Eastern Europe/Ukraine

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 31 Oct 2014 15:51

oh, this seems good too:

http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/ ... 9vLmNvbQS2

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 01 Nov 2014 23:47

http://www.skynews.com.au/news/world/eu ... polls.html

6 Ukrainian soldiers killed in Donetsk.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 02 Nov 2014 02:39

JE Menon wrote: There is no doubt that the US/EU are on a stronger footing, in general terms. The trouble is that they think they can afford these mistakes. Their room for strategic autonomy is shrinking. Today, when speaking about Russia, the EU is voicing itself through different orifices. The British posture is not comparable to the German one, with the French taking an opportunistic position. The rest of the EU’s considerations on this are basically irrelevant (even that of Poland, except to the extent that it can be a useful idiot, a role it performs with panache). The fact that that the US is not paying an immediate price is not my point; it is that it has made a strategic blunder over Ukraine.

I agree that the US has blundered over Ukraine. I'm not trying to argue against that position, just trying to present a different side that I believe gets ignored entirely. EU's considerations are not irrelevant at all, they remain Russia's biggest paymaster and investor. Makes no business sense to antagonize your trade partners. Poland helps make the point I'm trying to make. Poland has about enough reasons to hate Germany as it does Russia. However, today it fears only one of those two countries. Playing the role of an useful idiot doesn't take away from the fact that it has a genuine fear of and grievance against Russia. There's no reason Russia couldn't have been another Germany to those that suffered under its boots. In my opinion, that would be the more desirable outcome for all. US messing around in Ukraine doesn't mean what happened, should inevitably have.

This is quite different from aggressive Soviet era policies. Plus, Russia is a much freer country today. Putin may be authoritarian, but he is a far cry from Soviet leaders. Russia is not a typical democracy, but it does not resile from adherence to democracy in principle. Russians are travelling freely, and engaging freely with the world. (I was renting an apartment on the coast to a Russian IT entrepreneur who does not have a home, but spends his life 3 months at a time in different countries, renting, experiencing, and moving on). Even within the US, the position on Russia is not monolithic. Times have indeed changed.

It could be eternally argued that Russia had a choice in Ukraine, etc. What we know for certain is that Ukraine in NATO means, in essence, NATO on the Russian land border. For Russia, that is a major redline. This was basically an understanding between the Moscow and Washington. The game began with the Orange revolution. Russia had a lot of time to prepare. I’m not so sure what else it could have done. Technically, it is being very reasonable all around, even now.

I think it's important Russia build a top notch competitive economy. One that offers comparable opportunities for prosperity to countries in its periphery. That remains the only viable option for Russia to increase its options and provide far more leverage than withholding gas in the middle of winter, with those around it that fear it the most. Doing that will inevitably mean a system of governance that's seen (by it's own citizens to begin with) as transparent, clean and capable of functioning beyond Putin and his cronies. Leaving aside our stupid economic ideas, think of what India managed in its first 15 years of independence. That in spite of two centuries of colonization and resulting abject poverty. The partition, the Kashmir conflict, 1962 didn't break India, so why would NATO in Ukraine break Russia ? As I've mentioned before, there's no combination of countries in the world that can take the Russians on and win that fight. Putin's performance has been very unimpressive, to say the least. In fact there's no reason he couldn't have stoutly blocked NATO expansion while transforming Russia's polity and economy. If I'm not mistaken (not sure at all) the EU has been far more accommodative of Russian concerns on NATO expansion vs offering EU accession.

Here’s why: consider America’s position in the 1990s, in the immediate aftermath of the Soviet collapse, when it was seen as a victor, justified, and with reason to be proud of its achievement in the cold war. Then the adventures mentioned above. The US has got away with it, but it has not succeeded in its declared endeavours. It is not tottering, but the foundations are cracking. I personally don’t see this essentially as a good thing. I think a strong, principled America that declares and stands by its values is necessary. But America is not that today. It has slipped back to the traditional big power slipstream of perceived tactical interest above everything else. Perhaps these tendencies are a result of the realities of multipolarity, non-ideological competitive environment, and the electoral cycle. But the reasons don’t obviate the present reality. Its larger actions are moving it further away from that of a virtuous power, to one that simply grabs the biggest chunk because it can.

A hard stand can only be made by democratic, non ideological countries, if letting go of that position means ruin. In almost all other cases, in the face of resistance or immediate loss, principles will be substituted with realism or tactical interest as you put it. US long term goal is managing the rise of China with as little shock to the international system as possible. On that front I doubt the US is going to abandon its stand even if it suffers short term reverses. It can't afford to. I'll see the foundations as cracking if it were to start continuously retreating from that fight.

And there’s another problem. The US, while criticizing Russia, has few words of criticism for its more unsavoury allies – some which exercise greater degree of influence in the Middle East than Russia does in the FSU; and definitely through means that are at least equally unsavoury. This moral flexibility is evident even to commentators in the US, leave aside the EU.

The Gulf Arab countries hold the US and the rest of the world hostage. There's no comparison between Russia and the snakedoms. However, strong countries drawing vast red lines around their peripheries and claiming sole prerogative to dictate the politics there should be resisted. I think it makes a good principle to stick to, whether the countries making the claim be the US, Russia, China, Pakistan or India. However this throws up a lot of moral ambiguity. India certainly isn't going to let her pre-eminence in Bhutan, Nepal or the IOR be replaced by China while defending her right to drill for oil in Vietnam. What will our position on any future Chinese air defense zone be ? The US is seen as the most hypocritical country solely because it claims, has and defends its interests everywhere. If that were the case for India, we'd have to end up playing those exact same games and come across as just as "morally flexible". That shouldn't necessarily be seen as bad.

No one sees Russia as an especially good guy, but neither does anyone see the US as a particularly benevolent player any more. Everyone is suspicious of everyone else. There is neither bipolar clarity, nor multipolar stability. Russian strategic autonomy has declined all it is going to, in effect. What we are seeing in fact is the slow but perceptible decline of American strategic autonomy, and certainly its moral authority.

The US was never seen a particularly benevolent player during the Cold War, a prime example of that being India. It's ability to influence even Europe during the cold war wasn't absolute. Western European countries refused to accept US demands to embargo oil pipelines that allowed the SU to sell its oil to the west. I agree that the space for strategic autonomy is reducing even further. More trade/prosperity => more interdependence => reduced space for being the lone ranger. I think that's inevitable and a change for the better. In fact that should be a goal, to bind larger number of countries into interlocking interests centered around trade. India should offer countries in our neighbourhood, including Pakistan, increasing stakes in our economy and prosperity.

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 02 Nov 2014 06:26

Why is Europe turning its back on Ukraine?

P.S. I actually thought it was a serious article

. Turns out it's pretty biased.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Nov 2014 07:58

U.S. Ambassador To Kyrgyzstan Warns Of Russian Influence

The U.S. ambassador to Kyrgyzstan says that the Central Asian state's "growing partnership with Russia" presents a challenge to U.S. efforts to support democracy in Kyrgyzstan.

In an article published on the website of the Council of American Ambassadors, Pamela Spratlen said the "strong partnership" that Kyrgyz President Almazbek Atambaev has forged with Russian President Vladimir Putin "has had its impact on our efforts."

"It remains an unanswered question how Kyrgyzstan can maintain its democratic trajectory while pursuing this partnership," she said.

Spratlen also said that many in Kyrgyzstan get their news from Russian media, and that in the case of the Ukraine crisis "the strident anti-American tone taken by Russian propaganda has crystallized local public opinion around Moscow's narrative of events there."

Kyrgyzstan has seemed to follow Moscow's lead on several issues recently, including drafting laws that legitimize discrimination against homosexuals and would require foreign-based organizations to register as "foreign agents

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 02 Nov 2014 13:32

There's no reason Russia couldn't have been another Germany to those that suffered under its boots.

Germany bombed Yugoslavia. It supports the oppression of ethnic Russians in Latvia. It supports the ethnic cleansing of Russians in Ukraine.
No sir, Germany has been `good` to some European countries the same way Russia has been `good` to Armenia, Kyrgyzstan or Kazakhstan. Of course it has managed to build up a successful PR campaign to boost its image among dhimmis.

It wants democracy/rule of law/human rights in Russia !! It supported the undemocratic overthrow of Yanukovich and recognised the undemocratic government of Yatseneuk. It went on to try and defend its decision by proclaiming that Yanukovich was corrupt. Which court of law pronounced him guilty. Which article of the Ukrainian constitution allowed a coup. So much for rule of law.

It opposed humanitarian aid for the russian minority in Donetsk and Lugansk. So much for human rights.

Germany is as much a player in realpolitik as Russia is. Russia should manage its `I am so benevolent` campaign better. Particularly for people living in the delusional world in the west.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 02 Nov 2014 13:39

Poland has about enough reasons to hate Germany as it does Russia. However, today it fears only one of those two countries. Playing the role of an useful idiot doesn't take away from the fact that it has a genuine fear of and grievance against Russia.

Poland has genuine fear and grievance against Russia. Poland`s security is guaranteed by the strongest military alliance the world has seen. And it is afraid of Russia.

And Russia shouldnt be afraid of this alliance only because it has nuclear weapons. After all the Russians can eat those nuclear weapons when the west cuts them off from all their friends and resources.
Poland`s fear and grievance comes from its desire to bite into the big American pie. The more hostile you are to Russia the more you are loved in Washington. And noone needs more investment and taking care of than the eastern states of Europe. Naturally they are the ones who have the biggest `grievances and fear` of Russia.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 02 Nov 2014 13:54

As I've mentioned before, there's no combination of countries in the world that can take the Russians on and win that fight. Putin's performance has been very unimpressive, to say the least. In fact there's no reason he couldn't have stoutly blocked NATO expansion while transforming Russia's polity and economy. If I'm not mistaken (not sure at all) the EU has been far more accommodative of Russian concerns on NATO expansion vs offering EU accession.

When you are talking of winning a fight I assume that you are not talking of a military conflict and victory. You are talking of interests. So while US and Germany are ok in defending their interests with regard to their policies in/against Cuba and Yugoslavia, Russia should work hard to earn its `good boy` certificate from people living in the west.

Oh wait

The Gulf Arab countries hold the US and the rest of the world hostage. There's no comparison between Russia and the snakedoms. However, strong countries drawing vast red lines around their peripheries and claiming sole prerogative to dictate the politics there should be resisted. I think it makes a good principle to stick to, whether the countries making the claim be the US, Russia, China, Pakistan or India. However this throws up a lot of moral ambiguity. India certainly isn't going to let her pre-eminence in Bhutan, Nepal or the IOR be replaced by China while defending her right to drill for oil in Vietnam. What will our position on any future Chinese air defense zone be ? The US is seen as the most hypocritical country solely because it claims, has and defends its interests everywhere. If that were the case for India, we'd have to end up playing those exact same games and come across as just as "morally flexible". That shouldn't necessarily be seen as bad.

You are saying the same thing. So what is your angst against Russia if any.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 02 Nov 2014 14:06

http://www.economist.com/blogs/easterna ... a-gas-deal

Cold self-interest

The “winter package” protocol signed in Brussels comes after months of EU-brokered negotiatiations, culminating in a late-night finale this week. Ukraine will pay $378 per 1,000 cubic metres of gas until the end of the year, and $365 in the first quarter of 2015. Alexander Novak, Russia’s energy minister, called the deal a compromise. José Manuel Barroso, the president of the European Commission, was more ebullient: “There is now no reason for people in Europe to stay cold this winter.” Mr Barroso was referring to fears that, without a deal, Russia might have blocked or restricted gas flowing through Ukrainian pipelines (pictured) to European customers. Then the EU, which receives about 30% of its gas from Russia (including 15% through Ukraine), could have faced its own troubles this winter.

Supplies to Ukraine could resume next week, says Alexei Miller, head of Gazprom, the Russian gas export company. But first Kiev will have to pay $1.45 billion to cover part of its outstanding gas debts, as well as $760m in pre-payments for November. Another tranche of $1.65 billion must be paid by the end of 2014. Ukraine says it will finance these payments from existing international funds. Moscow had demanded a bilateral agreement from Brussels to guarantee Kiev's payments, but no such agreement was signed, though the commission did promise Ukraine "unprecedented levels of EU aid".

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 02 Nov 2014 14:08

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29865993
Ukraine crisis: Separatists hold controversial polls

Pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine are holding elections denounced by the West as "illegitimate". Presidential and parliamentary polls ...

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 02 Nov 2014 14:11

http://www.forbes.com/sites/paulroderic ... interests/

A Bad Gas Deal For Ukraine As Europe Looks After Its Own Interests

It turns out the month-long negotiations over Ukraine’s gas dispute with Russia were really about securing Europe’s Russian gas. Ukraine was only a side issue. Russia’s incessant propaganda that Europe itself was threatened by Ukraine’s gas cutoff dominated the discussion. Europe pushed Ukraine into a bad deal to protect itself.

What did Ukraine get out of the deal? It received the go-ahead to transfer some one third of the financial assistance it is receiving from the IMF and European Union to pay for the Russian gas, diverting scarce funds from its desperate defense, infrastructure, and reform needs. Ukraine gets to pay Russia one of the highest gas prices in Europe ($378 versus the $304 European average), and there appears to be no agreement as to how much of this gas goes to the gas-guzzling heavy industry of the Donbass, occupied by pro-Russian rebels. Kiev, by the way, has been virtually cut off from Donbass coal and has to buy elsewhere.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 02 Nov 2014 19:40

The Gas deal with Ukraine was always about Securing Europe Interest first as they didnt want Ukraine to Siphon off the Gas that passes through its pipeline to EU countries something that had happened previously. Ukraine was just a side show.

If no EU interest was involved we would have seen Western Press crying Murder depriving poor Ukraine of Free Gas from Ivan the Terrible

member_20317 · Post by **member_20317** » 02 Nov 2014 19:49

pankajs wrote:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-29865993
Ukraine crisis: Separatists hold controversial polls

Pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine are holding elections denounced by the West as "illegitimate". Presidential and parliamentary polls ...

Putin should help them shove it deep inside the West.

Ukraine is ripe for one country two systems. That way the Eastern Ukrainians can bug the Catholics in the west for the rest of their natural lives. Personally I am beginning to admire Putin's ability to push through his own agenda and yet exercise restraint at areas he cannot, push it push it some more.

This is how a strong leader of a weaker country should behave.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 02 Nov 2014 22:55

Moscow had demanded a bilateral agreement from Brussels to guarantee Kiev's payments, but no such agreement was signed, though the commission did promise Ukraine "unprecedented levels of EU aid".

EU wouldnt guarantee Kievs payment.
But has promised `unprecedented levels of aid`.

If EU doesnt give money to Ukraine, it gets discredited in Ukraine. Ukraine freezes over and goes back to Russia. If EU gives `unprecedented levels of aid`, most of it goes to Russia and all the sanctions prove useless.
How else was this going to turn out anyway ?! Dumb Euro Peons . Hilarious stupidity.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 02 Nov 2014 22:59

IMHO, EuroPeons will continue to act stupid.
First they will pay Ukraine some money. Which of course will do Ukraine no good considering the deep mess it is in. Then eventually individual states will refuse to part with their hard earned money to pay for `lazy and corrupt` Ukrainians.
Finally aid to Ukraine will stop.
Europe will lose both money and credibility. What a bunch of jokers.

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Nov 2014 11:48

Goodbye UKR.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/n ... -elections
Ukraine: Donetsk votes for new reality in country that does not exist
The election for the region’s prime minister has given hope to older generations that they will never again be part of Ukraine

Shaun Walker

The Guardian, Sunday 2 November 2014 20.41 GMT
Donetsk polling station
Members of a local electoral commission count ballots at a polling station after voting day in Donetsk on November 2. Photograph: Maxim Zmeyev/Reuters

With armed men in the polling station, no voter lists, and international observers coming from an organisation concocted the night before the vote, these were no normal elections.

But then the Donetsk People’s Republic is no normal country. It is no country at all, according to most of the world. But the vote for prime minister here and in neighbouring Luhansk region on Sunday was one more step towards creating a new reality on the ground and carving out a chunk of Ukraine that will no longer controlled by Kiev. Moscow has already said it will recognise the results.

The vote came more than six months after a handful of gunmen began taking over administrative buildings in several eastern cities. Since then, the Ukrainian army and volunteer battalions have fought a bloody war against rebels backed with Russian firepower in a conflict that has claimed well over 3,000 lives, many of them civilians.

An agreement in Minsk, Belarus, in September provided for a ceasefire, and a 12-point plan was drafted to allow the territories to remain inside Ukraine but with special status.

Several weeks later, the plan remains on paper, with each side accusing the other of numerous violations. All the while, the areas under rebel control drift further away from a solution in which they could be part of Ukraine. In the days leading up to the vote, isolated clashes between Ukrainian and rebel forces continued, including just outside Donetsk, where a group of Ukrainian soldiers continue to hold on to part of the airport despite continual rebel assault. The rumble of artillery from the airport is audible in central Donetsk most days.

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), Europe’s main election observing body, said it would have nothing to do with the elections. Undeterred, a newly created organisation appeared, named the ASCE, and mainly made up of far-right European politicians, who arrived and gave the elections two thumbs up. The fact that neo-Nazi European politicians are the only people east Ukraine has found to back its supposed uprising against the “fascist” Ukrainian authorities is one of the many paradoxes of the situation.

Despite the surreal nature of the vote, there is no doubt that, among the older generation at least, there was great enthusiasm for it, perhaps less as an endorsement of the Donetsk republic and more as a message to Kiev that the region would never again be part of Ukraine.

In Ilovaysk, which saw some of the worst battles of the conflict, with hundreds of Ukrainian forces surrounded by rebel and Russian troops in a siege that lasted weeks, there was a huge crowd at School No 13, one of three polling stations to open in the town. Residents said they were voting for a “peaceful future”, which they hoped would eventually involve the region joining together with Russia.

Valentina, a 61-year-old market trader in Ilovaysk, said she had spent 23 days cowering in a cellar with several dozen others, and had been threatened by Ukrainian volunteer battalions who tried to use her and others as human shields and stole mobile phones and other property.

“We are voting so that they never come back here again,” she said. “We have always been Russians, part of Russia, and we don’t need them here.”

Gennady, 61, said he had stayed in his flat for the duration of fighting in Ilovaysk, as his 90-year-old mother was too ill to move.

“It was like Russian roulette; you looked out the window and the neighbouring house is destroyed, but luckily God was kind to me,” he said. “Russia is the most democratic country in the world, and we want to join Russia.”

Most people said they would vote for Alexander Zakharchenko, the acting rebel leader who took over in August after what seemed an attempt by Moscow to replace Russian nationals with locals. Zakharchenko has run on a vague platform promising independence, peace and economic prosperity. On Sunday night, he had taken 81% of the vote, according to exit polls.

While many, especially among the older generation, have nostalgia for the Soviet Union and see contemporary Russia as its successor, the attitude towards the Donetsk authorities is ambivalent, with many people quietly mentioning that the armed gunmen who run the region now have allowed themselves many liberties. Even among the rebel leaders, there are divisions. The Guardian spoke with a high-ranking rebel commander, originally from Russia, who on condition of anonymity said he believed much of the Donetsk leadership was corrupt and there needed to be a “purge”, which he hoped would be carried out by Russian special forces.

With several competing paramilitary groups linked only under a nominal central command, there is potential for battles between the different groupings to break out in the near future, as the battle for power, influence and money begins in earnest.

The commander admitted rebel forces had been responsible for looting and crimes in many places, and said only through “iron discipline” could there be any hope of creating a new and just state. “In order to learn to live by the New Testament here, we first have to learn to live by the Old Testament: eye for an eye,” he said during an interview in a seized security services building in a town near Donetsk. “If people behave like animals we will treat them like animals.” He said military courts and “troikas” of three judges would sentence people to death for looting and other crimes, and claimed there had been two executions for looting in his town.

“Nobody blames a surgeon for the fact they remove tumours from the body with a scalpel. That is what we are doing here,” he said. He added he was fighting for “the Russian world; the Russian idea”, which he said was standing against a corrupt and decadent United States. He was formerly an officer in the Russian special forces but said he had come to Donetsk as a volunteer, disgusted by the actions of Ukrainian forces and the deaths of Russians in Odessa in May.

The potential for vigilante justice was also highlighted by the disturbing spectacle of a “people’s trial” last week in the town of Alchevsk, in the neighbouring Luhansk region, where rebels brought two alleged rapists on to the stage of the local theatre and asked a crowd of 300 locals to decide whether they should be condemned to death. The assembled masses spared the first man’s life but voted overwhelmingly to execute the second man, amid cheers, and despite the man’s pleas for mercy and the cries of his mother. It is unclear whether the sentence has been carried out.

Aside from implementing revolutionary justice, the main priority for the authorities in these regions is economic. Kiev is unwilling to pay for social payments and infrastructure in regions it does not control, meaning elderly people have not received pensions for several months. Many towns have spent weeks without light and heating as winter approaches.

“We will be blockaded, there will be an embargo, and we will end up in total isolation, like Cuba or North Korea,” said Yuriy Makogon, head of International Economics at Donetsk National University. “Everyone should remember that with no economy, it is impossible for anywhere to survive.”

Russia has displayed little appetite to annex the territory in the way it did Crimea in March, but the hope among the rebels is that financial flows and investment could come from Moscow.

According to the Minsk agreement, Ukraine has given the regions special increased autonomy for a three-year period, but in practice, President Petro Poroshenko appears to have given up on the regions, unable to win a military victory against superior Russian firepower.

Whether the rebels and their Russian backers are satisfied with what they have gained is not clear. There are persistent rumours that the Donetsk forces may attempt to take the key port city of Mariupol, part of Donetsk region under Ukrainian control.

Zakharchenko said last week that if Ukraine did not agree to hand over the city, the rebels would take it by force, and in recent days there have been numerous sightings of a large military convoy, apparently from Russia, travelling though the Donetsk region.

The Guardian saw the convoy, made up of several dozen green military trucks and including artillery systems, near the town of Torez on Saturday.

On the ground, the signs are that Ukraine has resigned itself to losing the territory for some time. At the entrance to the town of Mariinka, just west of Donetsk, a detachment of Ukrainian border guards is stationed who register all who come and go from rebel-held territory. In the adjacent fields, armoured vehicles are visible and trenches have been dug, in a sign that this might be a makeshift border that is here to stay.

“They want to have their cake and eat it,” said Ruslan, one of the guards. “If they want their republic, let them have it. They’ve shouted for so long, let them see what they have created for themselves. We’re tired, we’ve lost too many lives to keep fighting. But they should know there is no way back for them, and they shouldn’t expect us to pay for them.”

Philip · Post by **Philip** » 03 Nov 2014 11:50

http://rt.com/news/201711-donetsk-lugan ... elections/
Incumbent PM Zakharchenko leads in Donetsk elections – early results
Published time: November 02, 2014

Incumbent PM Aleksandr Zakharchenko is leading in Sunday’s elections in the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic in eastern Ukraine, taking over 70 percent of the votes. In Lugansk, 63 percent are voting for the current leader Igor Plotnitsky.

Zakharchenko is ahead of his rivals with over 70 percent of votes after half of the votes have been counted, the head of the Central Election Commission of the DPR, Roman Lyagin, said on Sunday evening.

He was trailed by Aleksandr Kofman, deputy speaker of the Novorossiya Union parliament, and Yury Sivokonenko, an MP from the local Supreme Council.

Meanwhile, the lead in the parliamentary elections – also held on Sunday – is being claimed by Zakharchenko's Donetsk Republic party, which has 65.11 percent, the head of the Election Commission added citing exit poll. The rival Svobodniy Donbass party is collecting 34.89 percent of the votes.

In Lugansk, the incumbent leader and head of the Peace to Lugansk Region movement, Igor Plotnitsky, has secured 63 percent of the votes, according to a preliminary count cited by RIA Novosti. The party has won 69 percent of votes, while some 24 percent voted for its closest rival, the Lugansk Economic Union.

The self-proclaimed people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk took to polling stations to vote for their leaders and MPs on Sunday. Over 360 polling stations were open in Donetsk for three million potential voters. Meanwhile, 102 polling stations for approximately 1.5 million voters were open in Lugansk.

In Lugansk, the overall turnout exceeded 60 percent, according to the head of the Central Election Commission in the LPR, Sergey Kozyakov. He added that by 8p.m. local time, nearly 630,000 residents had come to cast their votes.

Kiev has said it will not recognize the elections, as they contradict Ukrainian legislation. Ukraine’s Security Service has opened a criminal case against the organizers of the elections in Donetsk and Lugansk.

EU’s new foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini has also spoken out against the elections, arguing that it will be an obstacle to reconciliation in Ukraine.

“I consider today’s ‘presidential and parliamentary elections’ in Donetsk and Luhansk ‘People’s Republics’ a new obstacle on the path towards peace in Ukraine. The vote is illegal and illegitimate, and the European Union will not recognise it,” Mogherini said in a statement.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko condemned the elections as illegitimate on Sunday and called on Russia not to recognize the results. "I count on Russia not to recognize the so-called elections because they are a clear violation of the September 5 Minsk protocol, which was also signed by Russia's representative," he said in a statement.

However, the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a statement late on Sunday saying that Moscow “respects the expression of will of the south-eastern [Ukrainians].” The ministry noted a high turnout and reminded that in the current situation it is “extremely important” for Kiev to work on conducting dialogue with the people of the region.

Moscow earlier pointed out that according to the Minsk peace agreements, elections in both Ukraine and the self-proclaimed republics should be conducted between October 19 and November 3.

Thus Poroshenko’s order from October 16, which set the date of elections in the self-proclaimed republics for December 7, “contradicts the Minsk agreements,” said the Russian Foreign Ministry.

Ukraine conducted parliamentary elections on October 26.

No serious violations of public order were reported during the Sunday elections in the DPR. "We have no reports about incidents at polling stations,” a DPR Interior Ministry spokesman told TASS news agency. Minor incidents included a false bomb threat.

International observers said the elections in the self-proclaimed republics followed democratic standards, adding that they saw no violations during the process.

An MP from the Upper Chamber of Italy’s Parliament, Lucio Malan, acting as an observer at the elections in Donetsk, told RT that people “were not influenced in any way” during the vote.

“The prevention of double or triple voting appeared to be good, up to international standards” he added.

“What was possible for us to see and what we witnessed is that they fit completely into generally accepted democratic electoral standards,” Manuel Ochsenreiter, a German observer in Lugansk, told RT. “What was really impressing – the masses of people at the polling stations, standing sometimes for hours just to put their vote, to express their political will.”

“First I believe the elections followed international standards of democratic elections. I was very impressed with the enthusiasm and the vigor with which the people went to the polls to express their opinion,” US Senior Attorney Frank Abernathy, an observer in Lugansk, told RT.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 03 Nov 2014 11:59

Chocolate agreed to gas deal partly because he had no choice, but more because the EU wont pay Russia directly, but give the aid to Ukraine from which Chocolate and his fellow Oligarchs get their 10%.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 03 Nov 2014 13:32

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_b ... s_-_theyre

Igor Shuvalov, Russia's Deputy Prime Minister in charge , Shuvalov concluded by telling us of a discussion that Putin allegedly had with U.S. vice president Joe Biden several years ago. Apparently, Biden had just told Putin that Russia was simply too weak to compete for global leadership.

Putin replied that, while Russia might not be strong enough to compete for global leadership, Biden might reflect on the fact that Russia will still be strong enough to determine who that leader will be."

KrishnaK · Post by **KrishnaK** » 03 Nov 2014 21:10

Austin wrote:http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_b ... s_-_theyre

Igor Shuvalov, Russia's Deputy Prime Minister in charge , Shuvalov concluded by telling us of a discussion that Putin allegedly had with U.S. vice president Joe Biden several years ago. Apparently, Biden had just told Putin that Russia was simply too weak to compete for global leadership.

Putin replied that, while Russia might not be strong enough to compete for global leadership, Biden might reflect on the fact that Russia will still be strong enough to determine who that leader will be."

Hmm, no, not really. Russia is not even a critical swing state.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 03 Nov 2014 21:35

The Ukrainian side is bracing for more violence. They are on record that elections in Eastern Ukraine will make peaceful resolution difficult.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-0 ... by-un.html

Russia on its part has been more direct and asked Ukraine to halt violence.
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/n ... -elections

I believe the Russians must have suitably armed the ethnic Russians by now. If they have not, then they must be up there with the Europeans on stupidity.

KLNMurthy · Post by **KLNMurthy** » 03 Nov 2014 22:05

KrishnaK wrote: ...
I think it's important Russia build a top notch competitive economy. One that offers comparable opportunities for prosperity to countries in its periphery. That remains the only viable option for Russia to increase its options and provide far more leverage than withholding gas in the middle of winter, with those around it that fear it the most. Doing that will inevitably mean a system of governance that's seen (by it's own citizens to begin with) as transparent, clean and capable of functioning beyond Putin and his cronies. Leaving aside our stupid economic ideas, think of what India managed in its first 15 years of independence. That in spite of two centuries of colonization and resulting abject poverty. The partition, the Kashmir conflict, 1962 didn't break India, so why would NATO in Ukraine break Russia ?

What an amazing statement. India had reverses and hostile forces arrayed against it, and managed to struggle through, therefore no country should try to resist the arraying of hostile forces against it. Do you really mean this?

The Gulf Arab countries hold the US and the rest of the world hostage. There's no comparison between Russia and the snakedoms. However, strong countries drawing vast red lines around their peripheries and claiming sole prerogative to dictate the politics there should be resisted. I think it makes a good principle to stick to, whether the countries making the claim be the US, Russia, China, Pakistan or India. However this throws up a lot of moral ambiguity. India certainly isn't going to let her pre-eminence in Bhutan, Nepal or the IOR be replaced by China while defending her right to drill for oil in Vietnam. What will our position on any future Chinese air defense zone be ? The US is seen as the most hypocritical country solely because it claims, has and defends its interests everywhere. If that were the case for India, we'd have to end up playing those exact same games and come across as just as "morally flexible". That shouldn't necessarily be seen as bad.

Random and weirdly post-modern equal-equal, utterly lacking in moral foundation. I sincerely believe that the world and mankind's future would be much better under Indian hegemony, and it would fare a lot more poorly under the hegemony of other countries. That's because India is a superior civilization to all those others.

India should, unblushingly, and shamelessly, proceed to drill for oil around the Sparatlys and fight like hell to prevent Chinese from expanding their influence around India. And India should firmly oppose any attempt by the US or the West to claim the sort of exceptionalism that India is claiming.

How can the world be made a better place if the better civilizations don't seek to prevail but simply roll over and mindlessly accept that other civilizations are just as good and have the same rights to prevail?

The US was never seen a particularly benevolent player during the Cold War, a prime example of that being India. It's ability to influence even Europe during the cold war wasn't absolute. Western European countries refused to accept US demands to embargo oil pipelines that allowed the SU to sell its oil to the west. I agree that the space for strategic autonomy is reducing even further. More trade/prosperity => more interdependence => reduced space for being the lone ranger. I think that's inevitable and a change for the better. In fact that should be a goal, to bind larger number of countries into interlocking interests centered around trade. India should offer countries in our neighbourhood, including Pakistan, increasing stakes in our economy and prosperity.

Amazing, again. The potential host of a tapeworm should offer the tapeworm an equal (read equal-equal) share in its food, even though the host can just stomp on and kill the tapeworm, and not doing so would kill the host, because, you see, the tapeworm and the host are, what, just the same? have the same rights? Someone's esthetic ideal is served by this kind of weird symmetry?

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 04 Nov 2014 00:29

Which Minority is Appeased? Coalition Potential and Redistribution in Latvia and Ukraine.
This is an article that can be found in "Europe-Asia Studies Volume 60, Issue 9, 2008"
The article is written by an American Professor Stephen Bloom.

Please note:
Ethnic Russians in Latvia cant vote and cant get govt jobs. They dont have passports. They are stateless. Latvia is a part of European Union.
Stephen bloom argues that the western Ukraine has been favoured by Ukrainian politicians (before the conflict)when distributing the resources.

Here is the extract
"This article tests fiscal appeasement, needs-based and coalition potential hypotheses for redistribution in post-Soviet Latvia and Ukraine. I argue that the government's decision to reward a minority population depends on the coalition potential of minority parties and voters. In Latvia, the non-participation of minority parties in governing coalitions means that the distribution of spoils among coalition partners does not benefit the regions in which Russian speakers live. In Ukraine, on the other hand, voters and parties in western Ukraine have been sought out by Russian-speaking politicians from eastern Ukraine, and the districts of western Ukraine received preferential treatment as a result."

So much for western benevolence, human rights and Germany being so good. Dhimmis living in the west and in awe of its humanism may seek the article or contact me if cant find it.

member_23370 · Post by **member_23370** » 04 Nov 2014 04:11

KrishnaK wrote:
Austin wrote:http://russia-insider.com/en/politics_b ... s_-_theyre

Hmm, no, not really. Russia is not even a critical swing state.

Keep dreaming.

Deans · Post by **Deans** » 04 Nov 2014 10:03

http://ic.pics.livejournal.com/dragon_f ... iginal.jpg

Latest Battlefield situation map. In English.

2 Ukrainian pockets remain to be liqudated. Donetsk airport is between (1) & (2).

member_24684 · Post by **member_24684** » 04 Nov 2014 11:49

Anti-Aircraft Rounds Fired at SMM UAV

At a location 2.5km NE of Shyrokyne village (17 km E of Mariupol and east of the line of contact), an SMM Unarmed Aerial Vehicle (UAV) – at a height of 5,000 feet – spotted an armoured personnel carrier (APC) and two Ural trucks at what appeared to be a checkpoint at 13.05hrs on 2 November.

At 13.11hrs, a person in camouflage uniform – standing close to a civilian truck parked approximately 150m from the APC and Urals – was seen to point a man-portable air defence system (Man-Pad) at the SMM UAV. He did not fire. He instead loaded the Man-Pad onto the civilian truck. A canvas covering on the back of the truck was removed, revealing a truck-mounted, anti-aircraft gun (probably a ZU-23), which immediately fired numerous rounds at the SMM UAV, none of which hit it.

The SMM UAV left the area, landing safely at 13.54hrs.

Detailed post-flight analysis of the video footage was completed at 19.30hrs.

http://www.osce.org/ukraine-smm/126265

what kinda Drone was that ..vulnerable to 23mm AAA fire or misfire from the Crew

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Nov 2014 12:08

Looks like after the Election in Donetsk and Luhansk region the chances of Frozen Conflict in Ukraine has grown something the West always feared.

In best case Ukraine can hope for single country with two system with Donetsk and Luhansk having its own autonomy and for all practical purpose outside the control of Ukraine.

Frozen conflict would mean bye bye to any dream of Ukraine joining NATO and in any case Donetsk and Luhansk will form a buffer state , much like outlook of Georgia conflict and formation of SOssetia.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 04 Nov 2014 12:41

Moscow's Spy Game

Eight weeks after Ukraine’s new government and pro-Russian separatists in the country’s east agreed to a cease-fire, the war continues to simmer. It is fought with guns and rockets on the ground and with warnings and sanctions at the negotiating table. But, nearly invisibly, the war is also being waged along a third dimension: intelligence. On that front, both Ukraine and the West are scrambling to counter Russia’s vast advantage.

For Kiev’s new leaders, still struggling to set their country right after popular protests toppled the pro-Russian government of President Viktor Yanukovych last year, accurate and reliable information about the rebels in the east is critical. But obtaining intelligence about the aims, intentions, and capabilities of the rebels—let alone those of the Russian government that supports them—is nearly impossible. As Kiev attempts to react to Russian and rebel initiatives, both military and political, it often has only a faint idea of whether they represent serious moves or feints and what endgame they pursue. Even the numbers of rebel troops and the weapons they’ve acquired from Russia are frequently little more than guesswork. Meanwhile, Moscow enjoys a significant upper hand over Kiev when it comes to intelligence—the Ukrainian communications and command structures are thoroughly permeated by Russian agents—and is using this advantage to further tilt the playing field in its favor.

Time is working against Ukraine. To reverse the trend, Kiev must not only ramp up its intelligence and counterintelligence efforts but do so while radically reforming the Ukrainian security apparatus. Relying on Western assistance is of little help: the West, too, is short on reliable sources in eastern Ukraine and outmatched by Russia’s prior preparation. Ukraine’s ongoing political transition and last weekend’s parliamentary elections give its government a window of opportunity in which to reclaim control over this key instrument of security policy. Otherwise, Ukrainian credibility and sovereignty will both continue to be under question.

MOSCOW'S BACKYARD

Four factors have given Russia a head start in the ongoing intelligence war. First, Russia has long been preparing for the kind of conflict underway in Ukraine—one that combines espionage with firepower, economic pressure, information warfare, and political maneuvering. The Russian intelligence services use all these tools effortlessly—a skill that they inherited from their Soviet predecessors and further refined for today’s world, in which influence is as much about economic leverage and the ability to spin the story as about actual facts on the ground. It is telling that even the head of the Russian army, General Valery Gerasimov, admitted last year that “nonmilitary means” have become indispensable to Russia and sometimes even exceed traditional firepower in importance.

Second, Russian intelligence services have for decades maintained a firm foothold in Ukraine—a presence with roots in Soviet history when the Ukrainian security apparatus was simply the local branch of the KGB. Russian operatives, most commonly working for the Russian Federal Security Service (FSB), the KGB’s successor, permeate Ukrainian police and intelligence agencies. Russia sympathizers and agents, many of whom belong to the GRU, Russia's resurgent military intelligence agency, fill the Ukrainian army ranks. Equipped with an array of tools—from embedded spies to communications intercepts—the GRU is tasked with locating Ukrainian military units, uncovering their plans, and conducting paramilitary operations against them. The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service and Ministry of Internal Affairs, likewise, have also built extensive networks in the country. In particular, the Ministry of Internal Affairs’ long-standing relationship with its local counterpart, the Ukrainian Ministry of Internal Affairs, has allowed the agency to easily identify Ukrainian counterparts amenable to FSB recruitment.

Third, Russian intelligence forces maintain a significant ground presence—both open and covert—near the Ukrainian border. They have taken full advantage of the free flow of people between the two countries, which Ukraine has so far done little to stem. For example, there is evidence that the Russian intelligence services have been interviewing Ukrainian refugees crossing into Russia, under the pretext of gathering data on war crimes. The interview subjects could be providing valuable information about Ukrainian government forces battling the rebellion, from the locations of their encampments to the tactics they use.

And finally, Moscow has had the first-mover’s advantage since the start of the conflict. Its superior intelligence capabilities have meant that it can afford to keep its options open, changing its strategy and objectives week by week. In fact, Moscow’s only clear objective has been to prevent Kiev from suppressing the rebels—a task in which it has proved quite successful.

TRUST NO ONE

Kiev’s response to Moscow’s challenge has been remarkably flat-footed. The government has been unable to trust its own military, police, and security services, rightfully suspecting them of being riddled with pro-Moscow infiltrators. Ukrainian officials probably overestimated the actual degree of Russian penetration, but their lack of confidence in their own regular forces forced them to rely more on informal citizen militias early on in the campaign. The fact that some of those militias harbored anti-Russian, ultra-right views only fueled the conflict.

Kiev has since been working to cull the forces’ ranks, but it is fighting an uphill battle. Ironically, its weakest link is the Security Service of Ukraine (SBU)—the very organization tasked with hunting foreign moles and supporting the anti-insurgency campaign in the east. As of early this year, as many as 30 percent of its personnel might have been Russian agents, according one prominent Ukrainian security expert. Under the Yanukovych regime, deep Russian involvement in the SBU had been an open secret. The organization’s former deputy head, for example, admitted in 2010 that not only were there Russian agents among the SBU’s ranks, but the organization had an official agreement with the FSB, spelled out in a 2010 cooperation protocol, that allowed Moscow to recruit agents from within the Ukrainian government. In December 2013, a team of 30 FSB officers took part in SBU training exercises and met with its director, who has since fled to Russia along with two former deputies and two former department chiefs.

The SBU’s new head, Valentyn Nalyvaichenko, inherited an agency whose personnel was untrustworthy and whose secrets had already been plundered. He attested in recent interviews that, on the eve of Yanukovych’s ouster, Russian agents ripped apart the Ukrainian intelligence treasury, removing “files, archives, everything that forms a basis for a professional intelligence service.” Since then, the agency has seen massive staff turnover, as new leaders rushed to replace old cadres with loyal recruits. And the firings are set to continue. In mid-October, Kiev introduced a new law, aimed at weeding out Soviet-era holdouts at all levels of government, including the security apparatus, of which some 20 percent had either worked for the Soviet KGB or studied at its training academy, according to Nalyvaichenko.

This cleanup comes at a heavy cost to experience and professionalism. As one U.S. intelligence officer put it to me, “Some of these [new recruits] are still kids. They will season up nicely, but they are having to do jobs they’re not really trained or experienced enough for.” And it could take months or even years to fully rebuild the SBU as a reliable service. Inevitably, some talent and expertise will be lost for nothing; not every former KGB trainee ended up becoming a Russian mole. And, of the officers who remain, some who appear impeccably loyal and have no ties to Moscow could still fall to Russian bribery or blackmail. Although Russia’s grip on the SBU has grown weaker since the new government took office, it has certainly not disappeared.

HOME-FIELD ADVANTAGE

Kiev is not the only capital scrambling to counter Moscow’s advantage. Strategists across Europe and the United States are having similar trouble adapting to the new hybrid war in Ukraine’s east. Before hostilities erupted this past spring, the West had not bothered much with intelligence in Ukraine, focusing its resources instead on Asia, the Middle East, and Russia. This oversight has cost Ukraine’s Western allies valuable time at the start of the conflict. As a result, they lack agents on the ground and have little opportunity to safely insert them now. And their analytic capacity back home to interpret and assess what little intelligence data can be gleaned is often minimal.

The tools that the West did have at its disposal proved woefully inadequate. For example, although the West, and the United States in particular, does have far superior technology—such as satellite surveillance and electronic eavesdropping—Russia still managed to surprise them with its takeover of Crimea. That’s because Moscow had taken steps to minimize its vulnerabilities, including keeping its forces dispersed and undercover until they were ready for deployment. The Kremlin also misled observers by staging military exercises that dulled their suspicions about its true intent and relayed crucial orders by courier or land line rather than the more vulnerable broadcast signals.

Once the conflict moved into eastern Ukraine, the West found itself even further behind. The challenge of embedding Western agents in a region now controlled by the separatists proved very difficult, since any such sources would not be able to cultivate “legends,” or cover identities. As one British intelligence official told me, “this is not the kind of environment in which you can just drop in an agent without a solid cover—and building that kind of cover takes time.” Moreover, the region has no foreign embassies to shelter the agents or provide a front for their work.

Further, the separatist authorities are unpredictable. Any spy would risk beatings, imprisonment, or worse at the hands of local insurgents, who are often little more than thugs and who make their own rules. The task, in a word, is nothing like spying on a full-fledged country, with clear hierarchies and policies. Even determining whether rebel leaders are acting on their own or as agents of Moscow can be maddeningly difficult, since the answer often lies somewhere in between.

Without such knowledge, however, Western policy will remain as indecisive as it is today. Meanwhile, Moscow is using its intelligence advantages to preserve a bloody and miserable stalemate that it hopes will force the Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to offer major concessions to the separatists—the kind of terms that would allow Putin to claim victory without formally entering the war. Even short of a full-fledged peace settlement, however, Moscow will win as long as Kiev loses.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 04 Nov 2014 19:43

Choco soldier has a chip on his shoulder now. Claims that elections in SE Ukraine are invalid and calls the truce, elections etc into question. Also has maintained that he plans to talk to his team and get a set of optimistic and pessimistic forecasts and take a considered decision.

Don't think he is in the mood to have his company produced chocolates. Bah.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 04 Nov 2014 21:09

http://news.yahoo.com/ukraine-options-l ... 26509.html
A shallow article. Nevertheless everyone still know that Ukraine has only bad options left. At the same time it gives an indication of the fear that there is among the UKbapzis regarding the intentions of the Russian rebels.
They have the initiative and the resources to attack and take more territory if they want to. So it seems.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrapoza/2 ... y-gazprom/
And Ukraine`s goose is nicely cooked. Its economy is going down with inflation at 17%.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 05 Nov 2014 11:04

Ouch. Escalation? War-path

From NW:
Ukraine: Today Ukrainian President Poroshenko said he asked the National Security and Defense Council to request parliament to rescind the law on special self-government in Donetsk and Luhansk. He said plans to hold new elections in the southeast in December.

Following the meeting with the Council, Poroshenko ordered army reinforcements to key southern and eastern cities in case of a new rebel offensive. He said the units were to protect Mariupol, Berdyansk, Kharkiv and the north of Luhansk region. Ukraine has created new military units to prevent further assaults on its eastern cities of Kharkiv, Mariupol and Dnipropetrovsk, Poroshenko said.

Comment: Poroshenko said he still was committed to the peace process, but his request to parliament to rescind the special autonomy law contradicts his assurances. He called the elected leaders in Donetsk and Luhansk bandits and terrorists.

The security measures he ordered today appear to be defensive. The cities he mentioned (identified by red dots on the map) essentially form a defensive arc around Luhansk and Donetsk. Increased vigilance in these cities implies that the Kyiv security officials expect the breakaway regions to try to expand their territory. The deployments show that the Kyiv authorities sense the need for defensive vigilance, but, beyond that, they have no idea what to do about the rebel regions. They will be looking to Western backers for guidance to avoid what could be a large, violent confrontation.

vijaykarthik · Post by **vijaykarthik** » 05 Nov 2014 12:13

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/n ... el-attacks

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 05 Nov 2014 14:43

http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/dut ... 94344.html

This dutch prime minister is not helping at all. He has fallen for Russian propaganda despite all facebook posts shown by American intelligence proving Putin shot down the plane.

member_24684 · Post by **member_24684** » 05 Nov 2014 18:08

RSoami wrote:http://zeenews.india.com/news/world/dut ... 94344.html

This dutch prime minister is not helping at all. He has fallen for Russian propaganda despite all facebook posts shown by American intelligence proving Putin shot down the plane.

awww Please Let them allow into the Crash site ..Why still the Russian Sponsored Terrorists didn't allow the Malaysian Dutch Them into the Crash site

The leaders of Malaysia and the Netherlands vowed on Wednesday to keep pressing for access to the crash site of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 and bring to justice those responsible for downing the plane in Ukraine.

http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/malay ... ite-616533

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 05 Nov 2014 21:47

awww Please Let them allow into the Crash site ..Why still the Russian Sponsored Terrorists didn't allow the Malaysian Dutch Them into the Crash site

The Dutch and the Malaysians are nuts. Obama knew within half an hour that it was Putin who had fired that ManPAD. Malaysians may be SDRE and uncivilized but the TFTA dutch are acting technologically challenged.
What do they need the wreckage for. I ask. Hain jee

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 05 Nov 2014 22:42

They already got access to the wreckage earlier got the FDR in good shape , so all the data they need is there including photograph which OSCE team got with onsite visit to the site.

The problem with visiting those sites is either side blame each other when firing is heard at a distant.

pankajs · Post by **pankajs** » 06 Nov 2014 13:30

Fox News ‏@FoxNews 2h2 hours ago

US prosecutors launch money-laundering probe of Putin confidant http://fxn.ws/1z13zpL (PHOTO: Reuters)

U.S. prosecutors have launched a money-laundering investigation of a member of Vladimir Putin's inner circle, several people familiar with the efforts said, in a politically sensitive escalation of pressure on the Russian president’s cadre of billionaire supporters.

RSoami · Post by **RSoami** » 06 Nov 2014 14:48

^^ Dunno what US seeks to achieve by doing these. Its not as if Putin is going to change his foreign policy because of it or the billionaires who support him will stop doing that. They will in fact stop stashing their money in the western banks.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Nov 2014 16:21

^^ The West and by that I mean mostly the US is doing every thing possible ATM short of starting a war , be it Economic Warfare , Information Warfare or Blacklisting Individual.

They cant afford a direct war and short of that they would do every thing possible by any means possible.

As to if it will change the FP of a country ,West has done such stupid things in past , Post POK-2 there was this Stop ,Cap & Roll Back Policy US adopted to stop us deploying N weapons but without much success

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 06 Nov 2014 20:01

Interview with Russian NSA

Top Spymaster Explains How Russian Intelligence Sees the US