The Strategic Issues & International Relations Forum is a venue to discuss issues pertaining to India's security environment, her strategic outlook on global affairs and as well as the effect of international relations in the Indian Subcontinent. We request members to kindly stay within the mandate of this forum and keep their exchanges of views, on a civilised level, however vehemently any disagreement may be felt. All feedback regarding forum usage may be sent to the moderators using the Feedback Form or by clicking the Report Post Icon in any objectionable post for proper action. Please note that the views expressed by the Members and Moderators on these discussion boards are that of the individuals only and do not reflect the official policy or view of the Bharat-Rakshak.com Website. Copyright Violation is strictly prohibited and may result in revocation of your posting rights - please read the FAQ for full details. Users must also abide by the Forum Guidelines at all times.
RSoami wrote:This ceasefire is not going to hold. Poroshenko cant beat the rebels. He cant join them now either.
The ethnic russians have had enough of the maidan geniuses. Its their homes and cities that have faced the brunt of the conflict.
Washington is going to continue prompting Poroshenko to finger the Russians. Now he is dependent on the west for finances too. Cant say no to them.
It would make sense for Putin to arm the rebels to the teeth. When the next conflict comes they should be ready to overrun Kiev.
Ukraine`s goose is cooked. Its fate is no longer in its hands anymore. Others will decide what course it takes now. Thats what happens when lesser people like Arsenic and Poroshenko and Nehru rule a state.
I agree - Putin's a fool if he backs down now. Poroshenko's just buying time to rearm with sophisticated US weaponry, then he will attack again. The Ukrainians don't have time to absorb complex weapons systems like Apache helicopters but they can definitely wreak havoc on the Russians and separatists with simple-to-operate but very deadly weapons like Javelin anti-tank missiles and GPS-guided artillery shells. There's all kinds of extremely deadly weaponry and supporting technology the US can provide at very little cost to themselves, which would put a world of hurt on the relatively primitive Russian forces.
Additional sanctions are already coming regardless; now is the time for Russia to just plow ahead and secure all of Donbass and a land corridor to Crimea. Completely wreck the Ukrainian armed forces while doing so, and ensure they don't want to fight again for a few generations. Then the US can shower them with sophisticated weapons that the beaten-down Ukrainians will have no stomach to use.
Equipment needs training. Just dumping hardware makes an IS like situation with your hardware used against you. Eukraine will get polish/lithanian/estonian junk whch is in no great shape. And unless boots on ground, still the same result.
Eukraine is best off with an east poland on one side and a bunch of DNX on the other. Still nominally called eukraine. Both sides realize this. But if fighting turns back on (best for US economy), then maps may be redrawn all the way to moldova.
Shreeman wrote:Equipment needs training. Just dumping hardware makes an IS like situation with your hardware used against you.
Light anti-armor weapons and shoulder-fired SAM's don't require much training at all; the Afghan mujahedin certainly didn't have any trouble operating them. Sophisticated night vision goggles and frequency hopping radios are also very simple to use. Shower the Ukrainian armed forces with huge #'s of eqpt like this and you create a real nightmare for the Russians and their separatists.
If Putin dithers now, while his forces have the initiative, the Russians will suffer very heavy losses later, when Poroshenko decides to strike again, months from now with his forces bristling with US weaponry.
Marine Le Pen,who has made massive gains in the last French elections,and may in the near future lead the country,has hit out at the EU for being responsible for the UKR crisis,having to choose "either the EU or Russia".A glorious campaign statement from her that should warm the heart of every patriotic Indian.
“Our people demand one type of politics: they want politics by the French, for the French, with the French. They don’t want to be led anymore from outside, to submit to laws.”
Published time: September 06, 2014 13:49
Marine Le Pen, France's National Front political party.(Reuters / Francois Lenoir)
Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s far-right National Front party, says the EU is to blame for the crisis in Ukraine as it forced the situation where Kiev had to choose between East and West.
Now that France is joining sanctions against Russia over the alleged direct interference in the political crisis in Ukraine and Paris is considering suspending the €1.2 billion deal of two Mistral helicopter carrier ships ordered by Russia, the leader of the biggest parliamentary faction of the French parliament has her own opinion on Ukraine’s turmoil.
“The crisis in Ukraine is all the European Union’s fault. Its leaders negotiated a trade deal with Ukraine, which essentially blackmailed the country to choose between Europe and Russia,” Le Pen told Le Monde daily in an interview.
Le Pen has been a long-standing critic of Europe’s foreign policy and does not see how Ukraine could join the bloc.
“The European Union's diplomacy is a catastrophe,” Le Pen told RT's Sophie Shevardnadze in an exclusive interview in June.
“The EU speaks out on foreign affairs either to create problems, or to make them worse.”
“Ukraine’s entry into the European Union; no need to tell fairy tales: Ukraine absolutely does not have the economic level to join the EU,” Le Pen told RT.
In her fresh interview with Le Monde, the National Front leader had a positive attitude towards Russian President Vladimir Putin and the economic model he builds.
“I have a certain admiration for the man [Putin]. He proposes a patriotic economic model, radically different than what the Americans are imposing on us,” said Marine Le Pen.
As for France’s decision to suspend the delivery of the first of two Mistral helicopter carrier ships to Russia, it only shows Paris’ obedience of American diplomacy, Marine Le Pen said earlier.
"This decision (not to deliver Mistral ships) is very serious, firstly because it runs contrary to the interests of the country and shows our obedience of American diplomacy," Le Pen told France’s RTL radio.
France’s National Front and its leader Marine Le Pen, a party renowned for its anti-immigrant and anti-EU rhetoric, achieved unprecedented results at the latest EU elections, claiming nearly 25 percent of the votes and winning the election.
“Our people demand one type of politics: they want politics by the French, for the French, with the French. They don’t want to be led anymore from outside, to submit to laws.” These were the National Front’s slogans that garnered a quarter of French voters earlier this year.
President Francois Hollande’s popularity in France has hit a record low – just over 13 percent, according to estimates from the TNS-Sofres pollster, reported Reuters on Thursday.
Full of confidence, the National Front leader Marine Le Pen has no doubt she can head the national government today.
“I’m ready to be prime minister and implement the policies that the French are waiting for,” she said. “Hollande would be the president for representation and inauguration ceremonies, but that’s it. The government decides the policies and the political path to follow. He would have to submit to it, or he would have to go,” Le Pen told Le Monde.
By late Saturday, however, bursts of heavy artillery and machine gun fire replaced the evident calm, a gas station was ablaze and cars carrying injured civilians could be seen on the roads.
The warring factions blamed each other for violating the truce.
The Russian news agency Itar-Tass late Saturday quoted rebel officials saying that Ukrainian forces continued to shell Donetsk and rebel positions near Mariupol. The RIA Novosti new agency reported that four Donetsk residents were killed in the shelling.
Ukrainian National Security and Defense Council spokesman Col. Andriy Lysenko told reporters in Kiev on Saturday that the situation was calmer than before but that there had been a number of "provocations" by rebels.
These include 10 instances of shelling in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, he said.
But Lysenko said a prisoner exchange would begin soon without specifying a time and date.
Shreeman wrote:Equipment needs training. Just dumping hardware makes an IS like situation with your hardware used against you.
Light anti-armor weapons and shoulder-fired SAM's don't require much training at all; the Afghan mujahedin certainly didn't have any trouble operating them. Sophisticated night vision goggles and frequency hopping radios are also very simple to use. Shower the Ukrainian armed forces with huge #'s of eqpt like this and you create a real nightmare for the Russians and their separatists.
If Putin dithers now, while his forces have the initiative, the Russians will suffer very heavy losses later, when Poroshenko decides to strike again, months from now with his forces bristling with US weaponry.
Judging by the amount of ammunition left behind by retreating Eukrainians, there is no dearth of RPGs. The rebels must not be operating in convoys, so you only see an odd T72 divorced with its turret here and there. More anti-armor wont create any better outcomes unless the rebels start creating "fronts". SAMs are probably going to down more commercial traffic if anything, both luhansk and donetsk are sans runway.
Communication privacy could help,but it doesnt look like they are short of fire power. Just people willing to stand and fire it.
East ukraine was mostly razed to the ground. And the ceasing of the fire has itself ceased quite quickly -- the match appears to be back on. Lets see how long before maruipol falls and the rebels actually have a town with houses still standing in it.
Putin would be wrong if he gives up now. There are no Russian planes or tanks in the region that would get sacrificed even if, as the Chocolate soldier declared in the Nato kitty party 'the one Nato member who is supplying the precision weapons' supplies some more SAMs and ATGMs.
If Easterners can take up and hold on to half the country then a counter-coup is on the cards in less then 6 months in the westerns half of the country.
Hold on to what you have and make life hell for the '111th Infantry Brigade' of Maidan. More complex the plan more risk it carries. And no plan works as well as a persistent harassment. I am sure Putin has learnt how the Amerikhans damaged his country.
In any case now after the MH17 it is too personal for Vijay Deenanath Chauhan. The Amerikhans will target him personally now.
................................
VVVV - Bhagwaan jane, must be the country that everybody seeks permission from.
Last edited by member_20317 on 07 Sep 2014 10:51, edited 1 time in total.
UKR "army" abandoned their arms and fled! Must've been the advice from their Yanqui advisers and "contractors",assisting them,who have vast experience in this great military tactic (like the Romans in ASterix) in "beating the retreat"!
Rebels make a grab for arms abandoned by Ukrainian forces as leaders prepare for talks
Kim Sengupta
Shyrokyne
Sunday 07 September 2014
On Saturday, people in the east of the country, battered by six months of fighting, were tentatively tasting the first day of peace. Although the two sides accused the other of breaching the terms of the deal struck 24 hours earlier in the Belarus capital Minsk, Petro Poroshenko, the Ukrainian president, agreed with Vladimir Putin in a telephone call that the ceasefire was largely holding and discussed measures, said Kiev, which need be taken to ensure that it is not derailed.
The agreement came after separatist forces, heavily backed by soldiers and weaponry of the Russian armed forces, won a series of victories, according to Kiev and Western governments. One by-product of that has been caches of arms abandoned by Ukrainian forces.
Rocket-propelled grenades and ammunition for Kalashnikov assault rifles were taken away by men in civilian clothes from a children's summer camp, outside Shyrokyne village, which had been used as a base by Kiev. Boxes exposed to looting included more supplies, mortar rounds, land mines and detonators.
Some of the Ukrainian heavy armour had been smashed, turned into twisted hulks by precision artillery fire, left on the roads out of Mariupol which had faced repeated attacks from the rebels. An armoured personnel carrier was lying in the grounds of the summer school near Shyrokyne. Beside it lay live rocket-propelled grenades and belts of machine-gun ammunition that disappeared during the afternoon.
Sunbathers at the beach in Mariupol Sunbathers at the beach in Mariupol Nadiazhda Voromina, 75, who had been working as a caretaker there since retiring from engineering, gave a conducted tour of the other ordnance left behind: 21 cases of mortar rounds, 11 of anti-tank and six of anti-personnel mines which had been left by Ukrainian soldiers who pulled out after coming under fire on Thursday. "When the bombing started, I hid in a basement with the soldiers, but then they received orders to go and they got away very fast. There are others [arms] around the place; I have been asking the mayor's office to come and collect all this. Surely it's dangerous to leave this lying around, but I don't know whether this area now belongs to Ukraine or the separatists."
Later, a large black Toyota pulled up with three men who were soon in deep discussion about moving some of the boxes of weapons. Who were they? Were they from the Ukrainian government or the "Donetsk Peoples' Republic"?
One of them, large, paunchy, shaven headed, said: "No, we are civilians. We want to take these to a secure place; that is all we need to tell anyone. You don't know, they may be useful if the war starts again."
Sunday 7 September 2014
Out of America: Nato has a commitment to defend the Baltic states, unlike Ukraine. But those in charge seem less than committed
Few of us are offered the chance of reinvention at the pensionable age of 65. But in the next few months, Nato, the alliance we take for granted, has precisely such an opportunity. Post-Cold War "coalitions of the willing" in distant Afghanistan (and soon surely against the barbaric Isis in Iraq and Syria) are fine. But nothing beats going back to the job you know best, on your very doorstep: facing up to the Russians – the very reason Nato was created in 1949. But there's one big problem. Does Nato have the will to do so?
The East-West confrontation over Ukraine is the most dangerous crisis in Europe since the 1968 Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia. You can argue that we, and the US in particular, are in good part to blame, by grossly misreading Russian history, and its memories of Napoleon and Hitler.
It may seem to us pure paranoia: the observation of George Kennan, the great American diplomat who invented the post-war concept of "containment" of the Soviet Union, that Moscow "can have at its borders only enemies or vassals" is as true today as it was in 1946. The fact remains, however, that the West failed to understand that expanding Nato, Russia's sworn foe for half a century, into former Soviet republics would revive these ancestral obsessions.
We got away with it when Russia was prostrate in the 1990s. But that was bound to change. Cometh the hour, cometh Vladimir Putin. And now, we are where we are. Driven by the very nationalist demons he has summoned up, Putin cannot back down. As in every such confrontation, the need to maintain credibility and not to lose face has become paramount.
Yes, the West can apply non-military pressure. But economic sanctions, however high we ratchet them, are unlikely to bend a country as inured to privation as Russia, especially when its leadership, in virtually total control of the media, insists the suffering is justified by a noble patriotic cause, of protecting "the Russian world".
And the problem is not so much Ukraine, which is not a member of Nato and for which the West will never go to war. The true potential flashpoint is the Baltic trio of Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania, former Soviet republics which do belong to Nato, and which, in the case of the first two, have large ethnic Russian minorities. Under Article 5 of Nato's founding treaty, the alliance is obliged to come to the assistance of a member who has been attacked. Suppose the Russians in Estonia or Latvia rise in protest at some real or manufactured grievance against the government in Tallinn or Riga, and their protector in the Kremlin acts as he has done in eastern Ukraine. Would Nato have the will to stop him?
The decision at the Newport summit to set up a rapid response team, of some 4,000 men and based "in Eastern Europe", is hardly an answer. Supplies and equipment would be stockpiled at the base, allowing a so‑called "spearhead" force to deploy quickly. Whether it would be quick enough to counter an invasion by overwhelming Russian forces, is another matter. Presented with a fait accompli, what would the alliance do?
Nor should we yet take too much comfort from Friday's agreement between Russia, Ukraine and the rebels in the east. Such a deal, unless swiftly built upon, risks merely "freezing in place" the conflict, and permanently destabilising Ukraine. What of a similar frozen-in-place war in the Baltics: how would Nato react? The semantic shilly-shallying over whether Russia's actions in Ukraine qualifies as an "invasion" is not an encouraging sign. As for Nato's announcement that it will hold its next summit in Warsaw in 2016, that is no more than a symbolic sop.
Few are more anxious than Poland, the country that has among the bitterest experience of what it means living next door to Russia. What it wants is a "tripwire", similar to the 28,000 US troops stationed in South Korea, or the million-odd troops Nato had in West Germany at the height of the Cold War.
The Poles aren't asking for anything on that scale, merely a couple of permanently stationed combat brigades, with a total strength of about 8,000 men. But their function would be the same: a guarantee that a Russian attack would automatically trigger a direct confrontation between Nato and Russian troops – something that never happened throughout the Cold War.
It is, of course, absurd that Europe on its own cannot cope with Russia, a country with less than half of Europe's population and a total economy the size of Italy's. For that, thank endless defence cuts, born of the wishful belief that war is no longer an option. But again, we are where we are. Nato needs leadership, and for better or worse, that can only come from the US.
This brings us to the other great question of the moment: is Barack Obama, with his professorial detachment and instinctive caution, the person to provide that leadership? "Speak softly and carry a big stick," was the famous foreign policy dictum of Theodore Roosevelt. No one doubts the size of the US stick; the issue is whether the president who wields it is speaking too softly. Or it was until Wednesday.
Presidential trips and foreign summits produce much blather. And so it has been this time. But not when Obama went to Tallinn last week and promised the Baltic republics that, after losing their independence once before (in 1939), "with Nato, you'll never lose it again".
Article 5, he went on, was "crystal clear". An attack on one was an attack on all. "So if, in such a moment, you ever ask again who'll come to help, you'll know the answer: the Nato alliance, including the armed forces of the United States of America. Right here, present, now." Those words are up there with Britain's commitment to Poland in 1939. But does the man who ignored his self-imposed "red line" over Syria's use of chemical weapons, have the courage of his words?
That is a judgement for the man in the Kremlin. Does Obama have the will? Does that pensioner called Nato? But if the alliance can reinvent itself, the result would be the one Putin fears most: a West that finally has the courage of its proclaimed convictions.
All this bluster about Estonia and Latvia seems to suggest that they have already written off Youkraine and Moldovia. The lesson from East Youkraine is that if the West has Blackwater, the East has Balaclavas, and the 'precision artilley' of the East is something to be seen to be believed: every tank and APC became a deathtrap target because the East has drones in the sky and weapons that have terminal guidance. This is the reality of modern warfare. No need for ground observers to direct the fire: The drones can drop sensors by parachute, or into the trees, to capture tank engine sounds if they move; or magnetic field aberrations if a vehicle parks. When they come, the guided warheads don't waste explosive.
Drones change the whole equation.
Now that there is a ceasefire both sides will want to infiltrate, but I hope Comrade Putin conveys the message that Balaclavas can also appear in Kiev, without actually having to do it.
The NATO "drones",living off the "fat of the land",enjoying massive gourmet Welsh banquets are a pathetic bunch of talkers. Pres.Putin is a disciplined man of action as his character has displayed and decisive when it comes to protecting Russian core interests.The imbecelic Euro-Peons who cower in front of Uncle Sam,could've had Russia as a dependable ally instead of being a Yanqui "bogeyman".One must wait fro Marie le Pen to lead France and alter the attitude.
Ukraine ceasefire breached in Donetsk and Mariupol
Shelling is audible in port of Mariupol and explosions reported in Donetsk days after ceasefire deal
Shaun Walker in Mariupol
The Observer, Sunday 7 September 2014
Destroyed Ukrainian military hardware is strewn across the outskirts of Mariupol, where reports of shelling suggest the ceasefire is under threat. Photograph: Anatolii Boiko/AFP/Getty Images
Ukraine's ceasefire was breached repeatedly on Sunday as shelling was audible in the port city of Mariupol, and loud booms were also heard in the regional centre Donetsk. The ceasefire, agreed on Friday, held for much of Saturday, but shelling started overnight.
The official Twitter account of the Donetsk rebels said in the early hours of Sunday that its forces were "taking Mariupol", but later accused Ukraine of breaking the ceasefire. Fighters from the Azov battalion, who are defending the town, said their positions had come under Grad rocket fire.
Earlier on Saturday the truce had appeared to be holding, with only minor violations reported, as hopes mounted that the deal struck in Minsk on Friday could bring an end to the violence that has left more than 2,000 dead in recent months.
Both sides accused the other of violating the ceasefire, but there did not appear to be any serious exchanges of fire and no casualties were reported. Nevertheless, the rhetoric coming from Kiev and Donetsk, capital of the Russia-backed rebel movement, showed that a political solution was still some way away.
The atmosphere between the two frontlines on Saturday was tense but calm, as both sides took stock of what appear to have been heavy losses in the final fighting that led up to the ceasefire.
The fiercest fighting on Friday came in the villages between Novoazovsk and Mariupol, the strategic port city that Ukrainians feared would be attacked by separatists over the past week. Rebel forces seized the town of Novoazovsk, across the border with Russia, 10 days ago. Kiev says the rebels were aided by soldiers and armour of the regular Russian army, which helped turn the tide against Ukraine's forces and push Kiev towards accepting a ceasefire.
ukraine 0209 WEB
At one point on the main road, a Ukrainian tank had been hit so hard on Friday it had been thrown back on to a huge stone wave-breaker placed on the road, its treads spooling out behind it.
Fields all around were scorched, and in some places smoke was still rising from where Grad missiles had landed the day before. In a nearby village, three Ukrainian tanks had been abandoned in the courtyard of a school kindergarten. Two were burned out, while one was untouched but had clearly been left in a hurry, rucksacks and personal possessions of its occupants left strewn around it, a sticker reading "****** off Putin" stuck to the base of its turret.
The windows of the kindergarten had all been blown out, its roof removed, and there were gaping holes in the walls, apparently from mortar rounds.
"The tanks came in about six in the morning," said one villager who did not want to give his name. "As soon as they set up position there, you could hear the booms come in from that direction," he said, pointing at the pro-Russia lines. It was unclear whether those in the tanks had escaped alive.
There was anger in the village, which until Saturday had seen no major fighting, over the destruction of the school. "See what a glorious army we have," said one middle-aged woman, sarcastically. "Parked their tanks up in our kindergarten, now the whole thing has gone."
In Mariupol, there was a more-relaxed atmosphere, as for the first day in a week there was no suggestion that rebel forces might attempt to enter. The residents are far from unanimous supporters of the Kiev government; many here would have preferred the region to be annexed by Russia. But most simply want peace.
Fighters from the Azov battalion, the volunteer grouping with far-right leanings that has done much of the fighting around Mariupol, sat on a restaurant terrace eating pizzas; families strolled in the sunshine, wedding parties breezed through central streets beeping horns.
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko spoke by telephone with Vladimir Putin on Saturday on ways to make the ceasefire last, but the final political solution remains unclear.
Alexander Zakharchenko, prime minister of the so-called Donetsk People's Republic, travelled to Moscow from the negotiations, and told journalists on Saturday that the peace talks had "legitimised" his quasi-country, and it should be regarded as on an equal footing with Ukraine.
Analysts have suggested that Moscow is likely to push either for a "breakaway state" which will be unrecognised internationally but function independently, or for east Ukraine to be de facto part of Ukraine but with such autonomy that it can essentially become a proxy region for Russia, ensuring that the rest of Ukraine can never join Nato or fully orient its foreign policy westward.
Sanction should be a good thing for the Russian people , The Oligarch have held hostage for a long time developing Business Relation with Asia and relying too much on West.
These Oligarch have bought houses in London , Paris and where not and invested most of their money in West , Now with sanction and money stolen their control over the economy will loosen and Russia will be forced to develop economy with Asia which is also the fastest growing and needs energy.
From the right wing "Torygraph"!
Vladimir Putin’s 'unacceptable’ action in Ukraine was predictable and provoked Nato leaders don’t know what to do about Mr Putin and the civil war in Ukraine, and have been misreading this crisis since it began http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... voked.html
By Christopher Booker
06 Sep 2014
It is always revealing when politicians tell us that something is “unacceptable”. What they mean is that, although people might expect them to do something about it, they haven’t got a clue what it is they can do. That was why, as the Western leaders gathered for that Nato summit in Wales, several, including David Cameron, told us that President Putin’s intervention in Ukraine was “unacceptable”.
The real problem here is not just that our leaders don’t know what they can do about Mr Putin and that horrible civil war in Ukraine, which has already killed nearly 3,000 people and which the Russians seem to be winning hands down. It is that they and many others in the West have been misreading this crisis ever since it began at the start of the year.
It cannot be said often enough that what triggered the crisis was not Mr Putin’s desire to restore the boundaries of the Soviet Union, but the ludicrously misguided ambition of the West to see Ukraine absorbed into the EU and Nato. There was never any way that either Mr Putin or all those Russian speakers in eastern Ukraine and Crimea were going to take kindly to seeing the country which was the cradle of Russian identity become part of a Western power bloc. Russia would be even less happy to see the only warm-water ports for its navy taken over by a military alliance that had been set up to counter Russia in the first place.
When 96 per cent of Crimeans democratically voted in March to join Russia, this was not, as Western politicians now tell us, because Mr Putin wanted to “annexe” their country. It was because the 82 per cent of them who speak Russian as their main language wanted to rejoin a country Crimea had been part of for two centuries.
Yet, at the very same time, the democratically elected government of Ukraine was being toppled by mobs of demonstrators in the streets of Kiev, many of whom were being paid from Brussels funds to shout “Europe, Europe” at Baroness Ashton, as she urged them to sign that “association agreement” which was the last step but one to Ukraine becoming a full member state of the EU.
That is why the EU, with America’s backing, has been led by its own vainglorious delusions into the mess we see today. The Nato leaders know there is little they can usefully do about it. For months they have been talking about those “sanctions”, while being only too uncomfortably aware that the EU depends on Russia for 30 per cent of the gas it needs to keep its cookers working and its lights on. Even when President Hollande of France was urging David Cameron all those months ago to slam the doors of the City of London on the Russian bankers and oligarchs who have £27 billion invested in the UK, we knew that Britain had £46 billion invested in Russia.
So our leaders sat round the table in that ghastly concrete hotel in Wales, prattling about ever more sanctions. They send their little “battle groups” to march round in circles in Poland. They huff and they puff about what is “unacceptable”. But they know they dare not risk trying to blow the house down.
Meanwhile, Mr Putin and the Russians of Ukraine’s industrial heartland do exactly what could have been predicted, as they fight to establish a semi-autonomous “buffer state” between Russia and the West.
Our leaders have been caught out by a crisis that anyone of intelligence should have seen coming, from the moment they so recklessly and unnecessarily set it on its way.
"The tanks came in about six in the morning," said one villager who did not want to give his name. "As soon as they set up position there, you could hear the booms come in from that direction,"
Drones. Also, when 2 became toast with totally accurate shots, the crew of #3 got the idea and ran: and the drone saw that and passed on the Bojitive Neuj and the artillery ceased fire. So one more Ukrainian tank captured intact. Very interesting MO - this is how they are convincing the UkBapZis to get out and run.
This is modern warfare. Tanks and APCs are only good for terrorizing civilians and those who don't have air cover (or little UAVs sitting in the trees, tweeting like birds).
Hope Indian Army is watching. Investment in massive armored divisions is sheer folly. One $300 mijjile, one $3M tank + 3 crew + all their guns and ammo and radar and mijjiles are toast.
Great shooting. They must be Olympic medallists! One is simply amazed at Grand Master Putin's moves on the board.Like a George Best,he weaves this way and that,feinting and faking,leaving his opponents in a state of total chaos and confusion as he heads,flicks and unleashes cannonballs goalwards!
With the huge prize of Eston Kohver,who from all accounts is a most important intel operative of the Estonians in their custody,and presumably by now singing like a canary,Moscow has just chalked up another skirmish victory in CW-2.It is most interesting that a new TV serial,"the Americans",all about the Cold War and KGB "illegals" in the US,is on right now.Highly entertaining.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/s ... ce-officer Russians open new front after Estonian official is captured in 'cross-border raid'
Eston Kohver taken to Moscow and paraded on TV as 'spy' two days after Obama's visit to Baltic state
Julian Borger, diplomatic editor
The Guardian, Sunday 7 September 2014
Eston Kohver (r), receives a decoration from Estonia's President Toomas Hendrik, in 2010. Photograph: AP
The Estonian-Russia border at Luhamaa does not look like a new Checkpoint Charlie. Set among the wooded plains that mark Nato and the European Union's eastern-most territory, the crossing is more likely to be the site of long lines of idling lorries than machine-gun nests and prisoner exchanges.
But that era of post-cold war calm may have come to an end on Friday morning, when, according to several Estonian accounts, smoke grenades detonated at an Estonian customs post, and all radio and telephone signals were jammed as armed Russian men suddenly materialised and dragged away a local official.
His name is Eston Kohver, a counter-intelligence officer in the Estonian security agency, Kapo, whose job over the past few years has been to keep tabs on the smuggling cartels trying to sneak merchandise through the Luhamaa crossing.
But Kohver's fate has now become entangled in a much bigger issue: the question of just how far Vladimir Putin's Russia is prepared to go to goad the Nato allies on its doorstep.
The capture has been seen as particularly provocative because it came two days after the US president, Barack Obama, visited Estonia, a trip aimed at reassuring the Baltic states of the US commitment to the security of its Nato allies in the face of Russia's role in the Ukraine crisis. It followed the announcement of the creation of a "spearhead force" – a Nato unit of 4,000 soldiers to be tasked with defending Baltic countries including Estonia.
But the immediate reaction of the government in Tallinn was to play down Friday's incident in the hope that it was the work of local Russian commanders who have a record of involvement in the smuggling trade.
The Kapo chief, Arnold Sinisalu, issued a statement saying there appeared to be no political motivation behind the incident. Estonia's president, Toomas Hendrik Ilves, tweeted that: "Kapo, like FBI in US, deals both with counterintelligence *and* organized crime. Just in some places they turn out to be same."
The hope that the affair would turn out to be low-key was initially strengthened when Estonian and Russian border guards performed a joint inspection, which seemed to verify the evidence of an incursion from Russia into Estonia, including multiple footprints in a band of raked sand that runs through no-man's land.
By Sunday, however, it became increasingly clear that Russia had other ideas. The Estonian was taken to Moscow where he was paraded before television cameras. The Russian Federal Security Service, the FSB, successor to the Soviet KGB, claimed Kohver had been caught on Russian soil.
The FSB said in a statement: "A Taurus handgun with ammunition, €5,000 (£4,000) in cash, special equipment for concealed audio recording and documents that bear evidence of an intelligence mission were seized from the intruder."
The statement appeared ominous for Kohver, whom the FSB had identified as a Kapo officer as far back as 2011, saying he was one of several agents trying to recruit agents as they crossed the border. The decision to bring him to Moscow and put him on television made it clear that Moscow was not interested in finding a quick and quiet means of resolving the incident.
Kadri Liik, a policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said: "My first guess was that this was to do with cross-border smuggling which happened to be sponsored by the Russian security services, which wouldn't be that unusual. The lines are pretty blended. It could be that Kohver got in the way of a business deal, but if it is business, it's clearly a business with Moscow connections."
The question of Kohver's future now looks likely to become a lever for a resurgent Russia to work on its small Baltic neighbour, which at last week's Nato summit declared itself in favour of hosting a new Nato base.
"This is not something cooked up the day before yesterday," said Eerik-Niiles Kross, a former Estonian intelligence chief and national security advisor. "I don't know if it was an FSB shady deal that went wrong, but whatever it was, you have to put it in the general context. The timing is either an odd coincidence, or it is a signal."
There is nothing new about Estonia and Russia conducting spy operations against each other. President Ilves recently claimed Estonia had unmasked four Russian moles in the past five years. In 2008, it was discovered that the top security official in the Estonian defence ministry, Herman Simm, was a Russian agent. In the past two years, Kapo found two more double agents in its own ranks.
In 2007, Estonian government institutions came under a series of crippling cyber-attacks which Tallinn blamed on Russia, but which Moscow denied. In 2008, an ethnic Russian living in Estonia was fined for his part in the attacks.
But the Kohver incident points towards a new gloves-off approach by the FSB.
"I don't know of any other incident of a foreign national being taken on foreign soil. To kidnap a Nato country's intelligence official on foreign territory is unprecedented," Kross said. Nevertheless, he added, raising the stakes would be unlikely to help Kohver. "No one is interested in bringing Nato in on a practical level. The aim will be to try to deal with this on a local, bilateral level."
Marko Mikhelson, the chairman of the foreign affairs committee in the Estonian parliament, agreed that it did not serve the country's interests to escalate the issue into an international crisis. said: "It seems the Russians are trying to paint this event into a bigger story. I don't want to speculate on their aims, but remember they have done these kinds of acts that affect the sovereignty of other countries," Mikhelson said. "But we have been dealing with difficult issues with Russia for years. I don't see the need now for a bigger action. But we'll strengthen the border and keep our eyes open."
Great op-ed in Haaretz on the fact that Ukraine is only the symptom, not the problem.
The problem is that the primary consideration of the U.S. and the Western world does not seem to be the interests of Ukraine’s citizens, but rather their tireless effort to weaken Russia’s geopolitical status as a superpower.
When the Russian Revolution took place nearly a century ago, the Western superpowers decided to dismantle the Austro-Hungarian Empire into ethno-national states that would serve as a buffer against the influence of communist Soviet Russia. The West’s Russophobic obsession has struck again, just as it did then. Again, just as happened in the not-so-distant past, the Americans and their allies are ready to encourage any anti-Russian element in Eastern Europe, no matter how nationalistic and ethnocentric it might be.
It is frightening to see how the West is playing with the same nationalist fire that made the lives of national minorities in Eastern Europe hell in the first half of the 20th century, and finally led to a conflagration in the entire region. It is frightening to see because for Eastern Europe, the 20th century has not yet ended.
Quite correct.It's what I've been saying for decades,that the West,UK in particular,have never forgiven Russia for the Revolution which executed the cousin of the King of England,also cousin to Kaiser Wilhelm (Kaiser Billy).These royal families,closely related to each other ,have never forgiven the Russian Revolution which ultimately spelt doom for the monarchies of Europe in the aftermath of WW1 and WW2.The "bogeyman" of Communism was the pet hate of the US during the McCarthy era and the latter half of the last century saw the world enmeshed in Cold War proxy conflicts .The West want to keep Russia permanently in the global political "frostbelt",just as China wants India to remain perpetually restrained below the Himalayas,unable to assert itself in Asia and the world.
Cold War warriors spring up from the ground like weeds in both Britain and the US in particular,while the other Euro-Peon nations are more sanguine about cooperation with it.This UKR crisis is frankly NATO's last stand.It has neither the will,money and men to engage with Russia in any military conflict and destroy the European continent for a third time,this time with the spectre of a nuclear holocaust which will destroy European civilisation for all time,leaving the US happily out of the combat zone! The stakes are too high for Europe to engage itself in any spat with Russia over territory that is historically more Russian than "Ukranian" or European. The time has come to strike a political deal with Pres.Putin who has repeatedly offered a political framework for the UKR which would keep it equidistant from both Europe and Russia,thus able to benefit from both economic systems.But for that to happen,the US must retreat from its interference in European affairs where it is an interloper.
'NATO anxious to move towards de-escalation over Ukraine' - former UK ambassador to Russia
Get short URL
Published time: September 05, 2014
Leaders participate in the NATO Summit Leaders Meeting: Future NATO at the Celtic Manor Resort in Newport, Wales, September 5, 2014. (Reuters/Larry Downing)
NATO is anxious to get the Ukrainian situation under control, and move towards de-escalation, so the rhetoric is quite carefully framed given the seriousness of the problem as NATO sees it, former UK ambassador to Russia Sir Anthony Brenton told RT.
RT: President Poroshenko says he hopes a ceasefire will be signed by Friday. Are you confident that will happen and more importantly be maintained?
Anthony Brenton: We all hope that it will happen, but there is a really sad history of previously negotiated ceasefires not actually succeeding or even when they have been agreed not sticking for very long. So I don’t think anybody, and particularly at the NATO summit, are calculating on an effective ceasefire in the near future.
Kiev, E. Ukraine militia sign ceasefire agreement
RT: What's the long-term solution there? Are the interests of the West and East Ukraine reconcilable?
AB: It is pretty clear to me and to anybody who looks close at the situation that there is going to have to be a negotiated solution. What Russia is looking for, which is non-NATO membership for Ukraine and some sort of protections for the Eastern Ukrainian Russian-speaking citizens ought to be negotiable. Mr. Poroshenko has already moved some distance in that direction and it’s a matter of the two sides sitting down, beginning to talk this out. A ceasefire is a necessary precondition for that negotiation and that is exactly why it is so important.
RT: Barack Obama and David Cameron stressed yesterday that NATO needs to keep its forces permanently in Europe. What’s your stance on this?
AB: It is not very surprising really. The Russian seizure of Crimea and Russian support for what is going on in Eastern Ukraine have made a lot of NATO members very nervous – Poland, Estonia, Latvia. So quite a lot of what is going on in Cardiff today is reassuring those people by establishing some bolstered military arrangements to protect them. But the things to look out for from this summit are not so much about that which is a done deal really. It is about the questions of whether Western nations are going to move towards massive rearmament on all sides, whether they are going to arm the Ukrainian army, and again, the signs are probably are that they are not going to do that, there will be logistical support and non-lethal material, but there will not be a move towards direct confrontation with Russia by a Ukrainian army supported by the West fighting the Eastern Ukrainian army supported by Russia. The most interesting thing will be what NATO says about the expanding of its membership and in particular, whether Ukraine will be encouraged to join. I suspect on that the language, if there is any at all, will be very cautious indeed.
AFP PHOTO/PHILIPPE DESMAZES
AFP PHOTO/PHILIPPE DESMAZES
RT: In the joint newspaper editorial, David Cameron and Barack Obama put the alleged Russian threat on the same page as that from the Islamic State in the Middle East. What do you make of their comparison?
AB: I did read the editorial. Obviously there are very different sorts of threat. There is undoubtedly great anger in Western Europe that Russia broke international law and broke its international commitments by seizing Crimea and by fermenting the problems in Eastern Ukraine. There are understandable reasons for that but nevertheless, the offences are clear and NATO, the EU as well, feels the need to react vigorously to that. That explains a lot of rhetoric and what will come out of the NATO statement. Nevertheless, behind that, as I say, if you look at the question of Ukraine joining NATO, if you look at the question of the West getting closely involved in supplying arms to Ukraine, what I am reading is a willingness there to compromise if the right deal can be found.
RT: What sort of compromise do you see?
AB: First of all, support for a ceasefire and secondly, a willingness to encourage Ukraine to talk through with the Russians the question of autonomy for the east and the question of eventual NATO membership for Ukraine.
RT: Russia says it is being unfairly blamed for events in Ukraine. In fact former US intelligence officers say they are concerned about the lack of evidence being put forward by the West of Russian involvement. Are you concerned by that rhetoric of the Western leaders?
The Russian government is denying any involvement in military action in the east of Ukraine, including arms support, as well as a connection to the flight MH17 tragedy.
AB: I do not think there has been lack of proportion on purpose. In fact, Obama and Cameron who has been very careful to avoid to using the word invasion as another sign of a willingness to look for the process of de-escalation. There is no doubt in the minds of NATO, and evidence is actually very strong, that there are serving Russian soldiers and equipment actually in Ukraine helping the rebels. That is part of why NATO is so anxious to, first of all, get that situation under control and secondly, move towards de-escalation. So the rhetoric isn’t exaggerated and is indeed quite carefully framed given the seriousness of the problem as NATO sees it.
RT: Is that fair to talk about Russian involvement when there were no orders for the Russian army to enter Ukraine and those who are fighting there say they are volunteers?
AB: Of course we all have seen Russia's claims. The evidence in terms of satellite photography and all the rest of Russian involvement is pretty strong. The supply of weapons like the Buk which probably brought down the Malaysian airlines' flight, like tanks, those are not volunteers - they are coming from an armed outside state. And I have to say that Russian’s credibility was significantly damaged after the annexation of Crimea, where again Russia firmly denied that there was any Russian military involvement, and afterwards, Mr. Putin gave out a lot of medals to Russian soldiers who have been involved in the annexation.
RT: Russia didn’t see satellite images from America; it saw them from a commercial company. Russia claims the images are blurred and that it’s not substantial proof. But it is taken by the Western media to be so. What do you think?
AB: I have seen the arguments and counterarguments. When I was in government I used to see these arguments from inside. There is no absolute proof; there is never any absolute proof in these cases. You built up a reasonably convincing case, and what I can say is that the American government, NATO, the British government, other Western governments are really quite cautious about the claims they put into the public domain precisely because they do not want to be proven wrong. The fact that they have been so categorical about Russian military involvement on the ground in East Ukraine is quite strong prima facie reason for believing that there was such an involvement.
Negotiators of a contact group on Ukraine, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Ambassador Heidi Tagliavini (3rd L), Russian ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov (2nd R) and The rebel Prime Minister of self proclaimed "People Republic of Donetsk", Alexander Zakharchenko (R) attend talks in Minsk on September 5, 2014. (AFP Photo)
Negotiators of a contact group on Ukraine, Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe Ambassador Heidi Tagliavini (3rd L), Russian ambassador to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov (2nd R) and The rebel Prime Minister of self proclaimed "People Republic of Donetsk", Alexander Zakharchenko (R) attend talks in Minsk on September 5, 2014. (AFP Photo)
RT: What are the possibilities for a ceasefire? What is next? What reaction can we get from Obama and Cameron?
AB: They will cautiously welcome it. First of all, actually getting a ceasefire is complicated because neither side has complete control of what is going on on the ground. Whether or not there are Russian troops in Eastern Ukraine, there are certainly Ukrainian dissidents who have their own agenda and who are not entirely under control of the Russian government. From the Ukrainian side, there are also militias fighting alongside the Ukrainian army who are not directly under control of the Ukrainian government. So getting a ceasefire to hold is a rather complicated business. The worry in the West will be that if we establish a ceasefire, and we all hope that we will, we will then have what will quite rapidly become a frozen conflict, like Abkhazia and South Ossetia as they were after the Georgian war many years ago. Where what starts out as a fluid ceasefire lines on the ground quite rapidly turned into solid frozen lines and you end up with a chunk of Ukraine not under Ukrainian control, a frozen conflict which then becomes a political sore causing continuing tensions in years to come.
An article from a leading Ukrainian economist. Translated below: (url is in Russian).
DOES THE KIEV GOVERNMENT HAVE A PLAN?
Sergiy Kirichuk
The Ukraine has been on the verge of an economic collapse for a long time now. Still, the worsening economic crisis of the last number of days points to a convulsive, system-wide failure of the country's financial system. The dismally low value of the national currency, which crossed the 14 grivna to the dollar mark, has failed to provide a stimulus for national exports. Instead, the falling value of the currency has been accompanied by a decline in production and rising prices – the classic indicators of stagflation (the combination of economic stagnation and rising unemployment and inflation). In other words, rising unemployment is not eliciting a decline in prices, while inflation is not stimulating a growth in production, which should be more competitive in view of the depreciation of the national currency.
The main victim of inflation is the general public, whose real earnings are declining precipitously. In the past, the Ukrainian economic czars would have resorted to so-called monetary interventions, flooding the currency market at the expense of state reserves. Now, however, the IMF has forbidden the National Bank from reducing its gold and foreign currency reserves, which must be maintained at current levels as a condition for obtaining further IMF credits.
Meanwhile, the most high-tech branches of industrial production are languishing. Production at the Zaporozhye automotive factory is being curtailed, while Motor-Sich, which builds aircraft engines, has announced the relocation of its production to Russia. The Kremenchug car assembly plant (manufacturer of Geely and SsangYong vehicles), which assembled some 10,000 vehicles in 2013 – an increase of around 2.8 (?) times over the previous year, has announced its closure and the transfer of production to Kazakhstan. One of Ukraine's largest ship manufacturers, the Kherson Shipyard, has entered bankruptcy proceedings.
A halt or reduction in production naturally awaits those high-tech industries (the production of turbines, for example) which are geared towards the markets of the Eurasian Customs Union.
The hypothetical benefits from signing onto EU free trade zone will not only be unable to compensate for the economic losses, but will usher in even more troubles for previously growing industries. Ukrainian agricultural producers, for example, who have exhibited dynamic growth in recent years, will have to compete against EU producers who receive enormous subsidies from their governments. Moreover, producers of goods with high added value (for example, ready-to-cook meats) will encounter suspicion on the part of consumers in European markets. As with Ukrainian consumers, European shoppers prefer buying local products when going to the supermarket.
Armed conflict has also exacerbated the situation in the energy sector. Since gas from Russia will only be available in low quantities or not at all, the country will require an increase in coal production. The last Sunday in August, when the Ukraine traditionally celebrates Miners' Day, was one of the saddest days in the industry's entire existence. The mines, which have been shelled, destroyed, or simply closed, are incapable of meeting the fuel demands of the country's energy sector.
In recent years, many patriots have come to the opinion that the Donbass mines are unprofitable. Many even began suggesting that a bloody military conflict in the East would be a good way to rid the country of this outdated “Soviet” industry, tossing coal in “the dustbin of history”. However, the impending economic crisis of the upcoming winter threatens the infrastructure of the majority of Ukrainian cities. Some 42% of Ukrainian electricity is derived from thermal power plants using coal. Deprived of fuel, the thermal power plants will not only be unable to produce heat, but also electricity, while the growing number of hot-water heaters and independent heating systems will not only be unable to resolve the problem of heating and hot water, but will significantly worsen the crisis, imposing an excessive burden on the energy grid.
While Prime-Minister Arseniy Yatseniuk has stated the Ukraine needs to acquire 5 bn cubic meters of Russian gas, the former Minister for Fuel and Energy, Ivan Plechkov, believes the government is issuing false information, underestimating the size of the gas shortage. According to Plechkov, the Ukraine now requires between 10 and 15 bn cubic meters of gas.
The European governments and the major gas companies, connected with Gazprom through formal and informal agreements, are in no hurry to rescue the Ukraine, while the idea of reverse gas supplies from Slovakia is hardly a practical solution.
In the near future we may see the collapse of the modern urban infrastructure in the Ukraine. It is symbolic, that the “Revolution of Dignity”, proclaimed as a war against the Soviet totalitarian past, having declared that those who disagree with it are “superfluous” in this “celebration of life”, is at the same time forced to do battle against the most fundamental elements of the economy and infrastructure – all in the name of European integration. The “European choice” in the economic field is a rejection of industrial manufacturing and “unprofitable” mines, and of those elements of the population who are engaged in these industries and those regions where this production takes place.
The experience of Bulgaria, Romania and the Baltic states has shown how European capitalist integration ends: rapid deindustrialization, reduction of energy facilities, and a complete reorientation towards imports. For these countries, however, the onerous social consequences of such policies found partial compensation in the possibility of free movement of the labour force. The economically active and educated part of the population departed for the main European economies (Germany, Great Britain) and occupied the lowest paying positions in the job market. For example, a quarter of the Latvian population has already left the country in search of work. The Ukrainian economy, however, has no such compensatory opportunities, - on the one hand, because of the lack of prospects in removing visa requirements in the near future, and, on the other hand, due to the reduction in the number of jobs in Europe. Meanwhile, migrant labourers from the newest entries into the EU are creating downward pressure on the low-wage market. In other words, the most undervalued jobs in the EU have already been occupied and the expansion of the job market required to make room for the citizens of a stagnating Ukraine is not foreseen.
In the meantime, the Kiev government has declared economic war on the Donbass. Ukrainian citizens residing in the DNR and LNR have ceased receiving social benefits. The governments of the republics have already issued statements that they will ensure the continuity of payments in the region. Naturally, no one is surprised by the fact that the Ukrainian government has little interest in the life of average citizens, however it continues to show unwelcome concern for business. Despite the presence of military operations, death and destruction, the fiscal authorities continue to impose penalties upon Donbass enterprises for unpaid taxes, while creditors are increasing the pressure on debtors for overdue payments.
In the political sphere, the Kiev government is trying to establish a populist right-wing dictatorship. And if the government is employing the tactics of direct police violence, destruction of offices, arrests and intimidation against the left, its relationship with the far right is much more complex. Not only do the latter have significant support among the public, they are also well-armed and organized. They are exerting political pressure on the President, which has made him visibly nervous. By all accounts, Poroshenko's tactics in relation to the far right comes down to their mass dispatch to the front (hoping for their physical destruction) with the concomitant rapid occupation of the right flank with loyal political clowns, such as Lyashko (Sergei Levochkin's protege).
The right, meanwhile, is well-informed of the President's plans and is preparing for a military-political takeover in turn. It would appear the Ukraine's current right-wing government has the potential to move even further to the right.
The military situation gets worse for the government with each passing day. The DNR offensive towards Mariupol and the major defeat near Ilovaisk have forced President Poroshenko to declare there has been a full-scale Russian military invasion. At the same time, the Ukrainian military and political leadership has refrained from declaring war and martial law, fearing the consequences of such a step. After all, a declaration of martial law would not only make it impossible to hold parliamentary elections, it would also make it impossible to receive the foreign military assistance which Kiev is relying upon.
The government is placing its greatest hopes on the patriotic hysteria which has swept the capital and many regions of the country. Under the present circumstances, any form of protest will be declared as the doings of the enemy and harshly suppressed. However, there are regions which regard the Kiev government with more than a little skepticism. Kharkov and Odessa, which are still under the control of government forces, do not share these “patriotic sentiments”, and could become a major springboard for political resistance to the government. These “fault lines” - regions where loyalty to the government is minimal – could become a second front under conditions of a worsening crisis, since the residents of Odessa, Kharkov and many other towns are not prepared freeze and starve for the sake of war against the Donbass and Russia, with whom they sympathize.
The confinement and pre-trial detention of hundreds of political prisoners arrested on formal, trumped-up charges poses another problem for the regime. The continued detention of these persons is eliciting ever greater attention in the West and the issue of Kiev's political prisoners is expected to be raised at the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and in the the parliaments of European countries – the same ones providing support for the war and the repression of Ukrainian human rights activists.
In general, one can surmise that the government's tactics will consist in trying to “tighten the screws” in domestic policy while attempting to “internationalize” the conflict, i. e., drag NATO into it. What the government intends to do in the economic sphere remains unclear, as the current cabinet has no clear strategy for stabilizing the economy. The only available resources are IMF funds, which, however, cannot resolve the problem of an impending default. If the state goes bankrupt, its strategy in the political and economic spheres will suffer a complete reversal. This will require new, more coherent and sensible tactics on the part of the entire opposition front and it is here that the intellectual forces of the resistance should be focused.
I cant see how the west comes out on top in this game. The best outcome for them is that Ukraine remains independent and un divided, with the east enjoying substantial Autonomy.
^^in fact even this was not an issue until the useu combo decided eu nato membership was the way to go. That haaretz oped nails it....
Monumental self delusion....
Rather it looks like huge might just sitting there thinking what next? The impetus was for something they are comfortable with. Balance of power play with a familiar enemy. But Russia is not the familiar enemy. It is not the Soviet Union. That is over. This is not even the new Russia. It is the old Russia. That one didn't lose many wars or much territory through war.
The Ukrainians will turn on a dime. There is a patriotic wave washing through that unfortunate land but they are not stupid. Already Yatsenyuk is referred to jokingly as "krolik" - rabbit.
For an Anglo-Saxon (mainly UK-US) whim, a lot of Europe will be in unnecessary jeopardy. It is strategic foolishness of historic import. And even there one wonders, who in this leadership mass is driving this agenda? Obama? He looks increasingly like a ventriloquist's dummy not quite clued in to the unfolding situation. Cameron? Please.
It is through such haze that war and conflict slowly spins out of control. The world is already at war. Not the traditional kind with clear ideological or territorial boundaries, but one in which the Hobbesian dictum of "all against all" may be more appropriate... We shall see as it unfolds.
ShauryaT wrote:The best thing the Baltic states should do in their own self interest is to withdraw from NATO and be part of EU only, like Finland does.
They need security. And I dont mean only geopolitical but more importantly economic. They are not doing too well. And a bankrupt EU which needs China and India to bail it out is not a good insurance. That is why they are more anti-Russian than even the Americans. They need the Americans to like them.
Estonia has disenfranchised its own Russian speaking population. Almost like a racist state. But for the support of other racist states in the west/Nato, Russia would have justifiably intervened against this crude injustice.
So just withdrawing from NATO wont do, they will need to change their entire foreign and to some extent domestic policy. One cant work without the other,.
ShauryaT wrote:The best thing the Baltic states should do in their own self interest is to withdraw from NATO and be part of EU only, like Finland does.
Finland is rushing faster towards NATO than ever before. There is too much bad feeling about the CCCP days, and Russia is considered the inheritor of that legacy. So no amount peace initiative by Putin is going to change anything with these insecure states in Europe.
It is too late for decentralization, as E. Ukraine’s self-defense forces want full independence from Kiev after its bloody military campaign, international law expert Alexander Mercouris told RT. Kiev now needs a ceasefire because it’s losing, he argued.
On Friday, Kiev officials and representatives of the two self-proclaimed republics in southeastern Ukraine agreed to a ceasefire as the contact group met behind closed doors in Belarus.
Commenting on the ceasefire, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said: “We are ready to provide the significant steps, including decentralization of power.”
However, following the deaths and damage caused by Kiev's military offensive, Mercouris believes that decentralization is no longer an option for Eastern Ukrainians.
RT: Is decentralization possible in these current circumstances?
Alexander Mercouris: I don’t think there is any prospect of that at all. The people who are resisting the Ukrainian government have made quite clear that their objective is full independence from Ukraine. If decentralization was proposed in March or April, possibly many people in eastern Ukraine, in this area of Donbass which has been fighting, would have accepted it. After all the killing and all the destruction, I don’t think there are any takers for that plan. And I think, frankly, the reality is that Ukraine has lost Donbass.
Ukrainian servicemen ride on an armoured vehicle in the southern coastal town of Mariupol September 5, 2014 (Reuters / Vasily Fedosenko)
Ukrainian servicemen ride on an armoured vehicle in the southern coastal town of Mariupol September 5, 2014 (Reuters / Vasily Fedosenko)
RT: How big of a role are Russia and Kiev’s western allies playing in all of this?
AM: In terms of Russia, I don’t think there is any doubt at all that it is playing a certain political role. However, the important thing to understand about the negotiations that happened today is that they were between the Ukrainian government and the people it is fighting in the east. It was not between the Ukrainian government and Russia. President Poroshenko a couple of days ago tried to make a ceasefire agreement with the Russians and Mr. Putin would have none of it, because the Russian position is that they are not involved in this conflict. If one goes to the other side of the equation – to the Western powers – their policy throughout has been to support the Ukrainian government as it tried to suppress the people of the east. They have pretended in May, June, and July to negotiate with Russians' various peace plans. But in reality they only became interested in a peace proposal when it became clear that the Ukrainians were going to lose and when it also became clear that there was no support in the West for a military action to help the Ukrainians.
RT: Is decentralization possible in these current circumstances?
Alexander Mercouris: I don’t think there is any prospect of that at all. The people who are resisting the Ukrainian government have made quite clear that their objective is full independence from Ukraine. If decentralization was proposed in March or April, possibly many people in eastern Ukraine, in this area of Donbass which has been fighting, would have accepted it. After all the killing and all the destruction, I don’t think there are any takers for that plan. And I think, frankly, the reality is that Ukraine has lost Donbass.
A man walks on rubble near an apartment block damaged by what locals say was shelling by Ukrainian forces in Donetsk, September 4, 2014 (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)
A man walks on rubble near an apartment block damaged by what locals say was shelling by Ukrainian forces in Donetsk, September 4, 2014 (Reuters / Maxim Shemetov)
RT: How big of a role are Russia and Kiev’s western allies playing in all of this?
AM: In terms of Russia, I don’t think there is any doubt at all that it is playing a certain political role. However, the important thing to understand about the negotiations that happened today is that they were between the Ukrainian government and the people it is fighting in the east. It was not between the Ukrainian government and Russia. President Poroshenko a couple of days ago tried to make a ceasefire agreement with the Russians and Mr. Putin would have none of it, because the Russian position is that they are not involved in this conflict. If one goes to the other side of the equation – to the Western powers – their policy throughout has been to support the Ukrainian government as it tried to suppress the people of the east. They have pretended in May, June, and July to negotiate with Russians' various peace plans. But in reality they only became interested in a peace proposal when it became clear that the Ukrainians were going to lose and when it also became clear that there was no support in the West for a military action to help the Ukrainians.
RT: Some of the Western media have been spinning this truce in a completely different way. Take for instance CNN, they just said that Poroshenko laid out a peace plan with Russia. Is that how you see it?
AM: They are spinning it completely wrong. The fact of the matter is that Russians have never said they are interested in annexing Donbass. They have made it absolutely clear, right from the outset, all the way back in February, that what should be is a ceasefire and constitutional negotiations between the parties. Back in April and May, they were even suggesting federalization and decentralization. So, to argue that it is the Russians who wanted to annex eastern Ukraine, and Mr. Poroshenko is somehow ruling that out, is simply to turn reality entirely on its head. And one wonders how long this could be sustained for anyway. The reality is that decentralization might have been possible in April and May when the Russians supported it. It is far less likely when the Russians and the local people no longer do.
Donetsk's pro-Russia rebels celebrate expelling 'fascist Ukrainian junta'
Amid second world war commemoration, regions say they still plan to declare independence despite ceasefire deal
Crowds at a rally in Donetsk to mark the liberation of the Donbass region from the Nazis in the second world war. Photograph: Francisco Leong/AFP
With jaunty pop numbers about "expelling the fascist junta", rousing war poetry and – somewhat incongruously – a parade of performing dogs, the leaders of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic celebrated on Monday what they see as victory over Kiev.
Held in the shadow of an austere second world war monument in central Donetsk, the event was officially a celebration of the 71st anniversary of the liberation of the Donbass region from Nazi occupation. But the parallels with the current Ukrainian conflict, where local leaders and Russian President Vladimir Putin have compared the Ukrainian government to the Nazis, were not hard to find.
The self-proclaimed prime minister of the Donetsk People's Republic, Alexander Zakharchenko, signed a peace deal in Minsk last Friday with Ukraine's representative, former president Leonid Kuchma. The deal included a ceasefire, an "all-for-all" prisoner exchange, and increased autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk regions, with the implicit assumption that they would remain part of Ukraine.
After the talks, however, Zakharchenko said the regions were still planning to declare full independence, suggesting the region could become a kind of "breakaway state" with Russian backing. In Donetsk, which had come under heavy shelling in recent weeks as both the rebels and the government forces fired into residential areas, the rebels see the agreement as a victory, "freezing" the conflict and forcing the Ukrainian government to negotiate with the rebel leaders, whom it had previously dismissed as "terrorists".
Since the ceasefire was signed, each side has accused the other of breaking the truce, most notably in the port city of Mariupol, where Ukrainian checkpoints have come under heavy artillery fire from the pro-Russian side.
Zakharchenko, speaking at the rally in Donetsk, said all Ukrainian forces must leave the eastern regions, "or we will throw them out". Kiev's forces lost a lot of ground in the two weeks before the ceasefire, with evidence suggesting Russia sent reinforcements of armour and soldiers over the border, something Moscow has vehemently denied. But Ukrainian troops still control Donetsk airport and many other key sites, leading to fears the fighting could resume at any moment.
Alexander Khryakov, a minister in the Donetsk government, told the Guardian that a "real ceasefire" would only happen when Kiev was fully defeated.
"Today we are celebrating the liberation of the Donbass from fascism," he said. "And that is a battle that is still going on. The ceasefire will come when there are no more fascists. And not just in the Donbass but in Kiev as well."
Ukraine's president Petro Poroshenko made a surprise visit on Monday to the southern port city of Mariupol, which has come under heavy artillery fire, after separatist fighters allegedly backed by Russian support took the town of Novoazovsk, further along the coast and near the border with Russia, a fortnight ago.
On Saturday night, a day into the ceasefire, the edge of the city came under fire and the Donetsk rebels wrote on their Twitter account that they were "taking Mariupol", although they later said they were reacting to provocations from the Ukrainian side and were keeping the ceasefire. On Sunday, Ukrainian fighters claimed the rebels had again shelled their positions on the outskirts of Mariupol, leading to casualties, and that they had began to return fire, although Monday was largely quiet.
Poroshenko, who spoke to a crowd of steel workers in Mariupol, promised that the pro-Russians would face a "crushing defeat" if they tried to take the city, which would give the Donetsk rebels an outlet to the sea.
"I have ordered (the military) to secure the defence of Mariupol with howitzers, multiple rocket launchers, tanks, anti-tank weapons and air cover," said the Ukrainian president, dressed in military-style fatigues. "Mariupol was, is and will be Ukrainian."
A number of fighters on the Ukrainian side have said in recent days that Kiev needs the ceasefire to regroup, but will resume military operations against the "occupying forces" at the first possible opportunity.
In Donetsk, there was anger and resolution among the 1,500-strong crowd who had gathered at the rally.
"We loved Ukraine until they started bombing us, now we can never go back there," said Zinaida, a 58-year-old local. "They are fascists and they have your support. We read that you have Scotland wanting to secede there. Why don't you send your tanks there and destroy them instead of sending them here? We will be part of Russia now and will never go back to those fascists."
Donetsk, a city of 1 million in peacetime, has come to resemble a ghost town in recent weeks as more than half of the population have left, and those who remain stay indoors. While the mood at the rally was unanimous, many of those who want to remain part of Ukraine have left the city. Last month, a rare pro-Ukrainian activist was captured by rebel fighters and made to stand draped in a Ukrainian flag in a central street while passers by threw insults and projectiles at her. She was later released.
Poroshenko, from Mariupol, said the rebels had agreed to release around 1,200 Ukrainian prisoners from captivity under the terms of the Minsk agreement. There was no immediate confirmation of this from the rebel side, nor any information about whether Kiev had freed the estimated 200 prisoners it had taken among rebel fighters.
1. Ukrainians tried a counterattack North of Mariupol, to relieve pressure on the city on 06th Sept. That failed.
The dotted blue arrow going west indicates Ukrainian forces withdrawing after the ceasefire.
Mariupol itself was reinforced, but weakly. It has 4 Militia units of dubious quality and 1 National guard Battalion.
2. Ukrainians retook Donetsk airport but found themselves encircled (again) as indicated by the aircraft in the blue circle.
A relief effort was made but failed and Ukrainian forces withdrew on 06th Sept.
The pocket South of Donetsk was opened, saving elements of 1 Mechanised brigade and 2 Militia battalions.
3. The big pocket near the center of the map remains. It represents a disaster of Stalingrad proportions for Ukraine and
is a big bargaining chip for the rebels. Its currently being supplied from the air.
4. Ukrainian forces to the North have started withdrawing to the West, after the ceasefire (dotted blue arrow pointing West).
Separatist forces have not yet stepped in, but there are not likely to be any Ukrainian units south of the Blue dotted line.
Ukraine: The ceasefire is holding. Fighting today seemed to have decreased, although each side continued to accuse the other of ceasefire violations. Ukrainian President Poroshenko visited the port town of Mariupol in southeastern Ukraine and promised that it would always remain Ukrainian. Fighting continues on the outskirts of the town.
Comment: This situation has gotten more complicated and more difficult to follow. The pro-Russian easterners no longer seek secession. They now prefer continued union in a federal state. Poroshenko knows this from last week's meeting in Minsk, Belarus, but has not acknowledged the change in the easterners' political objective. Thus, his promise that Mariupol will remain Ukrainian is every party's position. Russia has made no claim to it and the easterners no longer want to secede. Poroshenko is grandstanding on behalf of Kyiv, but it is not clear that Kyiv's forces can hold Mariupol against the easterners.
Another dimension of complexity is the behind-the-scenes exchanges taking place. Several press commentators have made the point that a significant volume of communication is taking place among the interested parties, but is not in open source materials.
One analyst reported that German and European Union leaders are in closer and more frequent contact with Russian leaders than they are with American officials. The substance of the alleged communications is not known. What is known is that most European leaders reportedly favored President Putin's ceasefire proposal and the Americans did not.
An important question is whether the older members of NATO in Western Europe are committed to defend the Baltic States, Poland and the other former members of the Warsaw Pact that are now in NATO. The western European leaders seem content to let Putin lead the search for a solution to the Ukrainian crisis, as long as the shooting stops and business resumes. The Russians have been clear that they do not consider NATO membership by the Baltic states to be irreversible.
This is the kind of sh!t that will lead to war. Amazing stupid decision.
I do wonder: after this precedent, isn't it a good idea for the rest of the countries to actually take this as a mil doctrine too [what about Iran acting in the now for the stuxnet virus attack earlier?]. Amazing madness. Just goes on to prove how stupid decision making has become lately.
Pratyush wrote:WTF, this looks like a slow march to WW1. Haven't they learn t any thing from the past.
They only need some more fire eating strategic experts in Washington DC and intervention in xyz places to secure the world for democracy and freedom and american way of life whatever it is.
JE Menon wrote: It is through such haze that war and conflict slowly spins out of control.
The Soviet Union at the very height of its might didn't provoke a war. Putin's Russia is a chess master of strategy and growing in might in leaps and bounds only in Phillip's fervent delusions. Putin's bound to win a few rounds of chicken before the soft decadent europeans decide they have to have a real bludgeon for Putin to blink. And that is bound to happen. Like one article mentioned, the population of Russia is half that of Europe and has an economy the size of Italy. The only reason it isn't a large Khazakstan is it's nuclear weapons. That isn't helping anymore than it did in the last round. This is a side show, with Putin wanting to continue to be relevant to Russian politics. The real show is still to start and that will involve China.
Last edited by KrishnaK on 09 Sep 2014 23:27, edited 1 time in total.
Austin wrote:Sanction should be a good thing for the Russian people , The Oligarch have held hostage for a long time developing Business Relation with Asia and relying too much on West.
These Oligarch have bought houses in London , Paris and where not and invested most of their money in West , Now with sanction and money stolen their control over the economy will loosen and Russia will be forced to develop economy with Asia which is also the fastest growing and needs energy.
Oh dear me. The Oligarchs are the real criminals now. How about the benevolent Putin clearing that garbage out and bringing in credible governance. How about he establish credible institutions, cause tsar Putin's going to die at some point and then who's going to save the motherland against the rapacious west ? How about he start with vacating the throne after having claimed he'll let it go.
Like one article mentioned, the population of Russia is half that of Europe and has an economy the size of Italy.
Hmmmm. Why does NATO exist then? Of course, they dont need the might of all of Superduper power and all its super rich allies to counter puny Russian Federation.
US can squash Russia alone five times over. Heck even Britain and France could do that. Poland too. There is no threat from Russia that the powerful people of the west cant handle. So why does NATO exist. Why the anti ballistic missiles all around Russia. All the bases in Japan. Turkey. Afghanistan now. Germany.
Wait. Its the Nukes.
The only reason it isn't a large Khazakstan is it's nuclear weapons.
But China has them too. So does India. Even Pakistan has nukes. Why is puny Russia the villain?!
Putin is a despot. But state of China is an even bigger despot. A communist state. Biggest trading partner of US.
Pakistan has nukes. Also more people than Russia. Hub of west hating Jihadis. Not very democratic either. Why is it not the villain.
If Russia is really that weak and will be bludgeoned in the next round, then all the leaders of western Europe and northern America are either big time Russophobes or plain simple jerks.
Putin: Russia will strengthen its nuclear capability to ensure its security
Policy August 29, seventeen past four p.m. UTC + 4
"Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear powers. This is not a word, it's a reality," - said the president of Russia
MOSCOW, August 29. / ITAR-TASS /. Russia will not get involved in large-scale conflicts, but the partners have to understand that with the Russian Federation not to mess, President Vladimir Putin said at the youth forum "Seliger".
"I can just say: Russia is far from being able to get involved in any large-scale conflict. We do not want and are not going to do it," - he stressed.
At the same time, according to Putin, the country will continue to build nuclear capability - not to intimidate, but to ensure its security.
"I want to remind you that Russia is one of the most powerful nuclear powers. This is not a word, it's a reality," - said the head of state. "We are strengthening our nuclear deterrent force, we are strengthening our armed forces. They really are more compact, more efficient. They really are becoming more modern in terms of equipping with modern weapons systems. We continue to build the capacity or will to do it," - said Putin .
He explained that it is not in order, "to someone in danger, and to feel safe, feel safe and be able to implement the plans that we have in the development of economy and social sphere."
"We must always be ready to repel any aggression against Russia is always our partners, in whatever state they happen to be the state and what would be a foreign concept they are stuck, need to understand that with us not to mess with regard to a possible armed conflict" - warned Putin.
He said that at the moment, "nobody does not come to unleash some large-scale conflict with Russia."
KrishnaK wrote: Oh dear me. The Oligarchs are the real criminals now. How about the benevolent Putin clearing that garbage out and bringing in credible governance. How about he establish credible institutions, cause tsar Putin's going to die at some point and then who's going to save the motherland against the rapacious west ? How about he start with vacating the throne after having claimed he'll let it go.
Putin does not work alone unlike the West would like any one to believe , He is part of the system and even if he wants to clean it , wont happen over night.
Remember when he tried to nationalise Oil Company and try to book Yukos who stole money and resources at rock botton prices during Yelstin Era , The West Cried Foul , Evil Putin etc.
For as long as there was corruption in 90's and all the money the Oligarch stole and sent to west these were democracy at work and when things started getting hot the President became a dictator because he choose to work for People of Russia and not the Oligarch that Yelstin was surrounded by.
I am sure Putin is not some saint up there and he has his own flaws and all politicians do , but as long as the Russians People would like to see him President and he is not breaking any law why should he quit .. he is legally and by constitution eligible for 2nd term after 2018.
Wheather he chooses to stand of election for President or not its his choice but most certainly his lack of popularity among Russians is not in question.
Its good in a way Sanctions are there , it would help them diversify market base towards fast growing economy of Asia and else where ..... System always has inertia and some times you did strong kick on your butt to make you look else where.
If Russia is an implacable foe. The west needs to introspect, as to why things are the way they are. Rather then blame Putin. The man was elected 3 time to the position of the president of the Russia. Democratically if I may add. Yet, the idiots in the west keep on harping about the dictatorial tendencies in him.
Who is responsible for the bombing spree of American presidents ?! What good is American democracy if it springs up presidents like George W Bush 2 ? Or is it the flaw in US democratic process which gives too much power to one person.
Well, we can keep arguing forever.
The fact is that Putin is the democratically elected powerful president of the Russian Federation. His policies of strengthening Russia are causing immense khujli to west and low IQ brainwashed western stooges. They would rather have Yeltsin who would stay drunk forever and destroy Russian state, even if he were to order tanks into the parliament.
The darling of the west, Yeltsin, was no democrat either. He was on his way to bringing down Russians to the povert level of the Somalis. But you wont hear anyone comparing him to hitler or demonising him. Putin is bad, dictatorial, aggressive etc etc. Who is he bad for anyway?!
The NATO "drones",living off the "fat of the land",enjoying massive gourmet Welsh banquets are a pathetic bunch of talkers. Pres.Putin is a disciplined man of action as his character has displayed and decisive when it comes to protecting Russian core interests.The imbecelic Euro-Peons who cower in front of Uncle Sam,could've had Russia as a dependable ally instead of being a Yanqui "bogeyman".One must wait fro Marie le Pen to lead France and alter the attitude.
THAT's the reason. He cannot be allowed to get a vsa to the usa. Q.E.D. 