russian TV channels. At first, the OSCE condemned it. As far as I understand, this issue was raised even at your talks with the Western partners. Then it was slowly moved towards the bottom of the priorities list. As the OSCE representative said, there are national interests that allow for TV censorship.

SL: Yes, Dunja Mijatović said that. Let’s just say that being the OSCE Representative on Freedom of Media, she should show more freedom in her judgments. It’s lamentable that excuses are made for banning Russian channels. Who could imagine that channels can be banned if it’s done for protecting fundamental values? However, Ms. Mijatović dismissed in the past our numerous appeals that demonstrations with fascist and neo-Nazi slogans held in a number of the OSCE countries were unacceptable, citing freedom of speech. So in Ms. Mijatović’s opinion four channels are more dangerous than neo-Nazi demonstrations in the Baltic states and a number of other countries, including Germany.

‘Ukraine’s military neutrality must be stated unambiguously’

Q: Do Moscow and, say, Washington talk about Ukraine’s non-bloc status?

SL: This idea is present in our proposals. We definitely think that the new constitution should clearly say that Ukraine cannot be part of any bloc.

Q: Do Americans hear that?

SL: They hear that and you can tell whether they understand it or not by listening to their public statements. Speaking in Brussels last week, President Obama said that neither Ukraine nor NATO were ready and that there was no point talking about that.

Q: By the way, Yatsenyuk says he is not considering this option at this point.

SL: “At this point.” We are convinced there can be no ambiguity on this issue. There are too many of those caveats – “at this point” and “no intention.” Intentions can change, and you end up facing new facts on the ground.

Q: Especially in the last couple of months.

SL: Not just in the last couple of months – in the last 25 years. We are told that the West keeps extending a hand of friendship, and Russia keeps choosing a zero-sum game. A few days ago, my colleague, British Foreign Secretary William Hague, published an article, in which he writes that Russia faces global isolation again, because, he says, you come to Russia with open arms and it turns away and pursues zero-sum mentality. But that’s totally unfair. On the contrary, we are always eager to engage in fair partnership. This is reflected in our proposals on indivisible security, which should be the same for everybody. It is wrong for NATO members to be protected with indivisible security and for everybody else to be treated as second-rate nations, so NATO can act as a magnet to attract new members and keep pushing the dividing line further to the east.

We were promised that this would not happen – and we were cheated. We were promised that NATO would not bring its military infrastructure closer to our borders – and we were cheated. We were promised there would be no military installations on the territory of the new NATO members. At first, we just listened to those promises and believed them. Then we started putting them on paper as political obligations, and serious people, Western leaders, signed those documents. But when we asked them how come those political obligations were ignored and whether we can make them legally binding, they told us, “No, political obligations are enough, and anyway, don’t worry, whatever we do is not against you.”

West plays ‘either-or’ game with Eastern Partnership’

SL: Speaking of zero-sum games we are being accused of, the EU Eastern Partnership project from the very beginning was based on the “either-or” concept: either you’re with us or you’re against us. Actually, our Western partners have been talking about this since the 2004 election in Ukraine. Back then, there was no Customs Union and no Eastern Partnership; there was an unconstitutional, artificially invented third round of the presidential election. Karel de Gucht, who then was the foreign minister of Belgium and who is now, by the way, the EU Trade Commissioner, publicly demanded that Ukrainians should vote and decide whether they want to be with Europe or with Russia. This is where such mentality comes from.

Eastern Partnership – as well as NATO expansion – was simply an instrument used to quickly take control over geopolitical territory. The EU was ready to push this project through at any cost. It completely ignored legitimate economic interests of both Ukraine’s neighbors, like Russia and other countries, and even the nations that were part of this program. There have been many studies on this issue. No wonder even Yatsenyuk says that Ukraine needs to take a closer look at the economic section of this agreement.

The same will happen with Moldova. They are doing their best to sign a similar agreement with Moldova this summer, before the upcoming election. And this agreement they intend to sign with Moldova – it completely ignores the issue of Transnistria. It ignores the 1997 agreement between Chisinau and Tiraspol which entitled Transnistria to international trade. It ignores what is happening with Transnistria today: Chisinau and the new Ukrainian authorities have basically blockaded the territory. But our European partners keep mum about that. In fact, the European Union and, I think, the United States approve of this policy.

We want to talk to them very seriously about that, because they are escalating tensions over Transnistria, almost claiming that it will be next. This is outrageous, provocative rhetoric. Actually, they want to create unbearable conditions for Tiraspol in violation, I repeat, of the agreements which entitled Transnistrians to certain travel, transit and trade rights. This is outrageous. They never learn. Once again, they seek to create a sore point in our relations.

‘Russia has no intention to send troops across Ukrainian border’

Q: Almost all the statements regarding sanctions, including those made by the EU and the US official political institutions, contain the phrase “further escalation.” By “further escalation” my Western colleagues mean that Russian military forces may cross the borders of the mainland Ukraine and move toward Kharkov, for example. Will this happen or not?

SL: President of Russia Vladimir Putin in his address given on March 18 in the Georgievsky Hall said clearly that we are very concerned with the situation with Russians and Russian speakers in eastern and southern Ukraine, especially after various Right Sector groups, a certain Beletsky and the Eastern Front rushed there. Those are absolutely odious people. You don’t need to be a physiognomist to be able to tell what their intentions are. They speak openly about that. Many leaked phone calls indicate how Russians will be treated in Ukraine not just by the Right Sector members.

The Russian president demanded that Ukrainian authorities and their Western patrons take immediate action to stop the violence. He said we are going to protect the rights of Russians and Russian speakers in Ukraine using all the political, diplomatic and legal methods. I have nothing to add to that.

We need to be honest. You cannot just say like many times before – regarding Syria, Iran, etc. – that we have come to a crisis and that we just need to accept the reality. Russia is to settle the Syrian crisis, to solve the Iranian problem and to resolve the situation in Ukraine through direct talks with the Ukrainian authorities. The West is consistently trying to avoid the responsibility of dealing with those whom they nurtured and continue to support for their geopolitical purposes.

We have absolutely no intentions of crossing Ukrainian borders. This is not in our interests. We simply want everybody to work together; we want the violence to stop and we want the Western countries who are trying to sweep under the rug those cases of violence and to portray the situation in Ukraine in a positive light to realize they need to bear the responsibility.

According to Ukraine’s Interior Minister Arsen Avakov, the Ukrainian authorities lately have been trying to disarm all those who possess firearms illegally – that is, the criminals. If this is the result of our Western partners’ efforts, then, I repeat, we are satisfied with that. We are ready to continue to work out joint recommendations for the Ukrainians to stop all the lawlessness and to start a deep constitutional process to reform their country.

‘No US-style naval bases build-up planned’

Q: There are speculations that Russia may respond to all these events by setting up its military bases in the Seychelles, Vietnam, Nicaragua, Cuba and even in Argentina.

SL: This is a complete lie. We have no plans whatsoever to build naval and military bases abroad in the sense which you put into the term. The Russian Navy is now much stronger than before. I believe after Crimea joined Russia, it will have much more opportunities for development. Along with the Black Sea Fleet, we also have the Pacific, the Northern Fleet, etc.

It’s very important for a country to have highly trained Navy, especially because today the Navy has not just to plough the ocean for training purposes but also to complete specific tasks like counter-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden and elsewhere. Ships have to travel to remote places. We have agreements with some countries allowing our vessels and warships to use their existing infrastructure for servicing, minor repairs, water and food replenishments and for the crew to rest.

We are absolutely not considering building bases similar to how America does it. And of course, unlike the US, we will not have any agreements, which would make our personnel immune to criminal prosecution in the countries where they are deployed.

By the way, I recently saw an interesting picture on the Internet: a map of the Russian Federation and US military bases around it. It looks very impressive. There are over a hundred of them. And there is a quote from a US soldier: “How dare Russians be so close to our bases?”

Q: Are you talking to the countries I mentioned about the possibility of our warships entering their seaports?

SL: There are a few countries we are talking to but these issues are handled by defense ministries.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 16:11

Obama’s Spiel at Palais de Beaux-Arts: A Tissue of Errors, Hypocrisy and Lies

UlanBatori · Post by **UlanBatori** » 29 Mar 2014 17:34

trying to persuade China to scrap gas supply contracts with Russia

Q-e-D.

habal · Post by **habal** » 29 Mar 2014 19:22

This is a good time for India to carry out a nuclear test. Will they sanction India & RUssia both ? hain ji .. then all the more fun.

JwalaMukhi · Post by **JwalaMukhi** » 29 Mar 2014 19:29

It is mostly a clash of oligarchies. Ukraine is near abroad for Russia and it will play a greater role and be more careful. For US it is far abroad and it can afford to wing it and be sloppy.
This is an opportunity not lost by the interested parties to fuel military-industrial fundings on all sides.

Eventually Russia and US will kiss and make up. US paid recently $70 million dollars for a seat to get to Space station abroad the russian vehicle. Russia is wooing Steven Seagal to be its ambassador for fitness in Russia. It is all part of the game. Nothing too much to be worked up. Russia will continue its business like partnership and so will US its transactional relationship.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 29 Mar 2014 20:53

The best time to test is when the "Lame Duck" pres. is nearing the end of term,desperately looking to "Dame Luck" to ensure some sort of legacy other than his "back to the barracks" retreat from Afghanistan,etc.

Meanwhile,Russia and NoKo have decided to trade in roubles,the first indication of Russia rejecting the once almighty $ as preferred instrument of trade.Sergei Lavrov,its FM has reiterated that it has no intention to send troops into the Ukraine,as the US's scaremongering propaganda is alleging.The supposed 40,000 Russian troops "massing" on Ukraine's borders appear to be a phantom army as they can't be found in the numbers alleged! Another piece of Yanqui disinformation.

Russia has no intention to send troops into Ukraine – Lavrov
Published time: March 29, 2014
http://rt.com/news/lavrov-interview-ukraine-russia-065/

Dawning too late! But this is what happens when "Thieves fall out".The Euro-Peons conspired with the neo-Naxi Ukranian far right to seize power by any means,overthrowing Yanukovych by foul means,using snipers to fire on both sides and used the chaos as justification for the putsch by the "Baptist preacher" and his flock of criminals! Now the well armed villains of the piece,the Maidan murderers,are demanding their share of power from the suited and booted Kiev clique,supported by the Peons of Europe,who are dismayed at the neo-Nazis not bending to their will.When the ciris was at its height,these very hypocrites of Europe and America,praised these very same "opposition protesters" for their courage,blah,blah.The truth of the matter is that fascism is well and truly alive in Europe,but cleverly disguised in the clothes of Brussels bureaucrats.Revealing their ideology on the street after victory,is taboo for the closet Nazis like Ashton and co.

Against democratic principles’: EU’s Ashton denounces nationalists’ pressure on Ukraine parliament
Published time: March 29, 2014

The lawless actions of Ukraine's nationalists have finally caught attention of the intl community, with EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton denouncing Right Sector for its ‘pressure’ and ‘undemocratic’ demand of the interior minister’s resignation.

A day after neo-Nazi activists who helped bring the acting government in Kiev to power turned against it, Ashton has issued a statement condemning the “pressure by activists of the Right Sector who have surrounded the building of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine.”

This “intimidation” the EU foreign policy chief believes, stands against all “democratic principles and rule of law,” as Ashton called on the ultra-right group “to refrain from the use or threat of violence.”

Ashton stressed the need to “hand over any unauthorised arms to the authorities immediately.”

At the same time she welcomed the “impartial and credible investigation into the circumstances of the death of Aleksandr Muzychko,” whose death in a police shootout led to the latest showdown outside the parliament in Kiev.

The US Embassy in Kiev and the Delegation of the European Union to Ukraine also issued a statement 'condemning' the Right Sector tactics at the Verkhovna Rada.

“We welcome the statements of Pravy Sector’s leadership that they intend to keep their actions 'within the framework of the law." We urge all political forces to distance themselves from extremists, who undermine the efforts to stabilize Ukraine and to protect its sovereignty,” the joint statement read.

On Wednesday night, several hundred neo-Nazi activists from the Right Sector and their supporters besieged the parliament building, pressuring lawmakers to sack the newly appointed Interior Minister Arsen Avakov. The Right Sector believes that Avakov is personally responsible for ordering what they call a political assassination of one of their leader, Aleksandr Muzychko, who was killed in a special operation in a city of Rovno on Tuesday.

Avakov said that he is ready to resign if ordered, but wondered what would happen to Ukraine if he does.

“Resigning is not a problem for me, it wasn't three days ago, it isn’t now. I can do it immediately. The problem is, what direction will the country take in this case. We will move toward acting like the victorious gangs in Somalia, or we move in the direction of order? I prefer order,” Inter-fax quotes him as saying.

Activists of the Right Sector movement and their supporters gather outside the parliament building to demand the immediate resignation of Internal Affairs Minister Arsen Avakov, in Kiev March 27, 2014.(Reuters / Maks Levin)

Aleksandr Turchynov, the self-proclaimed President of Ukraine earlier on Friday has called the Right Sector's tactics “an attempt to destabilize the situation in Ukraine, in the very heart of Ukraine – Kiev.”

Yet the Right Sector's bullying techniques seem to work as the parliament on Friday registered a new bill aimed at deposing the Interior Minister. There is no date set for the reading of the bill, but local media outlets say it could happen as early as next Friday.

Earlier in the day, the Verkhovna Rada set up an interim investigation commission into the death of Muzychko nicknamed Sashko Bilyi. The Interior Ministry in the meantime announced plans to unveil the audio files related to the attempted arrest and subsequent killing of Muzychko.

“The Ministry of Internal Affairs will disclose all documents, material, video and audio evidence,” Avakov said on his Facebook page.

The ongoing extremism rampant in Kiev as well as other regions was the topic of Friday’s phone conversation between the Russian an US leaders.

The reason for concern is simple. The Right Sector has secured a reputation of an organization that uses threatening violent tactics to achieve their objectives. In addition, it is widely believed that the ultra-nationalist paramilitary structure is in possession of a vast arms arsenal that has gone missing from military depots during the February unrest in Ukraine.

The growing strength of the Right Sector and their overwhelming bullying tactics are allegedly forcing informal discussions by Ukraine’s security officials to ban the movement, according to unconfirmed reports. Only a month after street protests – in which the Right Sector played a central role – forced President Viktor Yanukovich from the country, the movement is seen as an increasing threat to those who now cling to power in Kiev, as well as ordinary people across the country.

Who will the Ukranians call upon when the "Right Sector",the "Wrong uns",get their act together and into top gear ,taking over the country,no chance of the Peons of NATO coming to their rescue,will they have to plead with Putin and call for the Russians to save them? It will be a hilarious about turn,but then facts are stranger than fiction!

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 29 Mar 2014 21:00

Longish Interview from Lavrov , Updated in Full

Finally there is some good clarity from Foreign Ministry .......clears lots of misconception we hear in western media lately.

anmol · Post by **anmol** » 29 Mar 2014 21:59

This is bigger than "f@ck the EU":

rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/

Time to grab guns and kill damn Russians – Tymoshenko in leaked tape — RT News
rt.com | Mar 24th 2014

Ukrainians must take up arms against Russians so that not even scorched earth will be left where Russia stands; an example of former Ukrainian PM Yulia Tymoshenko’s vitriol in phone call leaked online.

Tymoshenko confirmed the authenticity of the conversation on Twitter, while pointing out that a section where she is heard to call for the nuclear slaughter of the eight million Russians who remain on Ukrainian territory was edited.

She tweeted “The conversation took place, but the '8 million Russians in Ukraine' piece is an edit. In fact, I said Russians in Ukraine – are Ukrainians. Hello FSB Sorry for the obscene language.”

The former Ukrainian PM has not clarified who exactly she wants to nuke.

Розмова була, але про 8 млн росіян в Україні - монтаж. Насправді сказала: росіяни в Україні - це українці.Привіт ФСБ:) Вибачте за нецензурне

— Юлія Тимошенко (@YuliaTymoshenko)

[..]
Viktor: "What should we do now with the 8 million Russians that stayed in Ukraine? They are outcasts!"

Tymoshenko replies: "They must be killed with nuclear weapons."

vic · Post by **vic** » 29 Mar 2014 22:27

USA and Saudis want to cut off Russian links and Gas Supplies from Europe and Neo Nazis are being used to achieve this aim.

prahaar · Post by **prahaar** » 29 Mar 2014 22:43

----deleted-----

Sonugn · Post by **Sonugn** » 29 Mar 2014 22:51

anmol wrote:This is bigger than "f@ck the EU":
rt.com/news/tymoshenko-calls-destroy-russia-917/

Time to grab guns and kill damn Russians – Tymoshenko in leaked tape — RT News
rt.com | Mar 24th 2014

Ukrainians must take up arms against Russians so that not even scorched earth will be left where Russia stands; an example of former Ukrainian PM Yulia Tymoshenko’s vitriol in phone call leaked online.

Tymoshenko confirmed the authenticity of the conversation on Twitter, while pointing out that a section where she is heard to call for the nuclear slaughter of the eight million Russians who remain on Ukrainian territory was edited.

She tweeted “The conversation took place, but the '8 million Russians in Ukraine' piece is an edit. In fact, I said Russians in Ukraine – are Ukrainians. Hello FSB Sorry for the obscene language.”

The former Ukrainian PM has not clarified who exactly she wants to nuke.

Розмова була, але про 8 млн росіян в Україні - монтаж. Насправді сказала: росіяни в Україні - це українці.Привіт ФСБ:) Вибачте за нецензурне

— Юлія Тимошенко (@YuliaTymoshenko)

[..]
Viktor: "What should we do now with the 8 million Russians that stayed in Ukraine? They are outcasts!"

Tymoshenko replies: "They must be killed with nuclear weapons."

Strange are the ways/languages of the 'free'

ShauryaT · Post by **ShauryaT** » 30 Mar 2014 06:12

U.S. Intel Sources: Russian Invasion of Eastern Ukraine Increasingly Likely

American intelligence agencies have told Obama administration officials and key congressional staffers that there is mounting evidence that Russia is putting the pieces in place for an invasion of eastern Ukraine, and that the possibility of an imminent assault cannot be ruled out, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 30 Mar 2014 07:02

We heard a similar lie about Saddam's WMDs that required just 15 minutes to be launched! These 40,000 troops are being carefully hidden in the age of KH sats,and can't be found,but they're there.

What is alarming the Yanquis and the Euro-Peons is the internal spat between the neo-Nazi fascist thugs who they used to engineer the putsch in Kiev and the Kiev clique led by the baptist preacher and co. whom they want in place as puppet rulers.The leader of the neo-Nazis has been bumped off in style by the cops ,and they're now braying for blood! They have also supposedly stolen a vast qty. of arms,looted form one of the military bases and possess enough firepower to start a small war. If the putsch ends up in a bloody civil spat which cannot be ruled out,or if the neo-Nazis indulge in a pogrom of Russian speaking Ukranians,then the cry to Putin for Russia to step in and sort out the mess,and perhaps take another bite at eastern Ukraine,cannot be ruled out.

One again history has repeated itself as farce,with the West and NATO chosen in the Ukraine fascist thugs to overthrow a democratically elected president,whom they cannot control anymore.Having destroyed Vietnam,Iraq,Afghanistan and created chaos in Libya,Egypt and attempting the same are Syria,with the "camels of the desert" as partners in crime,their blood lust has now dangerously taken them to the border with Russia,and history has shown time and time again,not to disturb a sleeping bear in his lair.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Mar 2014 09:32

ShauryaT wrote:U.S. Intel Sources: Russian Invasion of Eastern Ukraine Increasingly Likely
American intelligence agencies have told Obama administration officials and key congressional staffers that there is mounting evidence that Russia is putting the pieces in place for an invasion of eastern Ukraine, and that the possibility of an imminent assault cannot be ruled out, according to people with direct knowledge of the matter.

US intel was taken aback with the speed Crimea was taken over ....so its a case of to be safe then to be sorry they are taking the path to least resistance.

On many key Geopolitical events US intel has been caught off guard including P-2 in 1998 .......with Crimea they have little reason to be caught off guard as they were the one who planned the uprising and should have been prepared for any eventuality.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 30 Mar 2014 19:46

UN chief: Putin promised no new moves in Ukraine

UNITED NATIONS (AP) -- Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon said Friday that Russian President Vladimir Putin assured him he had no intention of making another military move into Ukraine following the annexation of Crimea.

Russia's UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin echoed the UN chief, saying Putin made clear in a March 18 statement that there was not going to be any new Russian move into Ukraine. He accused unnamed countries of "trying to artificially whip up the atmosphere of international crisis."

The new Ukrainian government and the West have voiced concerns about a possible invasion into pro-Russian eastern and southern Ukraine following Moscow's buildup of its troops near the border.

Ban and Churkin spoke to reporters after the secretary-general briefed the Security Council behind closed doors on his recent talks with Putin in Moscow and Ukraine's leaders in Kiev.

"Some parties were trying to whip up tension - Russian aggression is imminent, or something like that, throwing wild assessments of the presence of our troops allegedly on the border with Ukraine," Churkin said.

"Our forces in Russia are undergoing their usual routine, staying in their barracks or doing some training," he said. "But there is no worry of any Russian initiative against Ukraine."

Churkin said there have been four inspections along the Russia-Ukraine border by about a dozen countries this month - including one by the United States, Germany and Ukraine - "and none of them told us they saw anything particularly disconcerting."

He said Putin told Russia's defense minister on Friday to return Ukraine's military hardware from Crimea, adding "this is not something you do if you plan anything dramatic against this country."

Ban said during his visits to Moscow and Kiev on March 20-21 "emotions were running high ... and tensions have been very highly charged." He said he urged leaders in both countries to de-escalate the situation and engage in direct talks, and called on Ukraine's leaders to address domestic concerns that Russia has.

But the secretary-general said "President Putin ... told me that he had no intention to make any military move."

Churkin said the effort to whip up an international crisis "is not helpful at all." What all parties need to do is help the Ukrainians get out of the crisis in the country, he said.

Churkin said Russia has spelled out its views of what needs to be done to "our international colleagues" and the Ukrainians.

"The armed groups must be disarmed. The radicals must be reined in, and most importantly there must be (a) constitutional process ... and the results of a constitutional assembly must be put to a referendum," Churkin said. Then, there will be a new constitution "where all the regions of the country will be comfortable about where they are, about their rights, and about where their country is going.

Russia has pushed strongly for federalizing Ukraine - giving its regions more autonomy - but Ukraine's interim authorities in Kiev have rejected such a move.

Churkin said the Ukrainians and their Western supporters only want to talk about a presidential election on May 25, which he said would take place "in a situation of political chaos in the country."

"There is no political leader in sight who might be able to unite the country," he said. "All the politicians one can hear about are extremely divisive for the Ukrainian society."

Churkin said Russia is being urged to engage in dialogue and is ready to talk if there's a response to its views of what must be done.

The Ukrainians say they can't hold a constitutional assembly now because there's no one to organize it, so Churkin proposed that the international community help. And he reiterated Russia's call for the establishment of an international contact group that could take on this role.