Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Thu Jan 20, 2022 2:09 pm

Donbass in anticipation of a big war: Kiev is doing everything to worsen the situation

Image

In Ukraine, they once again started talking about the need to resolve the conflict in Donbass peacefully, and even touched upon the possibility of holding direct negotiations with representatives of the LDNR. But while analysts are evaluating how realistic this is, the current situation at the front itself provides answers to all questions.

On the eve of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, the outskirts of Horlivka were once again shelled. Small arms and sniper weapons were fired at the village of mine 6/7 from Ukrainian positions. The fact that they were shooting at the residential sector on the Feast of the Epiphany does not surprise the local residents at all, on the contrary, it was expected. Massive shelling was expected here at Christmas, but then the situation was relatively calm.

"As soon as some kind of holiday, we immediately wait. New Year, Christmas, on Miner's Day, we always get shelled!" - says a resident of Gorlovka Galina.

According to her, on the eve of the holidays, the residents of the front-line village were seriously worried about the current situation, expecting massive strikes. For several days in a row, the Ukrainian anthem was clearly heard from the positions of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. As local residents later suggested, the soldiers stationed there used the loudspeakers that were equipped with the railway station, which is now under the control of Kiev.

“At first I didn’t understand, and then they call me, they say, do you hear? I listened - the anthem of Ukraine. Did they turn on us, or did they cheer themselves up?” - Galina asks a rhetorical question.

It is worth adding that this is far from the first case of such provocations from the Ukrainian side. For several years in a row, on Victory Day, Nazi military marches have been played through loudspeakers on this sector of the front.

In general, given that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are not currently conducting targeted shelling of the civilian sector of the Republic, but the intensity of the fire is not decreasing, it is quite reasonable that many people assume that Kiev creates the effect of presence and does not allow its military personnel to relax in the first place.

What is the Ukrainian army preparing for? A possible answer was voiced by the People's Militia Department of the DPR, saying that they have data on the preparation of terrorist attacks and sabotage at key civilian infrastructure facilities near the demarcation line. Gorlovka, Yasinovataya, Donetsk and Dokuchaevsk, as well as front-line settlements located in these areas, may be under attack.

At the same time, as Eduard Basurin, an official presenting the defense department of the DPR, told Vladimir Solovyov on the air, the key goal of all these actions for Kiev is to accuse the Russian Federation of "invasion". This is a completely logical assumption against the backdrop of all the latest statements made both in Ukraine and outside the West. Terrorist activity of Ukraine in Donbass is not a new phenomenon. The past year was notable for a whole series of attacks on the life support facilities of the Republic, and therefore there is every reason to assume that 2022 will pass in the same vein.

At the same time, Kiev continues to conduct rhetoric that is diametrically opposed to real actions. While the political leadership of Ukraine talks about its commitment to the peace process, the echelons of military equipment continue to go to the Donbass. While in Kiev they are discussing the possibility of a direct dialogue with the Republics, on the front lines of the Armed Forces of Ukraine they are daily firing at civilian settlements in the DPR and LPR.
Local residents of the frontline zone insist: the more peacefully they speak in Ukraine, the worse the situation at the front becomes, and therefore everything that is happening now makes us prepare for the worst.

Author: Georgy Medvedev

https://novorosinform.org/donbass-v-ozh ... 87759.html

************************************

Readiness number one: DPR citizens about military escalation in Donbass

Image

Over the past week, Kiev has increased the number of shellings, despite the truce, which melts like ice under the sun. The shelling of the positions of the People’s Militia of the DPR near Donetsk and in the Yasinovatsky direction with a large caliber by the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as well as the sounding of a number of sectors of the front by Ukrainian saboteurs, is an indicator that the sluggish Donbass war is rapidly developing into an active phase.

Frontline zone - special living conditions


For today's Nazi Ukraine, the main problem lies in the very fact of the existence of people's republics. And Kiev, by all its actions, clearly confirms that it intends to wage a war to destroy them.

Residents of Donbass, who actually live on the front line, understand the seriousness of the current situation.
According to Victoria K., a resident of the front-line Petrovsky district, whose husband is fighting for the republic, cases have recently become more frequent when explosive devices disguised as some things or household items are dropped from UAVs.

"Small bombs can be disguised as anything. They can be placed in things, a first-aid kit. There were several cases when our soldiers were injured if they inadvertently stepped on such disguised explosives. This happened, for example, before the holidays, when one soldier stepped on some kind of bundle, and it exploded. Another (fighter) picked up a first-aid kit, there was also a bomb. His armor (body armor) saved him, he would not have survived . "

Donchanka said that disguised explosives could be scattered not only in the frontline zone, but also in any region of the DPR.

“It’s not a fact that Ukrainian saboteurs will not penetrate here, who, by the way, are repeatedly advanced to our positions. As if they are testing their strength…, ” she added.

The harsh time dictates special rules of behavior in the frontline, vigilance, caution. And at the same time, many residents of the front-line areas have a tense expectation of a certain denouement. Especially when the Armed Forces of Ukraine, having closely approached residential buildings, as in the suburbs of Dokuchaevsk, are constantly firing to kill from various types of weapons.
Many people living in the frontline zones of Donetsk, Gorlovka, Yasinovataya fear that one day, upon waking up, they may see Ukrainian flags due to the surrender of positions by the People's Militia of the DPR.

According to Inna S., whose relatives live in a front-line village near Dokuchaevsk, this has already happened in Staromarievka.

"The village was in a neutral zone, and, in the end, it was occupied by the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Then I read somewhere an explanation that there (near the village) there were allegedly uncomfortable positions for our police. Therefore, they relocated somewhere else. But Well, it’s easy to say… Our people lived in the village, who received humanitarian aid from the DPR, and now it’s not known what happened to them…”, she said.

The woman lives near the village of Trudovskie in the Petrovsky district of Donetsk and fears that the village will repeat the fate of Staromaryivka.

“The worst thing for the residents of the village is if the positions are surrendered according to some military plans, and then they are recaptured. I heard that in our red zone near Donetsk there is no influence of the commandant’s office at all, that is, there are no military ones, and there are no defensive structures. This means that, for example, the tanks of the Armed Forces of Ukraine may not meet any technical barriers that were removed even under Zakharchenko (the first head of the DPR), 25 kilometers and on Lenin Square .... Do you understand what it is? ” she says.

The awareness of the female half of the population of the Trudovskys in military matters is typical for the Donbass, where even children distinguish by a special whistle what weapon a projectile was fired from.
The so-called buffer (neutral) zone, where a number of settlements are located, is one of the most vulnerable places. The periodic deployment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine to this territory demonstrates a clear unwillingness of Kiev to comply with the Minsk agreements.

To date, the Ukrainian Armed Forces have captured more than 10 settlements in the neutral zone in the Donbass.

When diplomacy is exhausted

At the same time, the transfer of Ukrainian equipment to the frontline and its concentration in different areas, including in the area of ​​the capital of the DPR, as well as in the southern direction, intensified in the region. The soldiers of the DPR tell about it.

"It feels like the Armed Forces of Ukraine are actively preparing ... for an offensive. So far, apparently, there has been no political will in this regard. But now, every night you can hear how their (Ukrainian) equipment is moving along the highway connecting Avdiivka and Krasnoarmeysk. Previously, they were against us there was one brigade of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, and now there are two of them. And they (the Armed Forces of Ukraine) have significantly increased the number of snipers equipped with thermal imagers, night sights and large-caliber rifles. In a word, the enemy is strengthening and is only waiting for an order from Kiev, "said one of the servicemen of the People's Militia DNR.

According to him, the passage of Ukrainian columns with infantry fighting vehicles, howitzers and tanks was also repeatedly observed. A clear strengthening of the enemy’s positions is indicated by an increase in the number of OZM mines that the DPR People’s Militia fighters now constantly find near their positions.

In a word, the military situation clearly shows that diplomatic methods have finally reached a dead end and, apparently, have exhausted themselves.

A few days earlier, the head of the DPR, Denis Pushilin, ordered a number of control measures to be carried out by the mobilization department of the DPR. From now on, this work will include local governments, which have already begun to develop a set of various measures regarding the mobilization agenda and, accordingly, the defense of the republic.

It should be noted that in the DPR the law on mobilization training was adopted in 2015, a combat-ready army was created in the person of the People's Militia, and intelligence and other bodies included in the defense department were formed. Those. the very fact of meeting the enemy in a non-combat-ready (not mobilized) state of peacetime is excluded.

On the current state of affairs in terms of readiness to repel the offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, if it nevertheless follows in the interval of the end of winter - the beginning of spring, the People's Militia fighters speak cautiously.

“In military terms, based on known facts, Kiev has about 13 brigades against us. And the length of the front reaches about 400 km. This is one brigade for a little less than 40 km. It is clear that they are now building up their grouping, delivered new brigades, while the old ones were not removed. Previously, they had a rotation by brigade, new ones replaced the old ones. As a result, there are about 125 thousand of them (the Armed Forces of Ukraine) at the line of contact ... " , - said one of the fighters of the People's Militia of the DPR.

According to the serviceman, it is not known what tactics the Armed Forces will use.

"They can, for example, throw one brigade into battle, and then try to outflank our positions from the flanks ... Let's see how they behave. I only know for sure that we will not give up our land ," the fighter added.

Let's rely on the internal reserve?

In a period of military escalation, not only the strengthening of the army, capable of defending the republic, comes to the fore. One of the important topics is properly organized work with the local population, which must be ready not only to endure the hardships of the war, but also to fight against Nazi tyranny.

As the military threat grows, the importance of ideological values ​​in society, and the Donbass is no exception, is increasing dramatically. The need for clear answers to the basic ideological questions "who are we?", "Where are we from?" and "where are we going?" becomes a powerful factor in the struggle for national-state survival. However, the overall picture of the coverage of the population in the republic, which defends the right to freedom, emerges rather modest.

So, since 2019, there has been a People’s Druzhina in the DPR, which at one time pretty much frightened the propagandists of Radio Liberty. Now it would not bother her to patrol the streets more often, so that the population in the same Donetsk knows that such a voluntary association exists.

In the DPR, a public organization "Military-patriotic movement "Young Guard-Yunarmia" was also created, uniting a number of patriotic clubs. The association is engaged in search work to perpetuate the memory of the defenders of the Fatherland, volunteer work, including assistance to veterans of the Great Patriotic War, conduct local history meetings, etc. "Young Guard-Youth Army" exists in the LPR.

Luhansk residents have also developed a military-patriotic program of additional education "Volunteer", aimed at teaching young people directly military disciplines.
These social movements, apparently, due to their young age, have not yet acquired a mass character.

There is a significant stratum of former militias in the DPR, whose invaluable combat experience could be useful in the so-called "truce" time. However, we have to admit that in the people's republics, fighters who often return from the war feel a certain detachment from the state from them.

“In 2014, we felt like we were part of making history,” one militia friend told me. “Now I’m at war again… only with bureaucrats on various everyday problems.”

That cult of the defender of the Fatherland, which existed in the pre-war USSR and exists in some states that defend their freedom, is, alas, not observed in the republics.

The Law "On Participants in Combat Actions", according to which the militias were to be given equal rights with the fighters of the "NM", as well as amendments to the Law "On the Social Protection of War Veterans", according to the testimony of the militias themselves, do not fully operate, and many who fought with the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the first years of the war, were actually out of work.

Even the issuance of relevant documents - certificates of combatants, a primary and necessary measure, was taken only in the sixth year of the war, which looks rather strange for a republic where the actual border with the aggressor country runs a few kilometers from the capital.

Natalya Zalevskaya

https://novorosinform.org/gotovnost-nom ... 87586.html

All above Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 22, 2022 3:03 pm

U.S. - Russian Talks Show Signs Of Progress

It feels weird to watch the delusional talk of the United States towards Russia.

How can people who are as wrong as Biden and Blinken be at the top of a state?

President Biden said on Wednesday that he now expected President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia would order an invasion of Ukraine, delivering a grim assessment that the diplomacy and threat of sanctions issued by the United States and its European allies were unlikely to stop the Russian leader from sending troops across the border.
“Do I think he’ll test the West, test the United States and NATO, as significantly as he can? Yes, I think he will,” Mr. Biden told reporters during a nearly two-hour news conference in the East Room of the White House. He added, almost with an air of fatalism: “But I think he will pay a serious and dear price for it that he doesn’t think now will cost him what it’s going to cost him. And I think he will regret having done it.”

Asked to clarify whether he was accepting that an invasion was coming, Mr. Biden said: “My guess is he will move in. He has to do something.”


Has Biden even once asked the very simple question: "Why would Russia want to do that?"

Retired ambassador M.K. Bhadrakumar points out that even U.S. allies do not believe Biden's bullshit:

It is an open secret that in October and November, France, Germany and some others in the EU questioned Washington’s warnings that Russia’s military buildup near Ukraine could signal an imminent invasion. France and Germany even opposed activating NATO’s crisis response planning system and had to be persuaded to relent.
Above all, Europeans have no desire to bankroll Ukraine which is a black hole and failing state. It doesn’t make sense to them when the US intelligence brags in the media that they’d bleed Russian troops in a guerrilla war in the middle of Europe. Fundamentally, all this dovetails into a pervasive scepticism among the European elite regarding the Biden administration.


In a recent interview Sergej Karaganov, who heads the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, explained why invading the Ukraine is very dumb idea:

[O]f course, we absolutely do not need to fight for Ukraine to the last Ukrainian, we certainly do not want to fight there. All this squealing about the fact that we are going to capture Kiev, it is about nothing. Yes, our military is standing at the Ukrainian border, but only so that on the other side it does not occur to anyone to break into the Donbass. And the capture of Ukraine in our military plans, I'm sure, is not included. If only for the reason that capturing a country that is castrated economically, morally and intellectually, a country with a destroyed infrastructure and an embittered population is the worst-case scenario. The worst thing America can do for us is to give us Ukraine in the form they brought it to.
So is that what Biden and Blinken are trying to do? Give the Ukraine to Russia to create more problems for it? No, I don't think they are smart enough to strategize that far.


Russia is not at all concerned about the Ukraine. It is concerned about NATO in Ukraine. This is not only about the Ukraine becoming a NATO member. The chances of that are low. But it is about NATO and the U.S. determining Ukrainian policies, sending 'trainers' and weapon systems and enticing fascist to attack Russia.

Pepe Escobar @RealPepeEscobar - 8:14 UTC · Jan 21, 2022
What NATOstan sent to 404:
Empire: Javelins + $300 million.
Turkey - Bayraktar drones.
Brits - NLAW complexes.
Baltics - MANPADS.
Czechs - artillery shells.
Canada - SWAT + frigate.
Wait and see what happens when Russia launches the first Iskander.


That has to stop. But invading Ukraine is not the way to do that.

It requires direct pressure on the United States to move away from its confrontational course. Karaganov already senses that Russia is on its way to achieve that:

Even from recent conversations, it is noticeable that our Western partners have begun to retreat. They are already proposing dialogues between the military, negotiations on arms limitation - something that until recently was categorically rejected. So maybe we can agree on something.

Today's talks in Geneva between Blinken and Lavrov seem to have moved into the right direction:

Russia's foreign minister and his US counterpart have held what they called "frank" talks to try to reduce the chance of a wider conflict in Ukraine.
Sergei Lavrov repeated denials that a huge Russian force assembled near Ukraine's borders would be used to invade Ukraine.

Antony Blinken said America would respond severely to any invasion.
...
For Mr Blinken, the talks were "frank and substantive" while for Mr Lavrov, they were also "frank" with an agreement to "have a reasonable dialogue".

"I hope emotions will decrease," Mr Lavrov added.

Mr Blinken warned his Russian counterpart of a "united, swift and severe" response if Russia invaded.

Speaking after the talks, he said the US was prepared to pursue possible means of addressing Russian concerns in the spirit of reciprocity.
...
For his part, Mr Lavrov described the talks as open and useful but he accused Nato of working against Russia. He reiterated Moscow's position that it had "never threatened the Ukrainian people" and had no plans to attack Ukraine.

He also accused the Ukrainian government of using "state terrorism" against the rebels in the east and "sabotaging" the Minsk peace agreements on the conflict there.


Russia's foreign minister said the US would send "written responses" to all of Russia's proposals next week but Mr Blinken only said America hoped to share its "concerns and ideas in more detail in writing next week".

The talks between the two diplomats came just a day after Russia unveiled plans for naval drills involving more than 140 warships and more than 60 aircraft, seen as a show of strength.

Russia also moved some of its army brigades and airforce elements from eastern Siberia to Belarus where they will take part in exercises until February 20. This will complicate any plans Kiev might have for attacks on Donbass while Putin is in Beijing to watch the Olympics. The military authorities in Donbass today reported of new signs for such a move under the pretext of a false flag event (video - click CC for English translations).


While Russia moves its forces and fleets Blinken tried to impress Lavrov with some stupid stunts.

The U.S. Treasury sanctioned two sitting members of Ukraine's parliament for pursuing opposition policies. The State Department called that Taking Action to Expose and Disrupt Russia’s Destabilization Campaign in Ukraine. It also published two laughable new sections on its websites. One is about Russia's alleged Top Five Persistent Disinformation Narratives in which the U.S. denies to be behind the various 'color revolutions' of the last decades. I bet Victoria 'fuck the EU' Nuland came up with that stupidity. The other is United with Ukraine, a collection of nonsensical and empty Blinken quotes and Ukrainian nationalist photography.

Lavrov was not amused about either:

The Russian foreign ministry mocked those statements, saying they must have been prepared by an Orwellian “Ministry of Truth,” and Lavrov caustically dismissed them in his remarks to Blinken, saying he hoped the State Department had also spent time drafting responses to Russia’s demands.
“I do hope that not everyone in the State Department was working on those materials and there were some who were working on the essence of our proposals and their substance,” he said.


That nicely sets out the contrast.

Blinken is all about show, Lavrov is all about substance.

Blinken also felt a need to correct his boss:

Blinken took pains to stress U.S. unity with its allies in opposition to a possible Russian invasion, something that took an apparent hit earlier this week when U.S. President Joe Biden drew widespread criticism for saying retaliation for Russian aggression in Ukraine would depend on the details and that a “minor incursion” could prompt discord among Western allies.
On Thursday, Biden sought to clarify his comments by cautioning that any Russian troop movements across Ukraine’s border would constitute an invasion and that Moscow would “pay a heavy price” for such an action.

“I’ve been absolutely clear with President Putin,” Biden said. “He has no misunderstanding: Any, any assembled Russian units move across the Ukrainian border, that is an invasion.”

Russia has denied it is planning an invasion and instead accused the West on Thursday of plotting “provocations” in Ukraine, citing the delivery of weapons to the country by British military transport planes in recent days.

There will be no 'Russian invasion' of Ukraine. Should Donbass be attacked, Russian missile artillery, stationed in Russia, will demonstrate sufficient reach to destroy any Ukrainian units near the frontline.

The U.S. president should be more concerned about Cuban invitations for harbor visits of Russian missile submarines than about some wreak of a country on Russia's border.

However, the U.S. and Russia are talking, which is good, and it seems that Russia has already achieved some of its aims. The process will continue.

We will have to wait for the written U.S. response to Russia's demands to see in which direction it will develop.

Posted by b on January 21, 2022 at 18:08 UTC | Permalink

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/01/u ... .html#more

'b' is way too 'pro' Putin, nonetheless, leaving aside the fawning on this counter-revolutionary regime, his opposition to US imperialist designs is solid. The bit about Russia wanting no part in absorbing a grotesquely failed state is absolutely true. Already they complain about the expense of helping to keep the Donbass republics afloat. Again, there will be no invasion. The point about Russia being able to strike any Nazi incursion is a good one: in the 2014 fighting the utter destruction of two Nazi mechanized forces attempting to surround the republics was almost surely accomplished by artillery from within Russia, something I doubt Ukrainian generals have forgotten though their imperial masters might not give a fuck about massacred Ukrainian troops, might even desire it.

***************************************



Emergency Statement On Ukraine Invasion From Anti Government (DPR) Military.
2,016 viewsJan 21, 2022

Patrick Lancaster

The situation of the Ukraine conflict has been heating up. Today in Donetsk the capital of the Donetsk People's Republic I and other journalists met with the official representative of the DPR People's Millitia Edward Bassurin as he made an Emergency Statement On Ukraine building up there military forces on the contact line and preparing a false flag attack in the pretext of an Invasion. As I have reported before this is exactly what the USA is accusing Russia of aswell. These are some very dangerous times for Donbass but no matter what happens now my team and I are here on the ground in Donetsk to show you what is really happening and as always bring my reports to you with full Russian and English translations

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fnrP8XNKIKM
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Mon Jan 24, 2022 3:39 pm

Pushilin: Kiev is pulling troops to the line of contact in Donbass

Image

According to the head of the DPR, Denis Pushilin, Ukrainian troops are preparing for an offensive in the Donbass, pulling up forces and heavy artillery to the borders with the republic.

He noted that the "high alert" mode was declared in the DPR, because, as the Donetsk politician said, "anything can be expected from Kiev."

“The equipment is being pulled up, tank crews are being prepared, and in those places of deployment where they were assigned, artillery and tank crews are concentrated there,” RIA Novosti quotes Pushilin .

The head of the republic added that the "Smerch" and "Uragan" fire support systems of the Armed Forces of Ukraine "cause serious concerns" as well. During the years of the war, Donbass has repeatedly faced their destructive impact.

Pushilin also recalled the American Javelin anti-tank missiles, which are available to the Ukrainian security forces.

"The media load that accompanies all these events is also important - I mean the pulling of foreign journalists to the line of contact from Ukraine," he said.

According to the head of the DPR, the foreign military "already near the positions almost openly" take photos, "posting them on the Web."

Earlier it was reported that Kiev deployed about 120,000 security forces in the Donbass. The arrival of Ukrainian military equipment in the area of ​​the city of Shchastya was also reported in the neighboring Lugansk People's Republic.

https://novorosinform.org/pushilin-kiev ... 88078.html

*******************************************

Ukrainian army brought equipment for mine clearance in Donbass – DPR

Image

The official representative of the People's Militia Department of the DPR, Eduard Basurin, announced that Kiev was preparing an attack on the Donbass.

As confirmation of his words, Basurin noted the transfer to the line of contact of special equipment aimed at the rapid clearance of Donbass. The Armed Forces of Ukraine in the shortest possible time are able to create clearings for the development of the offensive.

"We have irrefutable facts about the JFO command pulling UR-77 self-propelled rocket-propelled rocket launchers to the line of contact, as well as about reinforcing enemy forward units and assault groups with UR-83P2 portable mine-clearing units," Basurin said during a traditional briefing.

It is noted that such engineering means can make it possible to create passages 6-14 meters wide, destroying mine-explosive barriers during offensive operations.

https://novorosinform.org/ukrainskaya-a ... 88058.html

***********************************************

In the DPR revealed the plans of the Armed Forces of Ukraine

Image

The Department of the People's Militia of the Republic announced the upcoming offensive of the Ukrainian army in the Donbass.

According to the ministry, the Armed Forces of Ukraine are actively reinforcing assault groups, as well as redeploying units.

"We recorded the holding in the Ukrainian armed formations located in the zone of the so-called joint forces operation, measures to prepare for the offensive," RIA Novosti reported.

It is noted that in the units of the first separate tank brigade, in the tank battalions of the 53rd and 54th mechanized brigades, the 58th separate motorized infantry brigade of the Ukrainian security forces, vacations for all personnel were suspended, commanders were ordered to be in temporary deployment points.

In addition, the NM DPR announced the preparation of a provocation with the help of specially trained saboteurs.

“Reliable information has been received about the arrival of 40 servicemen of the third separate special forces regiment to carry out provocations in the Avdiivka area, who had previously been trained under the guidance of instructors from the UK at the 142nd SOF training center,” the ministry said.

They added that in the event of aggression, the DPR is ready to give a serious rebuff, after which the Ukrainian army will be critically damaged.

https://novorosinform.org/v-dnr-raskryl ... 88059.html

All above Google Translator

***************************************************

An Amateur Look At “Russian Build Up” Photographic Evidence By Walrus.
Posted on January 22, 2022 by walrus

Western Media talk knowledgeably about a “Russian Build Up on the Border with Ukraine”. These stories are often accompanied by one of two satellite images which purport to show evidence of the same.

The first of these, as used by Politico, correctly identifies the location of this vehicle park as Yelnya. However the image is cropped so you cannot see the extensive barracks and infrastructure which identify this as a permanent military base constructed no later than 2016. Furthermore Politico defines “near” the Ukraine border as within 150 miles for that is Yelnyas distance from it.

https://static.politico.com/dims4/defau ... e1-773.jpg

The second image used is located at Soloti – again the image is cropped so the extensive permanent barracks and infrastructure are excluded. This base is about 30km from the Ukraine border but it has been there since 2005!
https://live-production.wcms.abc-cdn.ne ... height=575
Details of the formations based at these locations are available here:

https://www.gfsis.org/maps/russian-military-forces

I have not included details of the sizes of the ammunition dumps that would be required to support any “invasion” of Ukraine. They would stick out a mile but are invisible today.

IMO, the “Russian Build Up” story is rubbish.

https://turcopolier.com/an-amateur-look ... by-walrus/

********************

<snip>

According to Michael Kofman, director of Russia studies at CNA, an Arlington, Virginia-based research firm, 55,000 of those troops have been stationed at the border, on permanent bases, for a long time. The other 45,000, who have reportedly been mobilized from other areas of Russia, actually haven’t moved. Rather, their equipment—tanks, armored personnel carriers, artillery, tactical missiles, and so forth—have been sent to areas near Ukraine.

(more...)

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/202 ... putin.html

***************************************

German navy chief resigns over controversial comments on Putin, Crimea

Issued on: 22/01/2022 - 22:15
Modified: 22/01/2022 - 22:17

Image
German navy's rear Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach at the United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL) on December 18, 2019, at Camp Castle in the Port of Limassol, Cyprus. © Tobias Schwarz, AFP (file photo)

Germany's navy chief stepped down on Saturday after drawing criticism for saying Russian President Vladimir Putin deserved respect and that Kyiv would never win back annexed Crimea from Moscow.

"I have asked Defence Minister Christine Lambrecht to relieve me from my duties with immediate effect," Vice Admiral Kay-Achim Schoenbach said in a statement. "The minister has accepted my request."

Schoenbach made the remarks to a think-tank discussion in India on Friday, and video was published on social media. The comments came at a sensitive time as Russia has amassed tens of thousands of troops on Ukraine's borders.

Diplomatic efforts are focused on preventing an escalation. Russia denies it is planning to invade Ukraine.

Vice Admiral Kay-Achim Schönbach: "We need #Russia to counter #China. #Putin and Russia deserves respect, #Ukraine has nothing to do with #NATO and #Crimea has been permanently lost."

Today he resigned as German Navy Chief. pic.twitter.com/e0SfHpxEWo

— Luka Duvnjak (@Luka_Duvnjak) January 22, 2022


In New Delhi, Schoenbach, speaking in English, said Putin seeks to be treated as an equal by the West.

"What he (Putin) really wants is respect," Schoenbach said.

"And my God, giving someone respect is low cost, even no cost... It is easy to give him the respect he really demands – and probably also deserves," Schoenbach said, calling Russia an old and important country.

Schoenbach conceded Russia's actions in Ukraine needed to be addressed. But he added that "the Crimea peninsula is gone, it will never come back, this is a fact," contradicting the joint Western position that Moscow's annexation of the peninsula from Ukraine in 2014 cannot be accepted and must be reversed.

Apologies

Prior to Schoenbach's resignation, the defence ministry publicly criticised his remarks, saying they did not reflect Germany's position in either content or wording.

"My rash remarks in India ... are increasingly putting a strain on my office," he said. "I consider this step (the resignation) necessary to avert further damage to the German navy, the German forces, and, in particular, the Federal Republic of Germany."

The Ukrainian Foreign Ministry had called on Germany to publicly reject the navy chief's comments. Schoenbach's comments could impair Western efforts to de-escalate the situation, Ukraine said in a statement.

"Ukraine is grateful to Germany for the support it has already provided since 2014, as well as for the diplomatic efforts to resolve the Russian-Ukrainian armed conflict. But Germany's current statements are disappointing and run counter to that support and effort," Ukraine's Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said separately in tweet.

(REUTERS)

https://www.france24.com/en/europe/2022 ... tin-crimea

"I didn't mean to say it but I meant what I said."....

*******************************************************************************

Chinese Embassy in Russia debunks US media claim Xi requested ‘Putin not invade Ukraine’

The embassy added that China’s position on the Ukrainian issue is consistent and clear

MOSCOW, January 23. /TASS/. A Bloomberg publication that Chinese President Xi Jinping allegedly asked Russian President Vladimir Putin not to invade Ukraine during the Olympic Games in Beijing is a hoax and provocation, China’s embassy in Russia told TASS on Saturday.

"A Bloomberg publication that the Chinese President asked the Russian President not to invade Ukraine during the Olympics in order not to spoil the event is a hoax and provocation," the embassy said in a statement.

The embassy added that China’s position on the Ukrainian issue is consistent and clear.

"The Chinese side advocates resolving differences by means of dialogue and consultations in the framework of the Minsk agreements," the Chinese diplomatic mission said.

Earlier Bloomberg reported referring to a diplomat in Beijing that Xi Jinping could ask Putin not to invade Ukraine during the Games that will be held in China from February 4 to 20.

Russian Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called the publication "a special information operation by US respective agencies." She did not rule out provocations from the United States and the US-led Kiev regime, including military provocations.

https://tass.com/world/1391929

The authorities in the Donbass republics have been predicting a major Ukrainian offensive off and on since 2015, to be honest. The difference today is the aggressive US posture, and while I believe Joe will not suicidally commit US forces to "the Russian Front" proxies are a different story. It is clear the US wants to escalate it's campaign against Russia to reach a favorable conclusion. That would be disrupting the strategic alliance between Russia and China and best case take Russia's nuclear arsenal 'out of the game'.Why now? Because every day that goes by the Chinese are gaining on all fronts.

Happily the US ruling class is not entirely on board with this strategy, which will retard it's implementation. Serious investors 'in China' might even believe it, but if they are profiting mightily under current conditions they are reluctant to have that gravy train ended. Who is 'selling rope' to whom?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Tue Jan 25, 2022 3:37 pm

Sense and Nonsense About Ukraine

January 21, 2022

By Stephen Gowans

Joe Biden thinks, or at least says he thinks, that a Russian invasion of Ukraine would “be the most consequential thing that’s happened in the world in terms of war and peace since World War II.” Biden is either delusional, or supremely confident in the power of US propaganda to turn black to white, otherwise he couldn’t possibly summon the chutzpah to utter such arrant nonsense. Unless Russia plans (a) to invade Ukraine and then (b) burn it to the ground, as the United States did to North Korea from 1950 to 1953, or napalm and exfoliate the country, as Washington did to Vietnam, or bomb and sanction it into the stone age, as the Pentagon did to Iraq twice, or spend 20 years killing civilians in drone strikes as four US administrations did to Afghanistan, then Russia could hardly match the United States in producing consequential markers on the record of post-World War II war and peace.

Equally absurd are the remarks of the leader of one of Washington’s favorite lickspittles, the government of Canada. “We are working with our international partners and colleagues to make it very, very clear that Russian aggression is absolutely unacceptable,” intoned the popinjay Justin Trudeau, a man whose servility to US interests is without limit. “We are standing there with diplomatic responses, with sanctions, with a full court press to ensure Russia respects the people of Ukraine.” Too bad Canada hadn’t acted to ensure the United States respected the peoples of Korea, Vietnam, Indonesia, Iraq, and Afghanistan, to say nothing of the peoples of Iran, Cuba, Venezuela, and Palestine, among others.

Image
The emperor and his Canadian viceroy

To avoid the terrible fate of being excommunicated from the church of respectable bourgeois politics, Canada’s peace and love party, the NDP, advocated the use of “sanctions” rather than “war” to deter what is said by governments and respectable (i.e., bourgeois) media in the West to be an anticipated Russian “aggression” against Ukraine, thus accepting as legitimate and propagating two spurious claims: (1) that sanctions—which regularly produce death and misery in excess of what is wrought by bullets, shells, bombs, and missiles—are a peaceful and desirable alternative to war, rather than a means of warfare itself, and a particularly vicious one at that; and that (2) Russian aggression lies at the heart of the dispute over Ukraine.

At its base, the conflict between Russia and the United States pivots on the question of security guarantees. Russia has asked for them and the United States refuses to grant them. Why does Russia feel insecure?

For one thing, the country, along with China, is at the center of the US reticle—Russia constituting what Washington calls a “revisionist power.” “Revisionist”, in US hands, means seeking to revise the international rules-based order—an order based on a set of shifting rules of which the United States alone is the architect and which it invokes whenever convenient, for its own benefit. Revising the international order is refusing to do whatever the US commands. The US president, uncrowned king of the world, or much of it, might as well intone, “The international rules-based order, c’est moi.” US politicians and journalists are quick to use the words “dictator” and “authoritarian” to refer to the targets of US aggression, but, skilled propagandists to a person, refuse to use the words in reference to Washington’s own relationship with the rest of the world. Yet the words fit to a tee. The United States seeks a relationship of prepotency vis-à-vis other countries. Ewan MacColl and Peggy Seeger described the relationship this way, in an amusing 1970s song, sung to the tune Yankee Doodle.

Yankee Doodle came to town

H-bombs in his pocket

Says chum if you don’t toe the line

I’ll blast you with my rockets


To be sure, the dictator’s tools of coercion have always surpassed H-bombs alone and include sanctions (more aptly known as starving people into submission, a favorite of Canada’s “peace-loving” NDP), fomenting rebellions, and declaring US toadies to be the legitimate leaders of countries that defy the US dictatorship (Juan Guaidó, for example.)

In 2019, the RAND Corporation, the Pentagon’s think tank, drew up a list of measures the United States and its satellites, such as henchman Canada, could take to “overextend and unbalance” Russia as a means of coercing Moscow to toe the US line. The measures were:

*Expand U.S. energy production to stress Russia’s economy, potentially constraining its government budget and, by extension, its defense spending. By adopting policies that expand world supply and depress global prices, the United States can limit Russian revenue.

*Increase Europe’s ability to import gas from suppliers other than Russia to economically extend Russia.

*Impose deeper trade and financial sanctions to degrade the Russian economy.

*Challenge the legitimacy of the state. Create the perception that Moscow is not pursuing the public interest by focussing on widespread, large-scale corruption.

*Encourage domestic protests and other nonviolent resistance to distract or destabilize the Russian government.

*Undermine Russia’s image abroad to diminish Moscow’s standing, influence and prestige.

*Encourage the emigration from Russia of skilled labor and well-educated youth.

*Relocate bombers and missiles within easy striking range of key Russian strategic targets to raise Russian anxieties.


The point is that the United States views Russia as a challenge to what the late Hugo Chavez once called the international dictatorship of the United States and Washington has not sat idly by, allowing the challenge to its dictatorship to stand, as evidenced by RAND’s recommendations.

The second reason for Russia to feel insecure, if the first isn’t enough, is that the United States is the world’s greatest menace to peace, contrary to the efforts of Joe Biden, Justin Trudeau, sanctions-loving social democrats, and the Western bourgeois media to flip this reality on its head. The United States’ addiction to war—according to Washington’s own Congressional Research Service, “the US military has waged war, engaged in combat, or otherwise employed its forces aggressively in foreign lands in all but eleven years of its existence”, that is, in more than 95 of every 100 years since 1776—is brushed aside. Twenty years in Afghanistan, the destruction of Iraq, the illegal occupation of Syria, the air war on Yugoslavia, the bombing of Panama and invasion of Grenada, wars on the peoples of Vietnam and Korea, to say nothing of wars of economic aggression on these and countless other countries—all these US aggressions are forgotten. Instead, we’re led to believe that, motivated by a desire to recover territory lost to the Russian empire, Vladimir Putin has asked for security guarantees he knows Washington cannot grant, and will use the denial of these guarantees as a pretext to invade Ukraine. Why the United States cannot guarantee Russia’s security, and why security guarantees are “non-starters”, is never explained. However, the undeniable US record of worshiping Mars is explanation enough: The United States cannot provide security guarantees, because the rules-based international order, of which the United States is the sole architect and its plutocrats the principal beneficiaries, depends on military threat and aggression as its ultima ratio. The alluring goal of integrating Russia into the US economy as a complement to, rather than as a rival of, corporate USA, offers too many lucrative profit-making opportunities for Washington to voluntarily surrender its program of anti-Russian military pressure.

Moscow has presented its request for security guarantees in the form of two proposed treaties, one with the United States and the other with the United States’ instrument, NATO. As far as I can tell, the details of the proposed treaties have never been presented in major US media, perhaps because they contradict the Western narrative of Russian belligerence.

Draft treaty with the United States:

1.Russia and the US shall not use the territory of other countries to prepare or conduct attacks against the other;
2.Neither party shall deploy short- or intermediate-range missiles abroad or in areas where these weapons could reach targets inside the other’s territory;
3.The US shall not open military bases in the post-Soviet countries that are not already NATO members, use their military infrastructure, or develop military cooperation with these states;
4.Neither party shall deploy nuclear weapons abroad, and any such weapons already deployed must be returned. Both parties shall eliminate any infrastructure for deploying nuclear weapons outside their own territories;
5.Neither party shall conduct military exercises with scenarios involving the use of nuclear weapons; and,
6.Neither party shall train military or civilian personnel from non-nuclear countries to use nuclear weapons.

Draft treaty with NATO.

1.NATO shall not expand further east and must commit to excluding Ukrainian membership;
2.NATO shall not deploy additional forces or arms outside the borders of its members as of May 1997 (before the alliance started admitting Eastern European countries);
3.NATO shall not conduct any military activity in Ukraine, Eastern Europe, the South Caucasus, or Central Asia;
4.Russia and NATO shall not deploy short- or intermediate-range missiles within range of each other’s territories;
5.All parties shall refrain from conducting military actions above the brigade level which shall be confined to a border zone to be mutually agreed upon; and,
6.Neither party shall regard the other as an adversary or create threats to the other, and all parties shall commit to settling disputes peacefully, refraining from the use of force.

The provisions of the proposed treaties are in no way aggressive. On the other hand, the expansion of an anti-Russian military alliance up to the border of Russia, a country the alliance-leader, the United States, defines as a challenger to its hegemony, is unquestionably menacing to Russia. As to the canard that NATO cannot possibly pose a threat to Russia, for, after all, it’s merely a defensive alliance, that too depends on historical amnesia. An alliance that was at the center of unprovoked wars on Yugoslavia, Libya, and Afghanistan, is, ipso facto, an instrument of aggression. It is also an instrument of US domination, used (a) to keep Washington’s former imperialist rivals Germany, Britain, France, and Italy under US tutelage; (b) to create markets for US weapons manufacturers by demanding that NATO lackeys buy weapons systems that interoperate with the US military; and (c) to enlist NATO subalterns in the US project of “overextending and unbalancing” states that remain outside the US empire.

It may, contrary to what one reads in the press, be very much in the interest of Washington to provoke a Russian invasion of Ukraine. What better way to overextend and unbalance the Eurasian giant? A Russian invasion of the east European country would be a march into a quagmire. Washington welcomes the opportunity to overextend and unbalance Russia via a Ukrainian proxy—that is, to carry on the US war on Russia to the last Ukrainian. What’s more, and referring back to the RAND Corporation’s proposals, what better way than by provoking an invasion of Ukraine to do the following?

*Undermine Russia’s image abroad to diminish Moscow’s standing, influence and prestige.

*Create a justification to impose deeper trade and financial sanctions to degrade the Russian economy.

*Provide a pretext to relocate bombers and missiles within easy striking range of key Russian strategic targets to raise Russian anxieties.

*Pressure Germany to cancel Nord Stream 2 to increase Europe’s ability to import gas from suppliers other than Russia as a means of economically weakening Russia.

“Strobe Talbott, the original choreographer of NATO expansion in the post-cold war order,” as M.K. Bhadrakumar describes him, has “triumphantly congratulated Blinken and Jake Sullivan for cornering Russia.” And well he should. In Ukraine, Washington has created an anti-Russian state on Russia’s border, which, while not formally integrated in NATO, is a de facto NATO asset. Left alone, Ukraine poses a threat to Russia. Invaded by Russia, it remains equally a threat.

Provoking a robust Russian reply to an advancing and predatory NATO offers other benefits to Washington as well. France and Germany—the principal EU actors—evince a growing desire to achieve a strategic autonomy that would allow them to take advantage of the economic opportunities a closer relationship with Russia would create. Growing Russian-European economic integration would disadvantage US corporations. For example, in preference to reliance on Russian natural gas, Washington has pressed Europe to purchase liquid natural gas from the United States, even though the cost is much higher. Washington has also balked at the prospect of EU military autonomy on the grounds that it would cut US arms companies out of contracts for military provisioning. In other words, the United States uses its dominance over its former imperial rivals to tilt the field in favor of corporate USA (and also to keep former and therefore potential future imperialist rivals in check.) There’s a cost, then, of belonging to the US empire—sacrificing one’s own economic interests to those of the US plutocracy. A Russian invasion of Ukraine would provide Washington with a moral argument to pressure Germany and France into renouncing their growing openness to Russia in favor of more openness to corporate USA, while cementing Europe’s place in the US empire and countering the gravitational pull of Russia on European economies.

Russia is clearly threatened by the United States and its NATO alliance, and the treaties proposed by Russia to guarantee its security would desirably stay the hand of an aggressive Washington, to the benefit not only of Russia, but to those of us who live in NATO countries who have nothing to gain, and much to lose, from the US plutocracy’s continuing predatory advance on its rivals. It is not Russians who are our enemy. Our enemies are the leaders of the column in whose ranks we are invited to march.

https://gowans.blog/2022/01/21/sense-an ... t-ukraine/

************************************

The DPR accused Kiev of disrupting the first negotiations in 2022

Image

On January 25, after a month-long break, a meeting of the representatives of Donbass and Ukraine in the Minsk humanitarian subgroup was held. Due to the fault of the Ukrainian side, the dialogue did not turn out to be constructive, said Daria Morozova, Commissioner for Human Rights in the DPR.


In particular, Ukraine once again refused to stop the criminal prosecution of former prisoners who were transferred to the Donbass republics as a result of exchanges, according to a statement on the website of the DPR Ombudsman.

"Representatives of Kiev have not made any progress on the issue of procedural "cleansing" of persons transferred to the Republics of Donbass as part of the 2019-2020 exchanges," Morozova said.

She added that the DPR and LPR are still waiting for the decision of the President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky to pardon 13 people from this list. Kiev does not take these steps, thus blocking the possibility of further negotiations in the humanitarian subgroup, summed up Daria Morozova.

https://novorosinform.org/v-dnr-obvinil ... 88187.html

****************************

Recognition of the LDNR will be a real step in the ongoing negotiations between Russia and the West - political scientist

Image

The North Atlantic Alliance does not stop its advance to the east, while Russia is trying to prevent this, because persuasion, as it turned out, cannot be stopped by NATO. State Duma Speaker Vyacheslav Volodin said that the lower house of parliament would consider the initiative of the Communist Party of the Russian Federation on the possible recognition of the DPR and LPR in order to solve "the issue of protecting the lives of Russian citizens and compatriots" there.

The initiative to consider the recognition of the independence of the LDNR, which was filed by the Communist Party, sounds against the backdrop of ongoing negotiations between Russia and the United States and NATO. According to the political scientist, Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences and Mass Communications of the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation Alexander Shatilov , which he expressed in an interview with Novorossiya news agency , Moscow is starting to move on to real actions in relations with the West.

"This initiative was put forward against the backdrop of a mutual increase in the stakes of Russia and its Western antagonists. Moscow, believing that there is nowhere to retreat, has very firmly and uncompromisingly resisted and does not want to compromise its interests and negotiating positions in any way. In turn, the United States, which considers itself world hegemon, are also unwilling to make concessions, since these concessions can lead to an image defeat for the United States and the West as a whole, as a world gendarme and global manager.

The United States is always used to winning, but then they faced stiff resistance from Russia and got a little confused. Regularly, representatives of Washington come out with all sorts of threats against the Russian Federation, they talk about the allocation of new military assistance to Ukraine, the introduction of new sanctions against Russia, but the Kremlin will have more of this arsenal. One of the means of pressure on America is the scenario with the recognition of the independence of the DPR and LPR, and the corresponding referendum was held back in May 2014," the agency's interlocutor expressed his opinion.

Raising this issue is very painful for the Ukrainian elite as well. At the moment, they are "in the backyard" of the negotiation process, and the "painful" sensations from the possibility of recognizing the LDNR are tripled from this, the political scientist notes.

"This can lead to the fact that, in addition to the will of their Western curators, the Ukrainian elite can take inadequate actions and make serious political and geopolitical mistakes. Therefore, the issue of recognizing the DPR and LPR with submission to the State Duma is largely part of a big geopolitical game. If Ukraine "twitches" and starts to use force to resolve the issue of the unrecognized republics, then this issue will immediately move from a hypothetical format to a more realistic format," Alexander Shatilov summed up.

Prepared by Ivan Soldatov

https://novorosinform.org/priznanie-ldn ... 88050.html

Google Translator

********************************

Azarov urged residents of Donbass to prepare for evacuation

Image

Armed formations of Ukraine are preparing for large-scale hostilities in the conditions of urban development, therefore, it may be necessary to evacuate the civilian population from a number of areas of Donbass, said former Prime Minister of Ukraine Mykola Azarov.


According to Azarov, at the suggestion of the United States and Great Britain, the military of the Armed Forces of Ukraine are equipped with all the necessary means for the offensive, and the number of Ukrainian soldiers drawn to the front line has recently increased four times. It is especially alarming that the nature of the armament of the Ukrainian security forces indicates preparation for military operations in urban areas, the politician said on the air of Solovyov LIVE, RIA Novosti reports .

“If, nevertheless, these scumbags decide on such a military adventure, it’s hard to imagine (consequences - approx. Novorossiya news agency) without the evacuation of the civilian population from these areas,” Azarov added.

He also noted that while the leadership of the LDNR is not taking any measures to evacuate the civilian population.

https://novorosinform.org/azarov-prizva ... 88184.html

Google Translator
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Wed Jan 26, 2022 4:34 pm

Tell Biden: No war! U.S./NATO hands off Russia and Donbass!
January 25, 2022 Greg Butterfield

Image
Protest against NATO Summit in Chicago, May 2012.

Jan. 24 – U.S. imperialism is playing with fire in Eastern Europe. U.S. officials are toying with the lives of millions of people in Europe, Asia and potentially the entire world with their unprecedented campaign of threats, provocations and war propaganda aimed at the Russian Federation.

The Biden regime and corporate media are lying when they warn of an “imminent” Russian invasion of Ukraine. The real danger of invasion comes from the U.S.-supported, NATO-armed Ukrainian government against the peoples of the independent Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk on Russia’s Western border.

Wall Street, its bought-and-paid-for politicians and the Pentagon have long sought to dominate all of the former Soviet Union, including Russia. Big Oil is especially rabid to stop Russian oil and gas from reaching the European Union, so that erstwhile U.S. allies are forced to rely on their products instead.

Today the U.S. announced it was pulling diplomats’ families and other “nonessential personnel” out of Ukraine. It’s not because they are in danger from Russia. Rather, it’s another in a long line of war provocations by Washington and the NATO military alliance it dominates.

U.S. politicians are working to create a wartime atmosphere so that any defensive action by Russia or the Donbass republics, or a wholly manufactured incident, can be used to justify Ukrainian aggression and NATO intervention.

After a week of talks where Secretary of State Antony Blinken continued stonewalling Russia on its just demands for security guarantees against NATO expansion, and when Biden said at a news conference that his “guess” was that a Russian invasion of Ukraine was inevitable, it seemed on Jan. 21 there might be a glimmer of hope that the U.S. warmongers would take a step back.

Blinken finally agreed to Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s request to give a written U.S. response to Russia’s draft statement on security guarantees, more than a month after it was presented by Russian diplomats. At least, this would force Washington to declare its intentions in writing before the world rather than being shrouded in backroom negotiations and rumors circulated by unnamed sources in the Western media.

Instead of using this opportunity to step back from the brink of war, it now seems the U.S. and its allies are instead rushing recklessly ahead.

Along with the move to pull embassy personnel out of Ukraine, the weekend of Jan. 22-23 saw a new propaganda barrage from Washington’s junior partner Britain, alleging that Russian President Vladimir Putin was planning a coup to replace the current U.S.-backed Ukrainian government of President Volodymyr Zelensky with one friendly to Russia.

Moscow immediately refuted the claim. But it was taken as gospel by all the big-business media, despite the fact that, as even the New York Times admitted, “The British communique provided no evidence to back up its assertion.”

Meanwhile, another provocation was carried out by Kiev on Jan. 22, as a Ukrainian military sabotage team illegally crossed the ceasefire “line of contact” into the Lugansk People’s Republic and kidnapped a soldier of the People’s Militia. It was the third such kidnapping since October.

After a weekend at Camp David with his military and diplomatic advisers – when they were supposed to be preparing their written response to Russia’s draft security agreement – President Biden’s spokespeople announced that the administration was likely planning the deployment of thousands of additional U.S. troops and more military hardware to the region. A decision is expected from Biden this week, according to the New York Times.

The real invasion threat

While corporate media whip up fears because Russia has deployed approximately 100,000 troops to defend its Western border, they never mention that 125,000 Ukrainian troops – that is, half the country’s entire military – are now concentrated at the contact line with Donetsk and Lugansk, near Russia.

This fact cannot be ignored by the residents of Donbass or Russia, however. Especially since those deployed to the front are the most notorious ultra-nationalist, neo-Nazi Ukrainian battalions, armed with NATO-supplied weapons and trained by the U.S., British and Canadian military.

The Ukrainian fascists have been hell-bent on war with Russia since they toppled Ukraine’s democratically-elected government eight years ago. In keeping with their genocidal ideology, inherited from anti-Soviet Nazi collaborators of World War II, these armed groups regard the multinational, mostly Russian-speaking residents of Donbass as “cattle” and “insects.”

For weeks, U.S. media have published glowing accounts of how the CIA and other Western police-military agencies have been training these forces for “resistance” in the event of a Russian invasion. In fact, they are being armed and trained to launch a murderous attack on the population of Donbass.

Since Ukraine launched its war on the Donbass region in 2014, when its people voted overwhelmingly for independence, more than 14,000 people have been killed in the conflict.

Donetsk and Lugansk have warned for months about the dangers of a new Ukrainian invasion as the buildup of troops and heavy weapons unfolded. The last time Kiev invaded, in 2015, the People’s Militias routed the Ukrainian forces and handed them a humiliating defeat.

“In terms of the numbers, if we take personnel, then from the Ukrainian side [near the contact line] it is two-to-three times higher than ours,” explained Denis Pushilin, the Donetsk People’s Republic head of state, on Jan. 18. “The amount of equipment also exceeds ours. But we are at home, we are defending our land, so we have many more chances to resist.”

While the Donbass republics are confident in their ability to defeat the invaders again, as they did in 2015, the influx of NATO high-tech weaponry would mean massive devastation to the civilian infrastructure and high casualties in a region already suffering under a nearly eight-year economic blockade by Ukraine and the West.

And this time, the danger of direct NATO military intervention – forcing Russia to defend itself and potentially igniting a new regional or even world war – is very real.

Alexander Skubchenko of the Housing Union of Ukraine summed up the situation: “What is happening now is not an attempt by NATO to protect Ukraine from a Russian invasion – it is an attempt by Russia to protect the Donbass republics from Zelensky’s military adventure, which NATO is pushing him to do.”

Flooding Ukraine with weapons

A Jan. 22 Washington Post headline screamed, “Military trainers, missiles and over 200,000 pounds of lethal aid: What NATO members have sent to Ukraine so far.”

“Last December, the White House authorized a $200 million security assistance package that provides Ukraine with small arms and ammunition, secure radios, medical equipment and spare parts. Other lethal equipment, including Javelin anti-tank missiles and other anti-armor artillery, as well as heavy machine guns, also were included,” according to the Post. “The U.S. Embassy in Kiev said late Friday that a first shipment of nearly 200,000 pounds of lethal aid had recently arrived in Ukraine. …

“British Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told Parliament on Monday that a ‘small number’ of British personnel would join an existing British operation to build up Ukrainian military capacity. ‘Light, anti-armor, defensive weapon systems’ also will be supplied …

“Canada also has a military training program with Ukraine, and Ottawa recently sent a small contingent of special forces to assist Kiev, according to Canadian media. The Department of National Defense declined to comment on potential troop deployments, citing operation sensitivity.

“The Baltic countries of Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia also have received permission from the Biden administration to send U.S.-made weapons, such as Stinger air defense systems and Javelins, to Ukraine, the countries’ defense ministers said Friday.

“Turkey, which has a sizable weapons manufacturing industry, has previously sold Bayraktar TB2 drones to Ukraine. The weapon has been used to strike Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine [That is, the Donbass republics – including the murder of 5-year-old Vladik Shikhov by drone strike last April – GB].

“The Netherlands and Spain also have deployed warplanes and warships, respectively, to the region to support NATO,” the Post concluded.

“The United States and its allies have already delivered billions of dollars in military assistance to Ukraine, with Washington alone contributing about $400 million in 2021 alone,” Sputnik News noted on Jan. 18. “Total U.S. outlays have topped $2.5 billion since 2014, and have included ‘non-lethal’ items, such as Humvees and artillery-locating mobile radar, as well as lethal systems like U.S.-made sniper rifles and Javelin anti-tank missiles.

“NATO allies have provided hundreds of millions of dollars more, including Turkish Bayraktar drones, British-made Saxon armored common centers, Czech 152 mm howitzers and Italian and German engineering and medevac vehicles.”

Stop a new war!

Significantly, Germany blocked Estonia from transferring German-manufactured artillery to Ukraine, as an incensed Wall Street Journal reported Jan. 21. NATO member Germany, the economic powerhouse of the European Union, is reliant on Russian gas and heating oil, and is eager for the completion of the NordStream2 pipeline to increase the flow of affordable fuel from the east – something the U.S. is desperate to stop.

Russia has made it clear that Ukraine’s takeover by NATO is a red line for its security and independence. Washington refuses to even negotiate on the issue of NATO’s further eastward expansion, despite the promise made by U.S. officials at the end of the Cold War not to do so – some 14 new NATO members ago!

Poor and working people are wracked with crisis after crisis here at home. Rampant spread of COVID and the deliberate dismantling of public health measures to control the pandemic. Wages slashed by inflation. Capitalism’s climate destruction intensifies by the month. The end of eviction moratoriums threatens the lives of hundreds of thousands of families in the dead of winter. Far-right attacks, from the streets to state legislatures to the Supreme Court, against voting rights, reproductive rights and trans rights.

U.S. war threats against Donbass and Russia are a greedy grab for profits and continued Pentagon military dominance. But they are also an ugly, xenophobic attempt to distract workers in the U.S. from fighting the bosses’ attacks on them, and instead turn us against people in other countries. The billionaires who dominate both the Democratic and Republican parties rely on this divide-and-rule strategy to maintain their power.

Don’t fall for it. Let’s fight for the things we need here at home – and fight to stop another bloody war.

Tell Biden and Congress: Sign Russia’s proposed defense agreement! Withdraw all U.S. troops and weaponry from Eurasia! Dismantle NATO!

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... d-donbass/

**************************************

US Announces It Will Refuse All Russian Proposals on Security

Image
The U.S. State Department spokesperson announced the bilateral agreements would only be reached if it comprises mutual benefit both nations. Jan. 25, 2022. | Photo: Twitteer/@rothenlambs

Published 25 January 2022 (15 hours 45 minutes ago)

On Monday, the U.S State Department announced they would refuse all Russian security guarantees proposal concessions.


The U.S State Department disclosed on Monday that the government would decline all security guarantees proposed by the Russian counterpart. The State Department noted that the bilateral agreements would only be reached if the arrangement comprised mutual steps to benefit both nations.

During a press conference, the State Department spokesman Ned Price stated that Washington would consult closely with its allies from the bloc, including Ukraine, before holding arrangements with Moscow.

Price statements followed last week's meeting in Geneva between the U.S. Secretary of State Antony Blinken with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, aimed at consultations over security guarantees.

"The key point in that is that any steps that we would take would not be concessions. They would need to be on a reciprocal basis, meaning that the Russians would also have to do something that would help improve our security – our security posture," he added.


In December last year, Moscow released drafts of proposed treaties sent to NATO and the U.S. The documents comprised a long list of security guarantees, a request for NATO to sign a legally binding agreement not to continue its expansion eastwards.

Even after agreeing to consultations, Washington has underlined that many of Moscow’s proposals would not be considered.

“We were firm, however, in pushing back on security proposals we have heard from Moscow that are simply non-starters for the United States,” the spokesperson stated, adding that the U.S. would never agree to ban Ukraine from joining NATO, but will do contemplate various reciprocal agreements on missiles and transparency of troop movements.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/US- ... -0012.html

********************************

Croatian President Will Remove Troops in Conflict With Russia

Image
Croatian President will remove troops in Eastern Europe conflict. Jan. 25, 20022. | Photo: @OdinitOrder

Published 25 January 2022 (16 hours 18 minutes ago)

Croatian President Zoran Milanovic is accusing the U.S. of exacerbating the conflict in Eastern Europe. He also states his resolve to keep Croatia away from it.


Since tensions have increased on the border between Russia and Ukraine, the Croatian President has announced that Zagreb will remove its troops from NATO contingents deployed in the region.

The leader expressed his concern about NATO’s major new deployment in the region. He guaranteed that Zagreb’s authorities were not part of the move and would not be part of it because it was a matter of international security.

An intended build-up of Russian forces on its border with Ukraine has been alerted by Western leaders and media in the last few weeks, which has led to the recent high tensions among the parts of the conflict. NATO has announced that members of the bloc will send more military force into the waters of Eastern Europe.

Russia has been accused of intending an invasion of Ukraine, which the Kremlin has denied. This has been a month of several diplomatic meetings involving Russia and the U.S. The first one is looking for a written response on its security proposals from American officials.


Russia demands that Ukraine be banned from NATO membership and stop military activities of the bloc in the region.

Jens Stoltenberg, NATO Secretary-General, has responded, stating that Moscow has no authority over Ukraine’s efforts to join the bloc.

In 2020, the Croatian armed forces deployed as part of nine separate missions were backed by the country’s parliament, including NATO contingents stationed in Poland.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/Cro ... -0016.html

****************************************

Pushilin: In the DPR, they are practicing actions to repel an attack and a counteroffensive

Image

Units of the People's Militia, emergency services and departments of the republic are preparing for possible offensive actions by Ukraine with a transition to a counteroffensive, the head of the DPR Denis Pushilin said on the air of the RBC TV channel.


He pointed out that the armed formations of Ukraine continue to build up forces at the front line. The DPR sees that at the moment the Armed Forces of Ukraine are forming shock tank formations, Pushilin said.

The head of the DPR assured that the republic is ready to give an adequate response to the Ukrainian security forces.
"We have made every effort to coordinate the units, work out joint actions, so that emergency services and the relevant relevant ministries and departments that will be involved in the event of offensive actions from Ukraine can withstand the attack, and at the same time could go on the counteroffensive. The situation is different cannot develop," Pushilin said in a commentary for RBC .
He added that the DPR remains committed to a peaceful settlement of the conflict. "But we simply cannot not react to what is happening on the line of contact," Pushilin summed up.

https://novorosinform.org/pushilin-v-dn ... 88227.html

Google Translator

*********************************

I lifted this surprisingly apt comment(considering the source) from MoA comments:
The American withdrawal from Afghanistan was an internationally recognised humiliation, the sight of which will live long in the memory of US voters, unless the mind is distracted with such hysteria as we are witnessing at the moment with Ukraine.

If the American Government and their war whores in the media have managed to create the impression of a military stand-off that in fact does not exist, they will just as easily be able to create the impression of a Russian climb down and a much needed foreign policy win for Biden.

Posted by: Pat Bateman | Jan 25 2022 14:56 utc | 1

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/01/a ... .html#more
What Pat said.....
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Fri Jan 28, 2022 1:57 pm

Russia will protect Donbass in case of war with Ukraine - DPR NA deputy

However, Vladislav Berdichevsky believes that Kiev will not dare to launch a large-scale offensive against the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics.

Vladislav Berdichevsky, in his interview for Donbass Resolves, expressed the opinion that Russia will help the LDNR to defend its independence in the event of an aggravation of the conflict in Donbass. The deputy stressed that most likely it will also be about military-technical assistance to the People's Republics.

However, the deputy of the People's Assembly of the DPR believes that Kiev is unlikely to decide on a direct military clash with the Donbass and Russia. Berdichevsky points out that most likely the Armed Forces of Ukraine will act by their usual methods - using sabotage, provocations and shelling on the line of contact between the parties.
Provocations are possible in certain sectors of the front, perhaps with some kind of advance, an attempt to capture some specific points there, and there may, of course, be shelling of our territories. It’s not worth excluding anything, including provocations using the same chemical weapons, ” the deputy noted.
https://novorosinform.org/rossiya-zashi ... 88453.html

*********************************************

Colonel of the LPR: The build-up of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the Donbass is not critical

Image

In the Luhansk People's Republic, a critical increase in units of Ukrainian security forces at the front line is not recorded, said Colonel Yan Leshchenko, head of the LPR People's Militia Department.

According to the representative of the NM of the LPR, since the beginning of the year, Ukrainian militants have indeed been increasing their presence in the zone of the so-called "Joint Forces Operation" (JFO), but this increase in the number of fighters of the armed formations of Ukraine is not critical. Leshchenko said this in an interview with TASS .
"We do not record a critical increase in units in the JFO zone, but we note the additional staffing and military equipment of Ukrainian units performing tasks on the line of contact," the colonel said.
He added that the Armed Forces of Ukraine are transferring forces and means not only to the Donbass, but also to the borders of Transnistria and Belarus.

https://novorosinform.org/polkovnik-lnr ... 88437.html

***************************************

First of all, the Armed Forces of Ukraine can attack Dokuchaevsk or Slavyanoserbsk - expert

Specialist of the Center for Military-Political Journalism Boris Rozhin named a likely scenario for the start of a full-scale operation of the Ukrainian security forces in the Donbass.

Answering a question about the likelihood of a Ukrainian invasion of the territory of the LDNR, Rozhin said in an interview with Ukraina.ru that "it is more than possible."
"Ukraine may try to seize cities like Dokuchaevsk or Slavyanoserbsk and see how Russia reacts," the expert said.
He explained that in this case, Russia will only be able to respond openly and "by military means." If there is no answer, the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be able to try to capture the republics. And if Russia responds, Western countries with announced sanctions will join in.

According to Rozhin, the task of the defenders of Donbass is "to restrain the offensive of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the shortest possible time." At the same time, he noted that Ukraine can decide to go on the offensive only with the approval of NATO, and this military operation will take place under the dictation of the alliance's officers.
“This is not a war between Ukraine and Donbass. Ukraine will be supported by NATO one way or another,” the military specialist summed up.
https://novorosinform.org/v-pervuyu-och ... 88481.html

*************************************

DPR and LPR may request rocket artillery and air defense systems from Russia

The defense of the republics would also benefit from the R-330 Zhitel electronic warfare system.

Izvestia writes about this, citing sources close to the command of the People's Militia of both republics.

In order to most effectively counter the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the event of aggression, the defenders of the DPR and LPR can also request modernized Osa-AKM short-range air defense systems and Grad-M or Tornado multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) from Russia as military assistance -G".

Of course, this will become possible if the request voiced by the head of the Duma faction "United Russia" Vladimir Vasilyev for military assistance to Donbass is agreed at the highest level.

Meanwhile, some lawyers believe that if Russia takes this step, it will mean that all participants in the process will automatically fall under international sanctions. And therefore, most likely, the supply of defensive weapons to the Donbass is best carried out in secret.

https://novorosinform.org/dnr-i-lnr-mog ... 88433.html

**************************************************

Lukashenko called the condition for the appearance of the Russian army in Belarus

The head of the republic, Alexander Lukashenko, said that in the event of an attack on Belarus, hundreds of thousands of Belarusian and Russian military will defend it.

In his address to the Belarusian citizens and the parliament, the president gave an answer to the Western countries, which are concerned about the "very important question" of whether Russia will send its troops to the territory of Belarus.
“If our country is attacked, there will be hundreds of thousands of Russian troops here, who, together with hundreds of thousands of Belarusians, will defend this sacred land. Here is your answer,” said the head of state, quoted by RBC .
He stressed that Moscow and Minsk are in allied relations, which is the basis for such actions. According to him, there are two reasons for the war. One of them is if Belarus is attacked and a "hot war is unleashed" against it.
"The second moment, when there will be a war, and Belarus will participate in it, is if our ally, Russia, is directly attacked," the Belarusian leader added.
During a meeting with the staff of the National Academy of Sciences, the president said earlier that Belarus does not want war, but is ready for the fact that the development of events can be very different .

https://novorosinform.org/v-pervuyu-och ... 88481.html

All above Google Translator

I'm pretty sure that Russia possesses rocket artillery capable of hitting targets anywhere in the Donbass republics without leaving Russia.

It is interesting that folks in Donbass are more worried about Ukrainian aggression than the Ukrainian government is about Russian aggression, leaving aside those cherry-picked interviews on NPR with Nazi symps.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Sat Jan 29, 2022 3:48 pm

Why Washington Will Soon Dump Ukraine's President Zelensky

The U.S. has responded to the security demands Russia had laid out in two draft treaties. It has rejected all major ones and is only willing to negotiate on secondary issues. Russia will response to that within a few weeks.

Meanwhile the U.S. is still claiming that Russia intends to attack the Ukraine any moment now. But the Ukrainian President Vlodymyr Zelensky publicly disagrees with that false evaluation. He sees no war coming and wants to avoid one as much as possible. That might mean that he has to be removed before a war can be launched.

<snip>

The U.S. wants to 'secure' Europe as a proxy force that can be used against Russia and China. The way to do that is by pushing Russia into an invasion of the Ukraine and to then proclaim that it is 'threatening Europe'. In consequence the Nord-Stream 2 pipeline, on which Germany's energy security depends, would never be used to provide gas from Russia. Europe's economy would falter and it would become more dependent on the United States. It would come under full NATO control and could then be pushed to help with the great isolation of China.

But how can the U.S. push Russia to invade the Ukraine? Events in the spring of last year demonstrated how it can be done:

Last March 24, the Ukrainian president decreed that Ukraine would take Crimea back from Russia, with “military measures” to achieve “de-occupation.” The U.S. and NATO voiced “unwavering” support.

In April NATO backed a Ukrainian offensive in its civil war against Russian-allied separatists in the eastern provinces, Donetsk and Luhansk. That is when Russia moved more troops to its borders with Ukraine, signaling it would defend its allies.


After seeing that Russia would response with force Zelensky backed off his plans.

The idea in Washington is that if the U.S. can instigate Ukraine to attack the Donbas region Russia would have to step in at least with extended suppliesto the Donbas rebels. With the help of the media the talk of a 'Russian invasion' would then become reality. It would trigger 'western' sanctions and Russia would be isolated.

However, the Ukrainian leadership knows what would happen should it attack Donbas and it currently has no interest in fighting for U.S. strategic purposes without any chances to win.

During a press conference in late December Ukraine's President Zelensky rejected plans to retake Donbas by force (machine translation):

Zelensky's direct speech: "The probability of escalation (at the border and in the ORDLO on the part of Russia - ed.)
I think that those political forces that say that we need to go (in the offensive - UE), go to war, it seems, do not imagine and do not think… More precisely, do not think about our army.

We will not go anywhere now. I believe that people come first. We cannot lose our entire army. She is powerful, she will take more than… But… It is impossible today. I think that's wrong today."


The White House however is urging Zelensky to launch a war. That he is pushing against that became obvious when the anti-Russia agitator Julia Ioffe was sent out to trash him:
Moon of Alabama @MoonofA - 8:16 UTC · Jan 27, 2022
White House urges Zelensky to attack south-east rebels but he declined?

Quoted Tweet:

Julia Ioffe @juliaioffe · Jan 25
"The White House and its Democratic allies have just about had it with president Zelensky. According to three sources in the administration and on the Hill, the Ukrainian president is by turns annoying, infuriating, and downright counterproductive." Inside the Biden-Putin Chess Match

From Ioffe's smear piece:

As strongly as the Biden administration has been backing Ukraine, the White House as well as its Democratic allies have just about had it with president Zelensky. According to three sources in the administration and on Capitol Hill whom I’ve spoken to in the last couple months, the Ukrainian president is by turns annoying, infuriating, and downright counterproductive.
...
There’s a sense that Zelensky isn’t very good at navigating American politics and is stepping on all the wrong feet. Perhaps it’s because he is frantically trying to save his own country; perhaps it’s because the former TV star had no preparation for, or education in, geopolitics. It is also, unfortunately, the plight of a country that is caught between two behemoths fighting over its fate. Supplicating while maintaining your dignity is hard enough; doing so while not pissing off your geopolitical backer is harder still.
The U.S. talk of war in Ukraine is destroying its economy. Zelensky is trying to calm down any talk of war even while the U.S. is pushing it. Here is another sign that Zelensky is not willing to do what the U.S. is demanding from him:

A call between US President Joe Biden and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky on Thursday "did not go well," a senior Ukrainian official told CNN, amid disagreements over the "risk levels" of a Russian attack.
...
Zelensky urged his American counterpart to "calm down the messaging," warning of the economic impact of panic, according to the official. He also said Ukrainian intelligence sees the threat differently.

The Ukrainian leader pointed to a recent breakthrough in negotiations with Russia in Paris, saying that he hoped a ceasefire agreement with rebels in eastern Ukraine would be maintained. He also said the talks between the US, Russia and NATO still had some distance to run before diplomatic efforts had been exhausted, the official said.


As Zelensky is not willing to do Washington's bidding he must be pushed out.

Zelensky is in a weak position. His poll numbers are way down. The U.S. has him by the balls over his offshore accounts and money laundering. His attempt to arrest former president of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, who recently returned to the Ukraine, was stopped by the U.S. embassy. That the U.S. wanted Poroshenko back in the Ukraine in the first place may point to a replacement strategy.

Leonid Ragozin believes that to be the case:

Throughout the year Zelenskiy has been forced to devote significant time and attention to an attempt by the radical part of the security community, close to Poroshenko, to launch an impeachment process through the so-called Wagnergate affair. They claimed that Zelenskiy committed an act of treason through a last-minute cancellation of a madcap plan, hatched by Ukrainian military intelligence, which envisaged the forced landing of a civilian Turkish plane carrying mercenaries from the infamous Russian Wagner group. The affair resulted in an open rebellion by the military intelligence chief, which Zelenskiy had to put down in September.
By the time the US went into red alert mode over “imminent” Russian aggression, Zelenskiy was clearly more preoccupied with domestic politics and the threat of a coup. His messaging became confused as he tried to link his foes, such as oligarch Rinat Akhmetov and ex-president Poroshenko to Russia, while it was clear that if any great power were behind them, then it would be the United States of America.

Akhmetov is one of the top sponsors of the Atlantic Council. The militant street movement, which backs Poroshenko and keeps the threat of a new Maidan alive, is run by Andriy Levus, an activist and former security official directly linked to diaspora organisations created by Nazi collaborators who found refuge in North America under the auspices of the CIA.

The Ukrainians have reasons to suspect that the United States and Britain, with their radical rhetoric unmatched by the real level of threat as well as their enthusiasm about “brave Ukrainians” fighting and dying for the Western cause, are prepared to throw Ukraine under the bus so as to get Russia bogged down in a devastating war. The vision of “a new Chechen war” was evoked by British PM Boris Johnson. Former Obama administration official Evelyn Farkas went as far as calling for the US to form a new “coalition of the willing” and engage in a direct conflict with Russia over Ukraine.

Zelenskiy also has good reasons to believe that his allies see him as an impediment.


Then again Zelensky may not be needed:

A false-flag provocation against Russian-friendly rebels in Eastern Ukraine or even convincing US-aligned elements of that country’s military-intelligence communities to attack them without President Zelensky’s approval is all that it could take to trigger a regional war.
...
Zelensky, meanwhile, is still trying to give off an air of calm and control despite obviously becoming more anxious and increasingly losing control over the situation. The West’s recent reports that Russia is plotting a regime change against him might actually be meant to precondition the public into accepting his removal by one means or another, including through the US simply standing by and letting him either be overthrown by the opposition or even his own military. His sacrifice, up to and including in the most literal way, might be considered necessary to galvanize global opinion against Russia.


To get the war the U.S. wants started some provocation has to be launched in east Ukraine that is significant enough to lead to a wider war. Either that or Zelensky has to be replaced with someone who is willing to sacrifice the Ukraine by outright attacking Donbas.

(more...).

https://www.moonofalabama.org/2022/01/w ... .html#more

******************************************

US Warns Russia About Pipeline Consequences if Invades Ukraine

Image
The U.S has warned Russia of consequences on Nord Stream 2 if it invades Ukraine. Jan. 28, 2022. | Photo: Twitter/@hstubner

Published 28 January 2022 (14 hours 42 minutes ago)

On Thursday, the U.S and Germany warned Russia about the consequences to its major gas pipeline if it invades Ukraine. This after repeated Russian statements that it has no interest in starting a war with Ukraine.

Germany and the United States warned Russia on Thursday that a significant gas pipeline could be compromised in the event of an invasion of Ukraine, as Washington continues its attempts to intimidate the Kremlin.

Top Russia officials, following the United States and its ally's formal responses to security demands issued by Moscow, expressed their chief concerns were not addressed but notably did not rule out new talks.

After repeated claims of Russian troops building up on the border with its neighbor, rising tension around Ukraine, the United States has warned the European country of swift and severe consequences if it invades its neighbor.

Following talks of divisions within Europe, Annalena Baerbock, German Foreign Minister, underscored to parliament that her government was "working on a strong package of sanctions" alongside allies, including Nord Stream 2.


According to a Washington top official, the multibillion-dollar project's activation was completed last September but is still testing and waiting for regulatory approval.

"If Russia invades Ukraine, one way or another, Nord Stream 2 will not move forward," the undersecretary of state for political affairs, Victoria Nuland, underlined. "I think the statements coming out of Berlin even today are very, very strong," she added.

An announcement from the White House stressed that Germany's new chancellor, Olaf Scholz, will visit President Joe Biden next February 7 to discuss the crisis.

https://www.telesurenglish.net/news/US- ... -0013.html

****************************************

‘We have a common cause’: Anti-war appeals from Donbass activists
January 29, 2022 Struggle - La Lucha

Image

As the U.S. and NATO threaten war with Russia and push Ukraine to invade the Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, Struggle-La Lucha shares these messages to the anti-war movement from activists living in the Donbass.

Alexey Albu is a coordinator of Borotba (Struggle) of Ukraine and Donbass, a Marxist and anti-fascist organization banned by the Ukrainian regime. Albu is a survivor of the May 2, 2014, Odessa massacre, when Ukrainian neo-Nazis set fire to the House of Trade Unions, killing nearly 50 people. Albu was then forced into exile under threat of death.

Hello dear friends!

Western countries are whipping up hysteria in the media, evacuating diplomats, sending military instructors, weapons and ammunition to the Ukrainian neo-Nazi government.

Now right-wing radical groups have announced mobilization all over Ukraine – they are gathering volunteers for the front.

In addition, we are receiving disturbing news from Transnistria – Moldova is also transferring military equipment, and negotiations between Tiraspol and Chisinau have reached an impasse.

All this is happening against the backdrop of an unprecedented impoverishment of the people, rising utility costs and prices, an infrastructure crisis, and a lack of heat in many homes in Ukraine.

For President Zelensky, the war can be a salvation – he will say that Russia is to blame for everything.

We will be grateful if you, together with other comrades at your actions, demand that your government not send aid to the neo-fascist regime of Ukraine, because this money can be used to solve social problems at home.

I also want all comrades to know that the Donbass is no longer as weak as before. And anti-fascists from Odessa, Kharkov, Zaporozhye, Nikolaev and other cities of Ukraine are not sitting idly by – they are also preparing very hard.

We sincerely thank you for your solidarity! We really hope that peace, equality and progress will come to the planet Earth!

Red salute!

Alexey Albu, Borotba

————-

Message from Communist Party of the Donetsk People’s Republic

Dear comrades!

On behalf of the Communist Party of the Donetsk People’s Republic, we sincerely thank you for your solidarity with the people of Donbass.

Today, the irresponsible actions of the U.S. imperialists, their allies and satellites have once again brought the world to the brink of a global armed conflict. The progressive forces of all countries must unite their efforts to prevent a catastrophe.

The key elements of the international anti-imperialist front – the people’s republics of Donbass, Syria, Venezuela, North Korea, Cuba – are now in a particularly difficult situation. Each of these states may at any moment be subjected to a full-scale attack on the part of the imperialists.

Today, it is especially important to strengthen the international solidarity of the working people and use the current difficult situation to move towards a more just society. We greatly appreciate your support and will do our best to live up to the expectations that foreign comrades place on our struggle.

We have a common cause. The most acute problems of our time can be solved only on a worldwide basis, only through global socialist transformations.

Long live international anti-imperialist solidarity!

Sincerely,

Central Committee of the Communist Party of the Donetsk People’s Republic

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... activists/

***************************************

The following piece is dated but is a good review of how we came to be in this situation.

I'd like to find a companion piece for this showing the continued enlargement of Ukraine by governments from Peter the Great to Nikita Khrushchev which helps greatly in putting this in historical perspective. It's around here somewhere...
Right on NATO’s doorstep?
Richard BeckerJanuary 25, 2022 70 4 minutes read

Download PDF flyer https://flyer-generator.herokuapp.com/? ... sts/101611

This was originally written in June 2016

In a major foreign policy campaign speech on June 2, 2016, Hillary Clinton stated: “Moscow has taken aggressive military action in Ukraine, right on NATO’s doorstep.” (emphasis added by author).

How did the Ukraine, a country in southeastern Europe, come to find itself on the “doorstep” of the “North Atlantic” Treaty Organization?

NATO, founded in 1949, was falsely represented to the American people and the world as a defensive alliance against a supposed “Soviet threat.” It never was.

Proving the point, after the dissolution of the USSR in 1991, NATO, instead of being disbanded, moved aggressively eastward, despite assurances to Moscow by top officials in the George H.W. Bush administration that it would not do so.

On February 9, 1990, Secretary of State James Baker met with Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev in Moscow and told him that if the Soviet leadership accepted a reunited Germany’s membership in NATO, there would be “no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” German foreign minister Hans-Dietrich Genscher repeatedly made similar assurances to Soviet leaders. (Spiegel ONLINE, 11/26/2009)

Since then however, NATO has added 12 countries, all in eastern and central Europe far from the North Atlantic, including four that border Ukraine – Rumania, Hungry, Slovakia and Poland, thus “the doorstep.”

Image
Map: History of NATO Enlargement. By: User:Patrickneil, based off of Image:EU1976-1995.svg by glentamara. Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported license.

NATO is presently in the process of adding Montenegro. Why would NATO be eager to bring in a small nation of just 650,000 people on the Adriatic Sea with a long history of friendly ties to Russia?

Commenting on NATO’s invitation to Montenegro, Admiral Vladimir Komoyedov, chairman of the Russian Duma’s defense committee, commented: “They are ready to admit even the North Pole to NATO just for the sake of encircling Russia. NATO was and remains an adversary of Russia.” (NY Times, May 19, 2016)

NATO’s eastward march continued during Clinton’s tenure as Secretary of State with the addition of Albania and Slovakia in 2009. The Obama administration took aim at incorporating Georgia and Ukraine, with the State Department taking the lead. Billions of dollars were allocated to support “democratic” forces in both countries.

Clinton herself joined a State Department hosted “Tech Camp” in Lithuania in June 2011, organized to train, advise and assist “pro-democracy” activists in the Ukraine, Belarus, Russia and other former Soviet republics.

Ukraine shares a long border and deep economic ties with Russia. Bringing Ukraine into both the European Union and NATO has been a major project of the State Department under both Clinton and her successor, John Kerry. Ukrainian membership in NATO would mean that U.S. nuclear missiles could be based on Russia’s borders, just minutes away from Moscow and other major Russian cities.

In late 2013, elected Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych announced the acceptance of a $15 billion assistance package from Russia. Ukraine was in the midst of a severe and deepening economic crisis. That set off a series of protests by pro-Western and outright fascist forces inside Ukraine, demanding that Yanukovych, who had sought a balanced relationship with Russia, the European Union and the U.S., must resign.

While Clinton was no longer in office, her prodigy and spokesperson, Victoria Nuland, now elevated to the position of Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs by President Obama, played a key role in the protests, which she personally joined, famously distributing cookies to participants and urging them on.

In a widely publicized incident, a Nuland phone call was caught on tape in Kiev, in which she shouted at one point, “F— the EU,” as the European Union was not taking in her view a sufficiently hard line. In the same taped call with another U.S. official she insisted that “Yats” (Arsiniy Yatsenyuk) must become the new leader after the goal of regime change was accomplished.

On February 21, 2016, an agreement to end the crisis was reached under the aegis of the French, German and Polish governments, but the following day armed fascist forces from the Svoboda party and the Right Sector led a coup that forced Yanukovych into exile.

He was immediately replaced by Yatsenyuk as interim leader.

But Washington’s euphoria over the prospect of incorporating such a strategically key country into its anti-Russia military alliance turned out to be short-lived. The Russian government refused to go along.

Russian troops were sent into Crimea, the home base of the Russian Black Sea Fleet. A referendum was held on Crimea rejoining Russia, which was overwhelmingly approved by over 95% of the votes. For hundreds of years Crimea had been part of Russia, and only in 1954 transferred to Ukraine. But at that time, Russia and Ukraine were both republics within one state, the Soviet Union.

If Crimea had remained a part of Ukraine and Ukraine had become a part of NATO, the U.S. would have insisted on the expulsion of Russian naval forces and the conversion of Crimea into a NATO base. There was no way that an independent and sovereign government in Moscow could have accepted such an outcome.

Clinton’s repeated outcries in her memoir about “Russia’s illegal invasion of Crimea,” and “Russia’s illegal annexation,” emphasize how stung she and other U.S. leaders were about being stymied, especially after seeming to be on the brink of triumph.

The Ukraine intervention turned out to be, like so many of the others that Clinton and her fellow neo-cons have initiated or supported in recent years, a classic case of imperial overreach.

Feature image: Map of NATO historic enlargement in Europe. Credit: User:Patrickneil, based off of Image:EU1976-1995.svg by glentamara. LIcense: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported

https://www.liberationnews.org/right-on ... rationnews
As with the Trump/Russia demonization of a few years past the current situation operates on several levels:

Political- A desperate attempt to pull Biden's electoral chestnuts out of the fire. This is of the least importance.

Grand Strategic- Decoupling Russia(& it's nukes) from China before the Main Event.

Economic- Stopping Nord Stream II. Probably the most important in the short term: It's zero sum, Russian sales vs US sales, with some hurting put on Russia and a lot of hurting put on Europe paying for much more expensive natural gas. But like she said, "Fuck the EU!"

Thank god it's not Trump, huh?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Mon Jan 31, 2022 3:49 pm

JANUARY 28, 2022

What You Should Really Know About Ukraine
BRYCE GREENE
What you need to know about tensions between Ukraine and Russia
Image
The Washington Post (11/26/21) placed an article on “tensions between Ukraine and Russia” under the heading “Asia.” As the Post (4/7/14) has noted, “The less Americans know about Ukraine’s location, the more they want US to intervene.”
As tensions began to rise over Ukraine, US media produced a stream of articles attempting to explain the situation with headlines like “Ukraine Explained” (New York Times, 12/8/21) and “What You Need to Know About Tensions Between Ukraine and Russia” (Washington Post, 11/26/21). Sidebars would have notes that tried to provide context for the current headlines. But to truly understand this crisis, you would need to know much more than what these articles offered.

These “explainer” pieces are emblematic of Ukraine coverage in the rest of corporate media, which almost universally gave a pro-Western view of US/Russia relations and the history behind them. Media echoed the point of view of those who believe the US should have an active role in Ukrainian politics and enforce its perspective through military threats.

The official line goes something like this: Russia is challenging NATO and the “international rules-based order” by threatening to invade Ukraine, and the Biden administration needed to deter Russia by providing more security guarantees to the Zelensky government. The official account seizes on Russia’s 2014 annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula as a starting point for US/Russian relations, and as evidence of Putin’s goals of rebuilding Russia’s long-lost empire.

Russia’s demand that NATO cease its expansion to Russia’s borders is viewed as such an obviously impossible demand that it can only be understood as a pretext to invade Ukraine. Therefore, the US should send weapons and troops to Ukraine, and guarantee its security with military threats to Russia (FAIR.org, 1/15/22).

The Washington Post asked: “Why is there tension between Russia and Ukraine?” Its answer:

In March 2014, Russia annexed Crimea from Ukraine. A month later, war erupted between Russian-allied separatists and Ukraine’s military in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas. The United Nations human rights office estimates that more than 13,000 people have been killed.

But that account is highly misleading, because it leaves out the crucial role the US has played in escalating tensions in the region. In nearly every case we looked at, the reports omitted the US’s extensive role in the 2014 coup that preceded Russia’s annexation of Crimea. Focusing on the latter part only serves to manufacture consent for US intervention abroad.

The West Wants Investor-Friendly Policies in Ukraine
Ukraine, Explained
Image
David Leonhardt (New York Times, 12/8/21) explains it all: “Putin believes that Ukraine — a country of 44 million people that was previously part of the Soviet Union — should be subservient to Russia.”
The backdrop to the 2014 coup and annexation cannot be understood without looking at the US strategy to open Ukrainian markets to foreign investors and give control of its economy to giant multinational corporations.

A key tool for this has been the International Monetary Fund, which leverages aid loans to push governments to adopt policies friendly to foreign investors. The IMF is funded by and represents Western financial capital and governments and has been at the forefront of efforts to reshape economies around the world for decades, often with disastrous results. The civil war in Yemen and the coup in Bolivia both followed a rejection of IMF terms.

In Ukraine, the IMF had long planned to implement a series of economic reforms to make the country more attractive to investors. These included cutting wage controls (i.e., lowering wages), “reform[ing] and reduc[ing]” health and education sectors (which made up the bulk of employment in Ukraine), and cutting natural gas subsidies to Ukrainian citizens that made energy affordable to the general public. Coup plotters like US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland repeatedly stressed the need for the Ukrainian government to enact the “necessary” reforms.

In 2013, after early steps to integrate with the West, Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych turned against these changes and ended trade integration talks with the European Union. Months before his overthrow, he restarted economic negotiations with Russia, in a major snub to the Western economic sphere. By then, the nationalist protests were heating up that would go on to topple his government.

After the 2014 coup, the new government quickly restarted the EU deal. After cutting heating subsidies in half, it secured a $27 billion commitment from the IMF. The IMF’s goals still include “reducing the role of the state and vested interests in the economy” in order to attract more foreign capital.

The IMF is one of the many global institutions whose role in maintaining global inequities often goes unreported and unnoticed by the general public. The US economic quest to open global markets to capital is a key driver of international affairs, but if the press chooses to ignore it, the public debate is incomplete and shallow.

The US Helped Overthrow Ukraine’s Elected President

During the tug of war between the US and Russia, the Americans were engaged in a destabilization campaign against the Yanukovych government. The campaign culminated with the overthrow of the elected president in the Maidan Revolution—also known as the Maidan Coup—named for the Kiev square that hosted the bulk of the protests.

As political turmoil engulfed the country in the leadup to 2014, the US was fueling anti-government sentiment through mechanisms like USAID and National Endowment for Democracy (NED), just as they had done in 2004. In December 2013, Nuland, assistant secretary of state for European affairs and a long-time regime change advocate, said that the US government had spent $5 billion promoting “democracy” in Ukraine since 1991. The money went toward supporting “senior officials in the Ukraine government…[members of] the business community as well as opposition civil society” who agree with US goals.

The NED is a key organization in the network of American soft power that pours $170 million a year into organizations dedicated to defending or installing US-friendly regimes. The Washington Post‘s David Ignatius (9/22/91) once wrote that the organization functions by “doing in public what the CIA used to do in private.” The NED targets governments who oppose US military or economic policy, stirring up anti-government opposition.

The NED board of directors includes Elliott Abrams, whose sordid record runs from the Iran/Contra affair in the ’80s to the Trump administration’s effort to overthrow the Venezuelan government. In 2013, NED president Carl Gershman wrote a piece in the Washington Post (9/26/13) that described Ukraine as the “biggest prize” in the East/West rivalry. After the Obama administration, Nuland joined the NED board of directors before returning to the State Department in the Biden administration as undersecretary of state for political affairs.

One of the many recipients of NED money for projects in Ukraine was the International Republican Institute. The IRI, once chaired by Sen. John McCain, has long had a hand in US regime change operations. During the protests that eventually brought down the government, McCain and other US officials personally flew into Ukraine to encourage protesters.

US Officials Were Caught Picking the New Government
Ukraine crisis: Transcript of leaked Nuland-Pyatt call
Image
Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (BBC, 2/7/14) picks the new Ukrainian president: “I think Yats is the guy who’s got the economic experience, the governing experience.”
On February 6, 2014, as the anti-government protests were intensifying, an anonymous party (assumed by many to be Russia) leaked a call between Assistant Secretary of State Nuland and US ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey Pyatt. The two officials discussed which opposition officials would staff a prospective new government, agreeing that Arseniy Yatsenyuk—Nuland referred to him by the nickname “Yats”—should be in charge. It was also agreed that someone “high profile” be brought in to push things along. That someone was Joe Biden.

Weeks later, on February 22, after a massacre by suspicious snipers brought tensions to a head, the Ukrainian parliament quickly removed Yanukovych from office in a constitutionally questionable maneuver. Yanukovych then fled the country, calling the overthrow a coup. On February 27, Yatsenyuk became prime minister.

At the time the call leaked, media were quick to pounce on Nuland’s saying “Fuck the EU.” The comment dominated the headlines (Daily Beast, 2/6/14; BuzzFeed, 2/6/14; Atlantic, 2/6/14; Guardian, 2/6/14), while the evidence of US regime change efforts was downplayed. With the headline “Russia Claims US Is Meddling Over Ukraine,” the New York Times (2/6/14) put the facts of US involvement in the mouth of an official enemy, blunting their impact on the audience. The Times (2/6/14) later described the two officials as benignly “talking about the political crisis in Kiev” and sharing “their views of how it might be resolved.”

The Washington Post (2/6/14) acknowledged that the call showed “a deep degree of US involvement in affairs that Washington officially says are Ukraine’s to resolve,” but that fact rarely factored into future coverage of the US/Ukraine/Russia relationship.

Washington Used Nazis to Help Overthrow the Government
Denying the Far-Right Role in the Ukrainian Revolution
Image
Ignoring the fascist element in Ukrainian politics has been corporate media policy for some time now (FAIR.org, 3/7/14).
The Washington-backed opposition that toppled the government was fueled by far-right and openly Nazi elements like the Right Sector. One far-right group that grew out of the protests was the Azov Battalion, a paramilitary militia of neo-Nazi extremists. Their leaders made up the vanguard of the anti-Yanukovych protests, and even spoke at opposition events in the Maidan alongside US regime change advocates like McCain and Nuland.

After the violent coup, these groups were later incorporated into the Ukrainian armed forces—the same armed forces that the US has now given $2.5 billion. Though Congress technically restricted money from flowing to the Azov Battalion in 2018, trainers on the ground say there’s no mechanism to actually enforce the provision. Since the coup, the Ukrainian nationalist forces have been responsible for a wide variety of atrocities in the counterinsurgency war.

Far-right influence has increased across Ukraine as a result of Washington’s actions. A recent UN Human Rights council has noted that “fundamental freedoms in Ukraine have been squeezed” since 2014, further weakening the argument that the US is involved in the country on behalf of liberal values.

Among American neo-Nazis, there’s even a movement aimed at encouraging right-wing extremists to join the Battalion in order to “gain actual combat experience” in preparation for a potential civil war in the US.

In a recent UN vote on “combating glorification of Nazism, neo-Nazism and other practices that contribute to fueling contemporary forms of racism,” the US and Ukraine were the only two countries to vote no.

As FAIR (1/15/22) has reported, between December 6, 2021, and January 6, 2022, the New York Times ran 228 articles that refer to Ukraine, but none of them reference the pro-Nazi elements in Ukraine’s politics or government. The same can be said of the Washington Post’s 201 articles on the topic.

There’s a Lot More to the Crimean Annexation

The facts above give more context to Russian actions following the coup, and ought to counter the caricature of a Russian Empire bent on expansion. From Russia’s point of view, a longtime adversary had successfully overthrown a neighboring government using violent far-right extremists.

The Crimean peninsula, which was part of Russia until it was transferred to the Ukrainian Soviet Republic in 1954, is home to one of two Russian naval bases with access to the Black and Mediterranean seas, one of history’s most important maritime theaters. A Crimea controlled by a US-backed Ukrainian government was a major threat to Russian naval access.

The peninsula—82% of whose households speak Russian, and only 2% mainly Ukrainian—held a plebiscite in March 2014 on whether or not they should join Russia, or remain under the new Ukrainian government. The Pro-Russia camp won with 95% of the vote. The UN General Assembly, led by the US, voted to ignore the referendum results on the grounds that it was contrary to Ukraine’s constitution. This same constitution had been set aside to oust President Yanukovych a month earlier.

All of this is dropped from Western coverage.

The US Wants to Expand NATO
NATO's Eastward Expansion
Image
A pair of maps from Der Spiegel (11/26/09) illustrates NATO’s drive toward Russia’s borders.
In addition to integrating Ukraine into the US-dominated economic sphere, Western planners also want to integrate Ukraine militarily. For years, the US has sought the expansion of NATO, an explicitly anti-Russian military alliance. NATO was originally billed as a counterforce to the Warsaw Pact during the Cold War, but after the demise of the Soviet Union, the US promised the new Russia that it would not expand NATO east of Germany. Despite this agreement, the US continued building out its military alliance,growing closer and closer to Russia’s borders and ignoring Russia’s objections.

This history is sometimes admitted but usually downplayed in corporate media. In an interview with the Washington Post (12/1/21), professor Mary Sarotte, author of Not One Inch: America, Russia and the Making of Post-Cold War Stalemate, recounted that after the Soviet collapse, “Washington realized that it could not only win big, but win bigger. Not one inch of territory needed to be off-limits to full NATO membership.” The US “all-or-nothing approach to expansionism…maximized conflict with Moscow,” she noted. Unfortunately, one interview does little to cut through the drumbeat of pro-NATO talking points.

In 2008, NATO members pledged to extend membership to Ukraine. The removal of the pro-Russian government in 2014 was a giant leap towards the pledge becoming a reality. Recently, NATO Secretary General Stoltenberg announced that the alliance stands by plans to integrate Ukraine into the alliance.

Bret Stephens in the New York Times (1/11/21) maintained that if Ukraine wasn’t allowed to join the organization, it would “break the spine of NATO” and “end the Western alliance as we have known it since the Atlantic Charter.”

The US Wouldn’t Tolerate What Russia Is Expected to Accept

Putin 'Won't Stop' With Ukraine, Experts Warn
Image
“A successful invasion of Russia…could embolden Russia” to engage in “cyberattacks, election meddling and influence campaigns,” says USA Today‘s “expert” (print edition, 1/26/22).[/quote]

Much has been written about the Russian buildup on the Ukraine border. Reports of the buildup have been intensified by US intelligence officials’ warnings of an attack. Media often echo the claim of an inevitable invasion. The Washington Post editorial board (1/24/22) wrote that “Putin can—and will—use any measures the United States and its NATO allies either take or refrain from taking as a pretext for aggression.”

But Putin has been clear about a path to de-escalation. His main demand has been for direct negotiations to end the expansion of the hostile military alliance to his borders. He announced, “We have made it clear that NATO’s move to the east is unacceptable,” and that “the United States is standing with missiles on our doorstep.” Putin asked, “How would the Americans react if missiles were placed at the border with Canada or Mexico?”

In corporate media coverage, no one bothers to ask this important question. Instead, the assumption is that Putin ought to tolerate a hostile military alliance directly across its border. The US, it seems, is the only country allowed to have a sphere of influence.

The New York Times (1/26/22) asked: “Can the West Stop Russia From Invading Ukraine?” but shrugs at the US dismissal of Putin’s terms as “nonstarters.” The Washington Post (12/10/21) reported: “Some analysts have expressed worry that the Russian leader is making demands that he knows Washington will reject, possibly as a pretext for military action once he is spurned.” The Post quoted one analyst, “I don’t see us giving them anything that would suffice relative to their demands, and what troubles me is they know that.”

Audiences have also been assured that Putin’s reaction to Western expansionism is actually a prelude to more aggressive actions. “Ukraine Is Only One Small Part of Putin’s Plans,” warned the New York Times (1/7/22). The Times (1/26/22) later described Putin’s Ukraine policy as an attempt at “restoring what he views as Russia’s rightful place among the world’s great powers,” rather than an attempt to avoid having the US military directly on its border. USA Today (1/18/22) warned readers that “Putin ‘Won’t Stop’ with Ukraine.”

But taking this view is diplomatic malpractice. Anatol Lieven (Responsible Statecraft, 1/3/22), an analyst at the Quincy Institute, wrote that US acquiescence to a neutral Ukraine would be a “golden bridge” that, in addition to reducing US/Russia tensions, could enable a political solution to Ukraine’s civil war. This restraint-oriented policy is considered fringe thinking in the Washington foreign policy establishment.

The Memory Hole
The Strategic Case for Risking War in Ukraine
Image
John Deni (Wall Street Journal, 12/22/21): “The West ought to stand firm, even if it means another Russian invasion of Ukraine,” because even though “the human toll will be extensive… the long-term damage suffered by Moscow…is likely to be substantial as well.”
All of this missing context allows hawks to promote disastrous escalation of tensions. The Wall Street Journal (12/22/21) published an opinion piece trying to convince readers there was a “Strategic Advantage to Risking War In Ukraine.” The piece, by John Deni of the US Army War College, summarized the familiar hawkish talking points, and claimed that a neutral Ukraine is “anathema to Western values of national self-determination and sovereignty.”

In a modern rendition of Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Afghan Trap, Deni asserted that war in Ukraine could actually serve US interests by weakening Russia: Such a war, however disastrous, would ​​“forge an even stronger anti-Russian consensus across Europe,” refocusing NATO against the main enemy, result in “economic sanctions that would further weaken Russia’s economy” and “sap the strength and morale of Russia’s military while undercutting Mr. Putin’s domestic popularity.” Thus escalating tensions is a win/win for Washington.

Few of the recent wave of Ukraine pieces recount the crucial history given above. Including the truth about US foreign policy goals in the post-Cold War era makes the current picture look a lot less one-sided. Imagine for one second how the US would behave if Putin began trying to add a US neighbor to a hostile military alliance after helping to overthrow its government.

The economic imperative for opening foreign markets, the NATO drive to push up against Russia, US support for the 2014 coup and the direct hand in shaping the new government all need to be pushed down the memory hole if the official line is to have any credibility. Absent all of that, it is easy to accept the fiction that Ukraine is a battleground between a “rules-based order” and Russian autocracy.
On Ukraine, Biden is channeling his inner Neville Chamberlain
Image
If Biden is Chamberlain, as Marc Thiessen (Washington Post, 12/10/21) suggests, then Putin is of course Hitler.
Indeed, the Washington Post editorial board (12/8/21) recently compared negotiating with Putin to appeasing Hitler at Munich. It called on Biden to “resist Putin’s trumped-up demands on Ukraine,” “lest he destabilize all of Europe to autocratic Russia’s advantage.” This wasn’t the only time the paper has made the Munich analogy; the Post (12/10/21) ran a piece by former George W. Bush speechwriter Marc Thiessen headlined “On Ukraine, Biden Is Channeling His Inner Neville Chamberlain.”

In the New York Times (12/10/21), Trump NSC aide Alexander Vindman told readers “How the United States Can Break Putin’s Hold on Ukraine,” and urged the Biden administration to send active US troops to the country. A “free and sovereign Ukraine,” he said, is vital in “advancing US interests against those of Russia and China.” Times reporter Michael Crowley (12/16/21) also framed the Ukraine standoff as another “Test of US Credibility Abroad,” after that credibility was supposedly damaged after ending the war in Afghanistan.

In a New York Times major feature (1/16/21) on Ukraine, the US role in bringing tensions to this point was completely omitted, in favor of exclusively blaming “Russian Belligerence.”

As a result of this coverage, the interventionist mentality has trickled down to the public. One poll found that, should Russia actually invade Ukraine, 50% of Americans support embroiling the US in yet another quagmire, up from just 30% in 2014. Biden, however, has said that no US troops will be sent to Ukraine. Instead, the US and EU have threatened sanctions or support for a rebel insurgency should Russia invade.

The past few weeks have seen several failed talks between the US and Russians, as the US refuses to alter its plans for Ukraine. The US Congress is rushing a “lethal aid” package to send more weapons to the troubled border. Perhaps if the public were better informed, there would be more domestic pressure on Biden to end the brinkmanship and seek a genuine solution to the problem.

https://fair.org/home/what-you-should-r ... t-ukraine/

*************************************************

National Days of Action Feb. 4-12, 2022: No war on Russia and Donbass! U.S./NATO out of Ukraine!

January 29, 2022 Solidarity with Novorossiya & Antifascist in Ukraine

Image
U.S. tanks arrive in Estonia as part of the NATO buildup on Russia’s borders.

The Biden administration has put 8,500 U.S. troops on standby for deployment, on top of 64,000 already stationed in Europe. Millions of dollars in U.S. “lethal aid” (weapons) is arriving daily in Ukraine. Biden claims that there is an imminent threat of a Russian invasion. But the real invasion threat stems from U.S.-allied Ukraine against the independent Donbass republics of Donetsk and Lugansk, near Russia’s western border.

Washington and its NATO partners have been pushing Ukraine’s government to invade Donbass, hoping to provoke a response from Russia that can cover further NATO expansion. Ukraine has deployed 125,000 troops to the ceasefire zone, including battalions of neo-Nazis, armed with NATO weapons. Donbass residents have already suffered eight years of Ukrainian war and Western blockade. More than 14,000 people have perished in that conflict.

Despite a U.S. promise not to expand NATO eastward at the end of the Cold War, the alliance has added 14 members since. Russia has made it clear that a NATO takeover of Ukraine – the largest country on its European border – is an unacceptable threat to its national security. Biden has continued Trump’s war drive worldwide, from Yemen to Syria, Venezuela to Palestine, Iraq to the South China Sea.

Why is Washington provoking Russia? The U.S. under both Democrats and Republicans has long sought to dominate and plunder the entire former Soviet Union economically, politically and militarily. Today U.S. Big Oil companies and banks urgently want to stop the flow of Russian gas and oil to Western Europe, including the new NordStream2 pipeline, so U.S. allies will be forced to buy from them. Biden, who has betrayed the urgent needs of workers and oppressed communities that elected him, is desperate to funnel people’s anger at a foreign enemy.

We say no! Poor and working people are wracked with crisis after crisis here at home: rampant spread of COVID; deliberate dismantling of public health measures to control the pandemic; wages slashed by inflation; capitalism’s climate destruction intensifying; the end of eviction moratoriums; racist police terror; bans on anti-racist education in schools; far-right attacks from the streets to the Supreme Court on people’s basic democratic rights.

We need a struggle to end racism and poverty at home, not another criminal war abroad!

We call for antiwar, workers’ and people’s organizations across the U.S. to hold rallies, pickets, mass leafleting, banner drops and other activities from Feb. 4-12. We must act now to stop another war before it starts.

Tell Biden and Congress:

*No war on Russia and Donbass
*Stop military aid to Ukraine – withdraw all U.S./NATO advisers, trainers and mercenaries
*Sign Russia’s draft statement on European security – end NATO’s eastward expansion.
*No new deployment of U.S. troops – bring all the troops home
*Disband NATO

Called by (list in formation):

Solidarity with Novorossiya & Antifascists in Ukraine
Women Against Military Madness (WAMM)
Alan Dale, Minnesota Peace Action Coalition*
Communist Workers League
Anti-War Committee
Socialist Unity Party / Struggle-La Lucha newspaper
Youth Against War & Racism
Harriet Tubman Center for Social Justice (Los Angeles)
Peoples Power Assembly (Baltimore)
Workers Voice Socialist Movement (New Orleans)
Women in Struggle / Mujeres en Lucha

*For identification only

To endorse:

solidarityukraineantifa@gmail.com
Facebook: facebook.com/events/1257146674792435

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... f-ukraine/

Tangent: Has no one noticed the parallels between NATO and the Delian League? Not 100% but enough for an argument, especially the middle and late portions of the League's history.
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Wed Feb 02, 2022 3:58 pm

To whom is war, and to whom is mother dear
02/01/2022

An outside view of the events in the Donbass

Since 2014, the military conflict between the unrecognized republics of the LPR and the DPR and Ukraine has not stopped in the Donbass . Despite its seemingly sluggish nature, the situation is constantly escalating: the intensity of shelling is increasing, open preparations are underway for the invasion of Ukrainian troops into the Donbass, and provocations have become more frequent. And from every mouthpiece against the enemy, a stream of accusations of inciting hatred, violating treaties and other unforgivable things is pouring. In this maelstrom of events, it is easy to lose sight of who is actually fighting with whom. Let's try to understand what is happening and whether it is worth the workers to stand on one side or the other of the barricades.

Image
Militia at the destroyed building

Donbass is a region in Eastern Europe that is part of Ukraine. It has large deposits of coal and a powerful chemical and coke industry. On April 27, 2014 , part of the territory of the Donbass seceded from Ukraine under the flag of the Lugansk People's Republic (LPR), followed by another part of the Donbass on May 12, 2014 as the Donetsk People's Republic (DPR). Since then, the leadership of Ukraine has not abandoned attempts to return the rebellious territories, although the intervention of the international community seems to have managed to slow down the hot phase of the conflict (see "Minsk agreements" ).

In May 2021, the lull ended: Ukraine began preparations for the invasion of Donbass, increasing its contingent in the contact zone. At the same time, Russia moved additional troops to the border with Ukraine and Donbass, to which the NATO countries immediately responded. However, the conflict did not happen, Ukraine withdrew its troops.

But in August it all started again. Heavy howitzers of the Pion reserve of the Supreme High Command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were deployed to the line of demarcation in Donbass , this once again confirmed that Ukraine is not going to comply with the Minsk agreements. NATO countries ignored this fact, thereby emphasizing the politicization of the conflict. And after the September meeting between Zelensky and Biden , tensions continued to grow as expected.

Image
Peony in action

The situation became even more complicated against the backdrop of the start of exercises to storm the Donbass in Ukraine , and at the end of September , restrictions on return fire on the Donbass militias by the Ukrainian Armed Forces were lifted. October opened with exercises of the Tochka-U OTRK of the Armed Forces of Ukraine on the border with Crimea and UAV reconnaissance flights , the withdrawal of security guarantees for Kiev from the LPR and the capture of an LPR observer. At the end of October, Ukraine occupied a village in the "gray zone", on neutral territory, and also stepped up preparations for the conflict, starting to supply medicines and equipment for the wounded to hospitals. In turn, Russian troops began movingto the border with Ukraine and Donbass, and the United States again sent ships with cruise missiles to the Black Sea.

November and December 2021 brought no relief. Ukraine , almost without hiding, began to deploy its troops in populated areas (this is an open violation of the third point of additional measures to strengthen the ceasefire adopted in July 2020). Reports on the growth of military groups and the transfer of weapons were supplemented by data on the shelling of villages in the DPR and LPR. Russia conducted major airborne exercises in the Crimea and Krasnodar Territory , while NATO deployedF-18 fighters and military transport aircraft closer to the zone of possible collision. Allegedly to prevent a Russian attack on small and defenseless Ukraine. And all this is happening against the backdrop of very aggressive rhetoric coming from representatives of all sides of the alleged conflict.

Image
Airborne Canadian Air Force F-18

The situation is aggravated not only by the growth of the Ukrainian Armed Forces on the border with Donbass, but also by a serious shortage of coal in Ukraine, which has already caused the shutdown of most of the power plants and the start of electricity supplies from Belarus . Recall that from November 1, 2021, Russia stopped supplying coal to Ukraine, which may give the impression of artificially pushing the Ukrainian authorities to the conflict. The urgent need to regain control over coal deposits in the Donbass gives Zelensky another serious reason to force the seizure of the territory of the LDNR.

In January, preparations began in Russia for the evacuation of diplomats from consulates in Kiev and Lvov . The United States has followed suit, suggesting that war is close at hand.

And if it does start, will the Donbass republics be able to win the conflict on their own?

According to the data for 2019, the total number of weapons and personnel of the Republics of Donbass is as follows:

*tanks - 481 units;
*armored vehicles - 914 units;
*guns and howitzers - 444 units;
*mortars - 276 units;
*MLRS - 208 units;
*personnel (active) - 30-35 thousand people.

As part of the BM-21 Grad MLRS, T-72 and T-64 tanks, MT-12 Rapira anti-tank guns, 2C1 Gvozdika howitzers and 2C9 Nona-S self-propelled mortars. Also in service are the Strela-10 air defense systems, ZU-23-2 anti-aircraft guns, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers BTR-80, BMP-1, BMP-2, MT-LB, ATGM 9K113 Konkurs, MANPADS 9K38 Igla. Aviation and air defense of medium and higher range are absent. In mid-January 2022, OSCE drones spotted another 50 tanks and 26 artillery mounts near Luhansk, which were not previously accounted for, but the equipment is still very small and mostly outdated.

Image
Tanks in service with the DPR

The APU has a slightly different picture:

*tanks - 2809 units.
*armored vehicles - 8217 units.
*self-propelled artillery - 1302 units.
*guns - 1669 units.
*MLRS - 625 units.
*aircraft - 234 units.
*personnel (active) - 255 thousand people. + 1 million people reserve.

The equipment of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, although inferior to modern analogues, is much newer than what they can put up in the LDNR. There are MLRS "Grad", "Hurricane", "Smerch", mortars "Pion", self-propelled guns "Acacia", "Msta-S", "Carnation", mortars "Nona", howitzers D-30, tanks T-64 , T-72, T-80, S-200, S-300, Buk-M1 air defense systems, MiG-29, Su-25 aircraft, infantry fighting vehicles and armored personnel carriers BMP-2, BMP-1, BTR-70, BTR- 80, Mi-24, Mi-8 helicopters and much more.

Image
Attack aircraft Su-25 Ukrainian Air Force

Already at the time of April 2021, a grouping of about 100 thousand people was deployed on the border of Donbass , which allows us to speak of a large numerical superiority of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. Now, according to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation, half of the entire personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine has been pulled to the contact zone.

On the side of the LDNR, there are serious fortification lines designed to slow down the advance of the enemy’s armed forces. But for the destruction of fortifications, Ukraine has many tools. Inspired by the experience of Karabakh, the Armed Forces of Ukraine during the conflict are going to actively use unmanned aircraft, which the Donbass cannot oppose with anything other than electronic warfare (EW), since there are no medium and long-range air defense systems. Also, the Armed Forces of Ukraine, despite the shortage of ammunition , will actively use (and are using now) artillery. They will be supported by NATO countries, in particular the United States. It is possible that US ships armed with Tomahawk cruise missiles will be used to carry out disarming strikes on the Donbass.

Image
Launch of a Tomahawk cruise missile from a US Navy ship

It is obvious that the chances of the Donbass republics to stand on their own in the conflict with Ukraine are extremely small. Therefore, the soldiers of Donbass harbor hopes for the intervention of the Russian Federation in the conflict. Constantly deteriorating living conditions and a protracted economic crisis may push the Russian authorities to start a "small victorious" war. However, due to the active participation of NATO countries, which do not intend to allow a serious increase in Russian influence in this region, the Russian army will most likely not risk getting involved in the conflict openly in order to avoid a sharp aggravation of international relations. But the defeat of the countries of Donbass by the Russian authorities is also extremely disadvantageous, since this will be sharply negatively perceived by the Russian society.

Thus, the intervention of the Russian army is likely to be limited to either enforcement of peace (a repetition of the Karabakh situation), or the dispatch of volunteers and the supply of equipment. But it is unlikely that such assistance is capable of keeping the mini-republics actually cut off from the world afloat for a long time.

In addition to equipping the troops and the strength of the allies, the motivation of the military personnel plays a significant role in the success of military operations. It is directly related to both socio-economic conditions and the understanding of what people have to die for. And it needs to be given very serious attention.

Let's start with the APU.

The army of Ukraine consists not only of openly fascist elements, but also of poorly motivated people who openly express their unwillingness to fight. One can recall at least the sensational appeal of the Ukrainian military to Zelensky after the capture of the village of Staromaryevka in the neutral zone. It’s very easy to understand people: since 2014, you don’t understand what’s been going on in the country, it’s getting harder to live, and then there’s also a war, the reasons for which ordinary Ukrainians often don’t understand and are not close to.

Image

With the motivation of the LPR and DPR troops, the situation is even more contradictory. In 2014, it was fueled by hopes for building a people's republic, for a better life, and for Russia's help. Now, after 7 years, for many in the armies of the LPR and DPR, it has become obvious that they are on guard not at all for the people, but for themselves an oligarchic state, in which the standard of living of the worker is inexorably falling. At the same time, trade with the alleged enemy, Ukraine, continues. This means that no matter who wins, the living conditions of the workers will not seriously change. Only people who receive "gesheft" on local resources will change. And it is far from the people who own the resources of the LDNR.

Only seven years have passed, and the oligarchs have already appeared in the Donbass. For example, Dmitry Egurnov , who did not hesitate to take advantage of martial law and “squeeze out” most of the small food business for himself. Now he is engaged in the supply of products. Or Igor Andreev , the owner of a food production facility in the Donetsk region and part-time of the Elektrostal plant, located in the Ukrainian-controlled city ​​of Kurakhovo . In 2017, his fortune was estimated at $ 35 million .

The appearance of “their own” oligarchs did not make it any easier for the workers of the LDNR. The contradictions in society have already developed so much that in June 2020, the miners of the Luhansk Republic, due to the systematic non-payment of salaries, staged the first long-term protest action, refusing to rise to the surface. The debt of the mine owners to the miners amounted to as much as 8 billion rubles, but the businessmen did not want to admit their guilt.

Image
Luhansk miners demand wages

In order to combat this action in the city where the mine is located, under the pretext of fighting the epidemic, a curfew was introduced, entry and exit were restricted. At the same time, the miners' strike was immediately dubbed "a provocation of the Ukrainian special services." This indirectly confirms the idea that the business is using the current situation to its advantage.

Referring to the difficult situation due to the threat of war and the epidemic, the authorities of Donbass continue to infringe on the rights of workers and increase the pace of exploitation of workers for many years. Pennies are received not only by the miners of the LDNR, while the owners of backbone enterprises only get richer from year to year. The increased strikes show that the workers are already tired of enduring this.

The situation is just as bad with those who defend the independence of Donbass. The soldiers of Donbass are paid a salary of 15-16 thousand rubles, while soldiers often have to buy military uniforms themselves. Sooner or later, this situation, coupled with constant shelling from the Ukrainian side, will inevitably lead to popular unrest, which the Armed Forces of Ukraine can also take advantage of.

Did the people of Donbass die for this in 2014? For everything to happen again, but under a different flag? It is unlikely that the army of Donbass will fight for the independence of its republics with the same zeal, as it was during the “Russian Spring”.

Image
Donbass militias

All this once again emphasizes the whole drama of the situation - it turns out that the war for independence has largely been curtailed, but the classic opposition of one capital to another still remains.

After all, it is obvious that Ukrainian business, which lost a very tasty morsel in 2014, by returning Donbass to the Ukrainian mainstream, seeks to increase profits at once and solve a number of economic and social problems.

The opposite side wants to avoid the loss of its independence and "honestly earned" wealth, which does not stop growing, despite military actions. In 2017 alone, Egurnov ’s Interelectro-2010 company received 42 million hryvnias of revenue while working in Ukraine, and his own Mastertorg in April 2020 received a 500 million rubles loan from the DPR. In addition, he received another 11 million rubles ( $150,000 ) from the DPR by participating in tenders. There is information that Yergunov controls one of the Donetsk TV channels - " Union ", for the maintenance of which millions of rubles are allocated from the treasury of the DRN. The cases of Igor Andreevfor 2021 went so well that he managed to open a network of food supermarkets in Donetsk - " Hercules-Moloko ", while displacing the previously existing food and household trifles dealers.

Few people want to give up such a jackpot for the sake of the notorious "unity of the nation." It is for the right to continue personally profiting from the suffering of the workers of Donbass that the soldiers of the LDNR are sent to the front line.

The desire to get their own from the warring parties is quite significant: they use the contradictions between the long-standing participants in the conflict - the United States and Russia, which undoubtedly have their own interests in this region. The result here may be a full-scale imperialist war, in which not only Ukraine and the LDNR will be forced to participate. But this prospect does not seem to frighten anyone except ordinary citizens who will continue to suffer for the interests of their elites.

Image
Anti-war rally in Kiev / Photo: freeze frame / Klymenko Time / youtube.com

The situation around Donbass is heating up every day. Russia is concerned about the intention of the United States to deploy offensive weapons and missile defense systems in Ukraine that can be used to launch a nuclear strike. In order to avoid further escalation, the parties held negotiations , which, as expected, ended in failure.

Against the background of the escalation, the Ukrainian authorities continued to rapidly prepare for an offensive in the Donbass, the reason for which in the future could be fabricated confirmations of an attack by the republics of Donbass. The republics themselves have already announced their readiness to request assistance from Russia if necessary, in turn, they have already headed to the Donbassvolunteers, however, in a rather modest number. So, in case of failure of international negotiations, Russia may find itself in a Zugzwang situation - intervention in the conflict threatens with a new war or even escalation into a full-scale conflict in Europe, non-intervention - to strategic and political defeat. The task of NATO represented by the United States is to obtain guarantees not to use the military, including the nuclear potential of Russia to support China, and the task of Russia is to protect nuclear sovereignty.

One way or another, the transnational business again launched large-scale political games, putting the lives of workers on the line. It seems that the considerably weakened labor movement is not able to influence the outcome of these games.
From the editor . In this article, we deliberately consider only two sides: Ukraine and the LDNR. The example of this conflict shows how the needs of the people, who are ready to fight for their freedom, are often replaced by the interests and needs of big business. We still demand that the Russian authorities help the republics in the confrontation, however, we warn that, one way or another, the Banderaites are no better than the Vlasovites ... The confrontation between Russia and the NATO bloc, which, against the backdrop of skirmishes of small capitalists, are trying to resolve their own contradictions, is a topic for a deeper research.
https://www.rotfront.su/komu-vojna-a-komu-mat-rodna/

Google Translator

Best I know the oligarchs who had been in Donbass before their revolution, while perhaps absenting their persons for a while did not lose their property, which the important thing so saying they 'appeared' is a little inaccurate. The talk of 'people's republics' and an at least partial return to socialism(expropriate the oligarchs) in Donbass faded as major proponents of such 'outlandish' ideas among the initial militia commanders were assassinated one by one. Hard to say who was responsible for these murders, enemies of socialism rule in both Kiev and Moscow and are always motivated to savagery at the inkling of existential threat.

*********************************************

And just in case the memory dims, a review...
Neo-Nazis and the Far Right Are On the March in Ukraine

Five years after the Maidan uprising, anti-Semitism and fascist-inflected ultranationalism are rampant.
By Lev GolinkinFEBRUARY 22, 2019

Image
A march of the Azov Battalian, Svoboda, and other far-right radical groups in Kiev, October 14, 2017. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)

Five years ago, Ukraine’s Maidan uprising ousted President Viktor Yanukovych, to the cheers and support of the West. Politicians and analysts in the United States and Europe not only celebrated the uprising as a triumph of democracy, but denied reports of Maidan’s ultranationalism, smearing those who warned about the dark side of the uprising as Moscow puppets and useful idiots. Freedom was on the march in Ukraine.

Today, increasing reports of far-right violence, ultranationalism, and erosion of basic freedoms are giving the lie to the West’s initial euphoria. There are neo-Nazi pogroms against the Roma, rampant attacks on feminists and LGBT groups, book bans, and state-sponsored glorification of Nazi collaborators.

These stories of Ukraine’s dark nationalism aren’t coming out of Moscow; they’re being filed by Western media, including US-funded Radio Free Europe (RFE); Jewish organizations such as the World Jewish Congress and the Simon Wiesenthal Center; and watchdogs like Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and Freedom House, which issued a joint report warning that Kiev is losing the monopoly on the use of force in the country as far-right gangs operate with impunity.

<snip>

A NEO-NAZI BATTALION IN THE HEART OF EUROPE
“Volunteer Ukrainian Unit Includes Nazis.”—USA Today, March 10, 2015

<snip>
FAR RIGHT TIES TO GOVERNMENT
“Ukrainian police declare admiration for Nazi collaborators”—RFE, February 13, 2019

<snip>

STATE-SPONSORED GLORIFICATION OF NAZI COLLABORATORS
“Ukrainian extremists celebrate Ukrainian Nazi SS divisions…in the middle of a major Ukrainian city”—Anti-Defamation League Director of European Affairs, April 28, 2018

<snip>

BOOK BANS
“No state should be allowed to interfere in the writing of history.”—British historian Antony Beevor, after his award-winning book was banned in Ukraine, The Telegraph, January 23, 2018
(They would hide the crimes of Nazi Ukrainians)

<snip>

ANTI-SEMITISM
“I’m telling you one more time—go to hell, kikes. The Ukrainian people have had it to here with you.”—Security services reserve general Vasily Vovk, May 11, 2017

<snip>

ROMA POGROMS
“‘They wanted to kill us’: masked neo-fascists strike fear into Ukraine’s Roma.” —The Guardian, August 27, 2018

<snip>

LGBT AND WOMEN’S-RIGHTS GROUPS
“‘It’s even worse than before’: How the ‘Revolution of Dignity’ Failed LGBT Ukrainians.”—RFE, November 21, 2018

<snip>

ATTACKS ON PRESS
“The Committee to Protect Journalists condemns a Ukrainian law enforcement raid at the Kiev offices of Media Holding Vesti…more than a dozen masked officers ripped open doors with crowbars, seized property, and fired tear gas in the offices.”—The Committee to Protect Journalists, February 9, 2018

<snip>

LANGUAGE LAWS
“[Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk] also made a personal appeal to Russian-speaking Ukrainians, pledging to support…a special status to the Russian language.”—US Secretary of State John Kerry, April 24, 2014

(more...)

https://www.thenation.com/article/archi ... t-ukraine/
We should also remember that the US preserved the existence of these scum from 1945 on because anti-communism is more important than anything else to capitalists and their political toadies in both parties. And that does include Democratic party leadership all the way to the top.

Which side are you on, 'progressives'?
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

User avatar
blindpig
Posts: 10586
Joined: Fri Jul 14, 2017 5:44 pm
Location: Turtle Island
Contact:

Re: Footnotes from the Ukrainian "Crisis"; New High-Points in Cynicism Part IV

Post by blindpig » Thu Feb 03, 2022 6:40 pm

A short history of NATO eastward expansion and the current tensions in Europe
February 3, 2022 Martin Woodley

Image
U.S. Army M1A2 Abrams battle tanks arrived in Estonia in 2017 as part of NATO’s Operation Atlantic Resolve.

Europe stands closer to all out war than at any time since WWII. It is imperative that the Western left fully understands the global geopolitical significance of the escalations currently taking place. Of course, the principal struggle which the U.S. is conducting is with China, and it is this that structures all other major world events. In the event of a major struggle with one adversary, the intelligent tactic would be to create and exploit divisions within that adversary’s system of alliances. In this case, by far the most important geostrategic ally of China is Russia.

However, the tactics pursued by the U.S. over the past decade have amounted to the solidification of the Sino-Russian relationship. This curious way of proceeding can only be understood in terms of the very narrow limits placed on the room for maneuver by the U.S.’s prior project of encircling Russia. The principal instrument of this encirclement in Europe is NATO. And contrary to what is discussed in the Western media, it is the expansion of NATO to the east, to include first the countries of the former Warsaw Pact, and now the attempt to incorporate some former Soviet republics. Fig.1 shows NATO member states and their proximity to Russia. Note that the incorporation of Ukraine and Georgia, both of which are candidates for membership, would bring NATO right up to Russia’s borders to join Latvia and Estonia. Moreover, given the attempt at regime change in Belarus in 2021 which if successful would probably have led to a government favorable to NATO candidacy, it is clear that Russia has legitimate security concerns.

Image
Fig. 1: NATO member states.

It is instructive to summarize the stages in the planning and execution of this eastward expansion. A detailed summary of the early assurances against NATO expansion given by leading diplomats derived from declassified documents is given in the National Security Archive.

In early February 1990, U.S. leaders made an offer. According to transcripts of meetings in Moscow on Feb. 9, then-Secretary of State James Baker suggested to Minister of Foreign Affairs, Eduard Shevardnadze, that in exchange for cooperation on German reunification the U.S. could make “iron-clad guarantees” that NATO would not expand “one inch eastward.” Less than a week later, Soviet President Mikhail Gorbachev agreed to begin reunification talks. After discussing the issue with West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl on February 24-25, the U.S. gave the former East Germany “special military status,” limiting what NATO forces could be stationed there in deference to the Soviet Union.

However, by March 1990 – only one month after Baker’s agreement with Shevardnadze – State Department officials were advising Baker that NATO could finesse Eastern Europe into the U.S.’s orbit. By October, U.S. policymakers were contemplating whether and when (as a National Security Council memo put it) to “signal to the new democracies of Eastern Europe NATO’s readiness to contemplate their future membership.”

The promise was reiterated in 1993 when the Partnership for Peace Program was proposed as a U.S. initiative at the meeting of NATO defense ministers in Travemünde, Germany, on October 20–21, 1993. In her memoirs, Madeleine Albright confirmed that the pro-expansion decision was reached in June 1993. Yeltsin was still in his first term as President of the Russian Federation. Indeed, in 1993 Yeltsin told Polish President Lech Walesa “Russia does not oppose Poland’s membership in NATO and does not perceive its membership in NATO as a threat to Russia.” However, ‘Under pressure from opposition within Russia, this informal declaration was retracted the following month, and Yeltsin wrote in October that NATO expansion violated the spirit of the 1990 agreement’.

Hungary, Poland, and the Czech Republic were invited to join NATO at its Madrid summit in 1997 and became full members in 1999. In 2004, during the George W. Bush presidency, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia and Slovenia joined, and Bush made an unsuccessful attempt to gain the membership of Georgia and Ukraine. In 2009 Albania and Croatia joined, in 2017 Montenegro became a member, and in 2020 North Macedonia became a member. The invitation to Georgia to join was a factor in the Georgian decision to attack South Ossetia in 2008 igniting the Russo-Georgian war of the same year. Incidentally, it is interesting to note that a pro-Western government came to power in Georgia following the so called ‘rose revolution’.

George W. Bush’s successful push to expand NATO to include the Baltic republics, and his even more brazen though unsuccessful effort to gain membership for Georgia and Ukraine at the Bucharest NATO summit greatly antagonized Russia. This promise of NATO membership for Georgia and Ukraine, was forestalled only by the opposition of Germany and France on the grounds that it would unnecessarily antagonize Russia, nevertheless encouraged Georgia to provoke a war with Russia by attacking South Ossetia. The background to the Russo-Georgian war of 2008 is the ‘rose revolution’ of 2003, which replaced the pro Russian government of Eduard Shevardnadze with the pro-Western government of Mikheil Saakashvili. This regime change occurred with the assistance of the suspension of aid by the IMF and U.S., and the active participation of some 4000 mostly foreign funded NGOs, including USAID, and which closely followed the model of the Serbian ‘bulldozer revolution’ which led to the overthrow of Slobodan Milosevic on 5 October, 2000.

The model of regime change which led to the overthrow of pro Russian governments in Serbia and Georgia was further pursued by the Obama administration in Ukraine, building on the ‘orange revolution’ of 2004-5 and culminating in the Maidan uprising which overthrew the pro Russian government of Viktor Yanucovych in 2014 as a result of his refusal to sign a political association and free trade agreement with the EU. The overthrow of the Yanucovych government was accompanied by a purge of civil servants associated with the former government and a de-russification of the country. That is what has led to the current long standing internal civil struggle between the predominantly Ukrainian and predominantly Russian regions of the country (see Fig.2).

Image
Fig. 2: Locations of the predominantly Russian speaking populations of Ukraine.

Since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the NATO military alliance has extended its borders 800 miles to the east, incorporating Poland, Hungary, Czechia, Bulgaria, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro and North Macedonia. In 2021, NATO officially recognized Ukraine itself as an “aspiring member,” and Sweden and Finland are also considering joining the anti-Russia alliance. Both Finland and Estonia are less than 200 kilometers (125 miles) from St. Petersburg, and Ukraine’s eastern border is less than 750 kilometers (465 miles) from Moscow. The current strategic situation facing Russia is shown in Fig.3.

Image
Fig. 3: the western border of Russia currently threatened by the proposal to admit Georgia and Ukraine into NATO.

In addition to the already accomplished eastward expansion of NATO and the proposed additions of Ukraine and Georgia, it is also necessary to account for the failed attempts to overthrow the pro-Russian governments of Belarus in 2021, and Kazakhstan earlier this year. Had these attempts been successful it is extremely probable that there would be moves to incorporate these additional states into NATO. This would accomplish a complete encirclement of Russia on its European and central Asian borders. The cases of Ukraine and Georgia are particularly sensitive since membership of NATO means that states are covered by NATO’s mutual defense article. Therefore Ukraine would be encouraged to retake Crimea and the Donbas by force and Georgia would be encouraged to retake Abkhazia by force secure in the knowledge that if Russia intervenes they would have the protection of the other NATO powers. This would deprive Russia of access to the black sea.

As can be seen from the above, the current heightened tension has been building for some time, and results directly from Western deceptions around NATO expansion at the moment of the dissolution of the U.S.SR, which are intensified by the present day geopolitical confrontation between the Western powers and the Eurasian Bloc led by China and Russia. For instance, Fig.4 shows an excerpt from a speech given by Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in 2018.

Image
Fig. 4: Excerpt from a speech by Sergei Lavrov. Taken from a twitter post by @Laurie_Meadows

Source: Socialist Action Britain

https://www.struggle-la-lucha.org/2022/ ... in-europe/
"There is great chaos under heaven; the situation is excellent."

Post Reply