By William Blum Published February 4th, 2017
"Why, sometimes I've believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast." Alice in Wonderland
Since Yalta, we have a long list of times we've tried to engage positively with Russia. We have a relatively short list of successes in that regard. General James Mattis, the new Secretary of Defense
If anyone knows where to find this long list please send me a copy.
This delusion is repeated periodically by American military officials. A year ago, following the release of Russia's new national security document, naming as threats both the United States and the expansion of the NATO alliance, a Pentagon spokesman declared: "They have no reason to consider us a threat. We are not looking for conflict with Russia."
Meanwhile, in early January, the United States embarked upon its biggest military buildup in Europe since the end of the Cold War 3,500 American soldiers landed, unloading three shiploads, with 2,500 tanks, trucks and other combat vehicles. The troops were to be deployed in Poland, Romania, Bulgaria, Germany, Hungary and across the Baltics. Lt. Gen. Frederick Hodges, commander of US forces in Europe, said, "Three years after the last American tanks left the continent, we need to get them back."
The measures, General Hodges declared, were a "response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine and the illegal annexation of Crimea. This does not mean that there necessarily has to be a war, none of this is inevitable, but Moscow is preparing for the possibility." (See previous paragraph.)
This January 2017 buildup, we are told, is in response to a Russian action in Crimea of January 2014. The alert reader will have noticed that critics of Russia in recent years, virtually without exception, condemn Moscow's Crimean action and typically nothing else. Could that be because they have nothing else to condemn about Russia's foreign policy? At the same time they invariably fail to point out what preceded the Russian action the overthrow, with Washington's indispensable help, of the democratically-elected, Moscow-friendly Ukrainian government, replacing it with an anti-Russian, neo-fascist (literally) regime, complete with Nazi salutes and swastika-like symbols.
Ukraine and Georgia, both of which border Russia, are all that's left to complete the US/NATO encirclement. And when the US overthrew the government of Ukraine, why shouldn't Russia have been alarmed as the circle was about to close yet tighter? Even so, the Russian military appeared in Ukraine only in Crimea, where the Russians already had a military base with the approval of the Ukrainian government. No one could have blocked Moscow from taking over all of Ukraine if they wanted to.
Yet, the United States is right. Russia is a threat. A threat to American world dominance. And Americans can't shake their upbringing. Here's veteran National Public Radio newscaster Cokie Roberts bemoaning Trump's stated desire to develop friendly relations with Russia: "This country has had a consistent policy for 70 years towards the Soviet Union and Russia, and Trump is trying to undo that." Heavens! Nuclear war would be better than that!
"Let me issue and control a nation's money and I care not who writes the laws. - Mayer Rothschild
"Civil disobedience is not our problem. Our problem is civil obedience! People are obedient in the face of poverty, starvation, stupidity, war, and cruelty. Our problem is that grand thieves are running the country. That's our problem!" - Howard Zinn
"If there is no struggle there is no progress. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and never will" - Frederick Douglass
Quote:Would you like to know what really happened in Donbass recently?
A week before the outbreak of fighting, over 10 parliamentarians had left the ruling coalition in the Verkhovna Rada. As a result, only 212 people were left in the coalition. According to the Ukrainian constitution, the coalition must have at least 226 members, otherwise the president is required to disband the Verkhovna Rada and call for a new election. This could in turn end with Poroshenko's impeachment or an early election.
Then suddenly fierce fighting breaks out in Donbass the worst since August 2015. And yet for some reason we don't see thousands of soldiers marching on Donetsk like we did two years ago, but only groups of 20-30 people. For several days they walk towards their own death. Strange? Not at all! Poroshenko doesn't care for Donetsk or Lugansk. The only thing that he wants is to hold on to his presidential post. 230 Ukrainian soldiers have given up their lives so Poroshenko could stay in power. When will Ukrainians realize that the oligarchs who rule their country are willing to slaughter as many people they want in order to protect their money?
I must say, this made me stand to attention...
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
Quote:Something interesting is happening in Russia. The recent murder of Givi is attracting A LOT of attention from the main media outlets, much more than any of the other murders of Novorussian commanders. Furthermore, a majority of the key people invited to express their opinion generally seem to agree on a number of conclusions:
Poroshenko is pretty much gone and finished.
The Ukronazis have all but officially declared Minsk-2 dead.
The Urkonazis have all but officially declared that they are at war with Russia
The Urkonazis don't want any negotiated solution
The Urkonazis have now decided that an military attack on Novorussia is the only solution
Interestingly, the actual amount of Ukronazi artillery shelling has actually gone down, very significantly, during the last 48 hours, and yet by all reports the Novorussians remain in a state of pre-war. If the purpose of the murder of "Givi" was to demoralize the Novorussians then it achieved the exact opposite effect: the Novorussians are seething with anger.
[Sidebar: this time around those who criticized me for writing that the murder of "Motorola" is the symptom of a major Novorussian problem and that such a murder could not have happened without local accomplices are keeping a low profile this time around. This is not due so much to some sense of guilt for being so blind, but to the fact that in Russia and Novorussia the issue of local accomplices is now openly mentioned. Good better late than never. If a recognition that the Novorussian security and counter-intelligence services are in acute need of FSB help can save even a single live, say the one of Zakharchenio (who is now openly threatened by the Ukronazis as being the "next one"), then such a painful admission is well worth making]
Interestingly, the Novorussians also seem supremely confident. This is rather surprising considering that the Ukronazi forces vastly outnumber them (from 2:1 up to 4:1 depending on how you count). In interviews Novorussian commanders and frontline combatants all say that while the Ukronazis did use the past months to reequip and retrain, this will not be enough to make a difference.
Members of the Russian Duma have publicly declared that they are fed up with Kiev and that if the Ukronazis attack the Voentorg and Northern Wind spigot will be fully opened. At least one source reported that a large number of Cossacks had already crossed the border and were deployed inside the DNR/LNR.
Finally, one more theory being regularly mentioned is that the reason why Trump is not telling the Ukronazis to cool it and step back (assuming that this is why Trump tells them, which remains to be proven) is that he wants to them attack and fail and then blame them for rejecting the Minsk-2 Agreement. This is an interesting theory. For one, I am not so sure that the Americans did not tell the Ukies to cool it after all the shelling has dramatically decreased. This might also be a case of projecting the logic of the Kiev junta on the Americans. It is well known that Poroshenko loves to send the Nazis death squads (known as the "Dobrobat" or volunteer battalions) to the front lines to have the Russians kill them instead of having to do it himself. According to this theory, this is a win-win strategy for Poroshenko: he sends the "Dobrobats" to the frontline either then win and the credit goes to him or they lose (so far, that is what they have been doing) and he gets his most dangerous political foes killed by the Novorussians. That makes them into martyrs of the "heavenly hundred", Glory to the Ukraine, Glory to the heroes, etc. etc. and Poroshenko can mobilize around that. Maybe. Seems a plausible theory to me.
What is sure is that the opposition to Poroshenko (Liashko, Tymoshenko, Semenchenko, etc.) has gone completely mental and that they are pushing for an escalation be it by declaring a state of war in the Ukraine or by backing further Ukronazi attacks against Novorussians. As for the murder of Givi, it was welcomed by the entire Ukrainian political scene which rejoiced at the murder and even organized opinion polls to see whom the people wanted murdered next. The only exception to this was, believe it or not, Nadezhda Savchenko (yes, yes, the "Ukrainian Joan of Arc" and "hope of the Ukrainian nation") who accused Poroshenko of trying to unleash a massacre in the Donbass. The Urkonazis are outraged and the Russians are dumbfounded by Savchenko's political 180. As for the Novorussians, they position is hyper-pragmatic: "she is a murder and we despise her, but we will work with her if she wants to work towards peace or even towards exchanges of prisoners".
Yesterday I was listening to a Ukronazi politicians saying that the Russian media is preparing the Russian people for a Russian intervention in the Donbass. Well, I would not quite formulate it as he has, but I generally agree with his feeling. While it is not "the Kremlin" who is directing anybody, the general mood in Russia seems to be one of profound disgust, irritation and frustration with the junta in Kiev. And while I categorically exclude any large scale overt military intervention in the Donbass, I also see that the theory of a Russian peace-enforcement operation is openly floated in Moscow and often discussed. This, however, would require one of two things to happen first:
a Ukrainian attack on Russian, as opposed to Novorussian, forces somewhere
a UNSC Resolution authorizing such a peace enforcement operation
With Trump in the White House, there is at least a theoretical possibility that the UNSC might authorize such an operation, especially is that then places upon Russia the burden of re-building Novorussia. That, in fact, is something which neither Putin, nor most Russian, want. They are afraid of being tricked into taking Ukrainian territory under Russian control only to find out, as international law clearly mandates, that any occupying force is responsible for the administration of the territory under its control. The Russians feel that they are not the ones who created this bloody mess and that they therefore ought not to be the ones paying to fix it. They also know that the comparatively small Russian economy simply cannot shoulder such a financial burden.
There is a distinct possibility that 2017 will see a fundamental and crucial transformation of the war in the Ukraine. For one thing, whether the final Ukronazi attack every materializes or not, if it does it will be the last "hurray" of a decaying and dying Ukraine. Whether with or without direct Russian assistance, I predict that the Ukronazis will be comprehensively defeated. Once the military component is removed, by one way or another, the central question will become "how pays for the mess", with both the USA and Russia pointing their fingers are Europe in general and at Germany especially. If the final Urkonazis attack never materializes, then the regime will most probably implode internally at which point all key players will have so step in and agree on plan to rebuilt at least the very basic part of the Ukrainian society. Europe will have no choice but to accept yet another huge wave of refugees.
As for the Russians, it appears that their position is now as follows: the only option the regime in Kiev is to abide by the Minsk-2 Agreement. That, of course, would mean a "soft suicide" for the Urkonazi regime. If not, then a "hard suicide", including a possible limited Russian intervention or the recognition of the independence of the DNR/LNR by Moscow becomes a distinct possibility. Either way, the Russian/Novorussian patience appears to have reached its limit.
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
The DLPR nationalize Akhmetov's holdings and all other non-registered businesses in response to blockade.
Quote:As of today, March 1st, external management will be introduced at all unregistered Ukrainian enterprises on the territory of the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republic. This decision was taken by the leaders of the republics in response to the transport blockade of Donbass.
In late January, a group of veterans of the military operation in Donbass, including deputies of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine, blocked freight rail traffic from the Donbass republics at several points. The "blockaders" stated that in their opinion any trade with the self-proclaimed republics is illegal. The blockade has led to shortages of anthracite coal which is mined in the areas of Donbass uncontrolled by Kiev. In connection with this, Ukrainian authorities have been compelled to introduce emergency measures in the energy sector with the aim of saving resources. A number of industrial enterprises have had to stop production.
On Monday, February 27th, the heads of the LPR and DPR announced that the republics would cease coal deliveries to Kiev if the railway blockade continues. In addition, they promised that if by midnight of March 1st the blockade is not lifted, then external management will be introduced at all enterprises under Ukrainian jurisdiction working in the DPR and LPR.
Due to the transport blockade, a number of large enterprises around the frontline in Donbass have ceased production. Among them are the Enakievsky metallurgical factory in the DPR and the Krasnodonugol company in the LPR. Both of these factories are part of the Metinvest group belonging to Ukrainian oligarch Rinat Akhmetov.
The leader of the DPR, Alexander Zakharchenko, had warned at a press conference: "The Enakievsky metallurgical plant has ceased working, and some other companies need to be jumpstarted. If they do not register themselves by Wednesday, then they will all come under our complete control. This also includes stadiums and hotels." During emergency sessions of the DPR and LPR parliaments on Monday, the relevant amendments to legislation were adopted which allow for external control to be imposed on Ukrainian enterprises that are not registered on the territory of the republics by March 1st. The DPR and LPR have announced the creation of a special headquarters for controlling Ukrainian enterprises' transition to external management. The LPR has emphasized that the employees of these enterprises will keep their jobs.
The chairman of the LPR's People's Council, Vladimir Degtyarenko, said: "The established headquarters intends not to merely keep enterprises afloat,' but to contribute to their further development and reorientation towards Russia."….
Representatives of Donbass have explained that this decision on "nationalizing" Ukrainian enterprises was necessary. The primary task is resuming their work and saving jobs. But this, according to DPR head Alexander Zakharchenko, will take about two months. "In the short term we will have to rebuild industry and change markets. The main task is ensuring the smooth operation of enterprises and salaries and work for the workers of these enterprises," Zakharchenko said.
The Ministry of Industry and Trade of the DPR has stressed that there can be no doubts that the enterprises will be successfully reoriented from the Ukrainian market to markets in the Russian Federation and other countries. In addition, the transfer of all enterprises of non-residents to republican jurisdiction only broadens the foreign trade ties of the DPR. "Despite difficulties with the political recognition of the republic, our enterprises are quite successfully working with countries in the near and far abroad. For already more than two years, our manufactures have essentially begun the process of withdrawing from Ukrainian markets in favor of other countries. Both the state and business circles have some experience in this," the acting industry and trade minister, Aleksey Granovsky, affirmed.
Granovsky added that the republic is now exporting more than 50 types of goods among including from light industry, food products, chemical and pharmaceutical industries, and metallurgy.
Quote:Ukraine, after shooting herself in each foot with the blockade of Donbass, which the People's Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk (DPR and LPR) have turned back to her, Ukraine is engaged in pulling the trigger of the gun that she put on her head during the Maidan of 2014.
As the last few days and weeks go by, Vladimir Putin's plan for Ukraine, which many had considered as "soft" in his reactions to the massacre of Donbass population, is beginning to unfold.
But let's take the story from the beginning. During the Maidan, in February 2014, Viktor Yanukovych, the legitimately elected president of Ukraine, was overthrown by a coup d'etat, which all Western chancelleries have declared as legitimate. The big problem is that it was not, even with regard to the Ukrainian constitution.
Vladimir Oleinik, who until 2014, was a member of the Rada, wrote a complete report on the events (which was translated into English), where he shows that the February 2014 coup was totally unconstitutional.
To summarize: once Yanukovych left, the pro-Maidanists via the Rada changed the Ukrainian constitution, returning to an earlier version, in order to legitimize their coup. These changes were signed and published by Turchynov, who was considered as the acting President as chairman of the Rada. The problem is that until the publication of this new constitution in an official way, Turchynov is not entitled to validate it by its signature. It was up to Yanukovych's Prime Minister, Mykola Azarov, to validate it.
Moreover, the Rada adopted these constitutional changes with a resolution, not a law, which is also contrary to the Ukrainian constitution. And the deputies will not be able to claim that they did not know that what they were doing is illegal, because they put in this resolution "… that the compliance of the procedure of making amendments, established by the Ukrainian Constitution, the XIII chapter, is one of the basic conditions of the legitimacy of the constitutional order in Ukraine".
Furthermore, these amendments were based on a law of 2004 which was invalidated by the Ukrainian Constitutional Court. Application of decisions of the Ukrainian Constitutional Court is mandatory on the territory of Ukraine, and these decisions are final and can not be disputed. So, the new Ukrainian authorities violated the constitution, but they also violated a decision from the constitutional court, which is the only institution able to decide what is constitutional or not.
And if we take a closer look to the impeachment of Viktor Yanukovych, here we get the jackpot. The article N° 108 of the Ukrainian constitution details clearly the only four reasons which could justify an early termination of the mandate of the Ukrainian President:
1. resignation;
2. inability to exercise his or her powers for reasons of health;
3. removal from office in the case of impeachment;
4. death.
The problem is that Yanukovych did not resign, he had no health problems, and he is not dead (we better understand now why Yanukovych was chased in Eastern Ukraine after the coup d'etat to be assassinated, it would have solved the problem of the legitimacy of his impeachment; by saving him, Russia let a huge thorn in the foot of the current Ukrainian authorities).
The only legal way for the putschists was the impeachment procedure. The article N°111 of the Ukrainian constitution is very clear on the reasons which can justify such a procedure: "The president of Ukraine may be removed from office by the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime".
But it was not this reason which was referred to in order to impeach him. The decree states that "President of Ukraine V. Yanukovych has unconstitutionally removed himself from performing his constitutional powers as President and acting as one, and that he is not performing his duties".
However, such a point does not exist and is not foreseen in the Ukrainian constitution to impeach a president. Thus, the impeachment decree against Yanukovych is also completely unconstitutional.
Clearly, the current Ukrainian authorities are totally and undoubtedly illegitimate with regard to the Ukrainian constitution and law, and therefore Viktor Yanukovych is still the legitimate Ukrainian president.
And now you will tell me that, as the current authorities are supported by the international community, it does not change anything for Ukraine and Donbass. Until now, yes. But not anymore.
Because in their russophobic madness, and trying to prove that Yanukovych committed a crime of state treason to justify lately their coup d'etat, the current Ukrainian authorities just put themselves the gun on the head and are ready to pull the trigger.
Indeed, mid-January, some pro-Maidan media like Radio Svoboda, published an information known since 2014, but on which light was shed after the request by Ukraine to UN to provide a certified copy of the letter that Vitaly Churkin, the Russian representative, has shown during a meeting of the UN Security Council, on 4 March 2014.
[ATTACH=CONFIG]8991[/ATTACH]
On 6 January 2017, UN answered positively to the request, and provided a copy of the letter, which contains the following:
"As the legally elected President of Ukraine, I hereby make the following statement.
The events on the Maidan and the illegal seizure of power in Kyiv have brought Ukraine to the brink of civil war. Chaos and anarchy reign in the country, and people's lives, safety and human rights are under threat, particularly in the south-east and in Crimea. With the influence of Western countries, open acts of terror and violence are being perpetrated and people are being persecuted on political and linguistic grounds.
I therefore appeal to the President of Russia, V. V. Putin, to use the armed forces of the Russian Federation to restore law and order, peace and stability and to protect the people of Ukraine."
Yes, you read correctly. In March 2014, Viktor Yanukovych asked Russia, like Bashar al-Assad will do later, in September 2015, to intervene militarily in his country to restore order.
Then you will wonder why did Russia not do it? You have to remember that, at this moment, Russia has already the Crimean case to manage. Crimea, refusing the coup d'etat, has launched the organisation of the referendum asking if the inhabitants want to come back to Russia. Initially planned in May, the date of the referendum is advanced to 30 March, the very same day that Yanukovych wrote this letter, then the date will be advanced one more time to 16 March five days later.
When Churkin shows this letter in front of the UN Security Council, events in Crimea are accelerating in a way which is already difficult to control, and the Russian intervention to protect the peninsula inhabitants from the threats of Ukrainian neo-Nazis groups already allows the US and their valets to shout about Russian invasion.
If Russia would have answered to Yanukovych' request, it would have meant taking the responsibility on Ukraine, which is a money pit (without speaking about the political mess), while Russia does not want to play the role of world policeman; US and NATO would have had the prefect excuse to launch a war, and Russia already had to manage the Crimean case. After, it will be the frenzy, the return of Crimea is validated by the referendum, and situation in Donbass degenerates. And in Syria it was not much better. There were too many fronts to manage, and too much risks, both internally and internationally, Russia thus temporised.
The most urgent was to manage Crimea. A highly strategic point that Russia could not afford to lose. And faithful to the Russian tradition, the authorities of the country preferred to try to negotiate and discuss rather than to use weapons. This is the very essence of Minsk-1, then Minsk-2. The Russians, remembering what cost them the Second World War, prefer a bad deal to a good war.
And even if they know that Ukraine will never respect these agreements, like the deputy Anton Gerashchenko openly stated on air on TV channel 112:
"Let's immediately say that the Minsk Agreements were not implemented from the day they were signed in February 2015. This was a temporary measure on the side of the Ukraine and, I will be honest, a deliberate deception. Remember that the first Minsk Agreement was signed following the military disaster near Ilovaisk when we had no forces to defend the front from Donetsk to Mariupol. The second Minsk Agreement was signed following the treacherous Russian aggression on Debaltsevo and the formation of the "Debaltsevo Cauldron". These agreements are not international agreements or anything else." (translation by the Saker)
Unfortunately for Gerashchenko, since the UN resolution on these agreements, they are an international agreement, that Ukrainian authorities openly admit not to respect.
So, what could be Putin's plan? I will give you here my intuition, without any guarantee that it exactly reflects what he thinks (it would be pretentious from me), or what he did, but what I think is simply highly plausible.
As he had to manage several serious crisis, Putin chose to temporise, be patient, and negotiate to delay the use of weapons, while letting his opponent reveal his game, his true face and his intentions, and offer on a silver plate the stick to be beaten with.
In front of Trump's failure to block the neoconservative forces, Putin considered that patience has lasted long enough, and that the fight was inevitable. Thus he now needs to give himself the means to win it. And for this, as the good lawyer and judoka he is, all the preliminary preparation done by Russia can now be used. Including the rescue of Yanukovych.
It began with increasingly firm warnings against Ukraine over any attempt to break the Minsk agreements. Then, facing the new escalation on the front in late January-early February, and the blockade of Donbass, it was the recognition of the official documents of the DPR and LPR in order to open up the two republics from a humanitarian and economic point of view, while recognising by the tangent the legitimacy of the authorities issuing these documents (which will be very useful for the rest of the plan).
This maneuver also aims to be a final warning to Ukraine in order to avoid the bloodbath. If she still wants to settle the Donbass conflict by force as claimed by more and more Ukrainian officials, then Russia could well use its major asset: Yanukovych, and the fact that legally he is still President of Ukraine. Whatever the Western chancelleries say.
But then, why is it Ukraine which has published this old story of letter to UN, and not Russia? I think that it is also a part of Putin's plan. If Russia would have published this story, westerners could have accused her to try to justify in advance her future invasion of Ukraine. But, if it is Ukraine which comes out with this old sea snake, then nobody could say anything against it if Russia uses it after (and I think Russia pushed Ukraine to comes out with this by cleverly providing information to the most russophobic forces of the country).
If Ukraine launches a new offensive, and if the Russian intervention is inevitable, then like al-Assad in September 2015, Yanukovych could repeat his request of military intervention of Russia in Ukraine, by limiting it to Donbass, in order to stop the bloodbath while not imposing a too heavy financial burden on Russia. A request which would be accepted this time by Russia, which would have then the legal basis to intervene under international law, and the moral right to do it after having let more than two years to Ukraine to implement the peace agreements she signed, and never respected.
The Western chancelleries will howl, as during the war in South Ossetia in 2008, but in fact, from a legal point of view, they will not be able to do anything about it, and Russia will be able to confront them with their inaction in enforcing the Minsk agreements, to silence the most reluctant.
And if, in nearly three years, the Ukrainian army did not succeed to defeat a people's militia, I let you imagine in which state it will end in front of the Russian army. Then Russia will be able to openly recognize the DPR and LPR, or integrate them into the Russian Federation according to the choice of the population, thanks to the first stone of legitimization set by the recognition of the documents and therefore the authorities of the two Republics (if the authorities are legitimate, their acts are also legitimate, including organising a referendum).
This is how, with patience and determination, Russia just put the current Ukrainian authorities "checkmate" with their active participation. As the Viking proverb says: "By making laws you build a state, and by violating them you destroy it". The new Ukrainian authorities, and the neoconservatives should have meditated on this proverb.
"There are three sorts of conspiracy: by the people who complain, by the people who write, by the people who take action. There is nothing to fear from the first group, the two others are more dangerous; but the police have to be part of all three,"
hock::::commie:::
: