We’re alienating allies & risking a much larger war
Meanwhile, Europe has finally woken up to the risks and seems to be ready to carve out a different path than the US. A lot hinges on the high level talks that are currently underway between Russia and Europe’s leaders.
As the President Hollande of France put it on Feb 7th, “If we don’t find not just a compromise but a lasting peace agreement, we know perfectly well what the scenario will be. It has a name, it’s called war.”
He’s not simply referring to an escalation of the factions fighting within Ukraine. He’s warning about the real deal: a wider conflict that could easily spread into Europe, and possibly, the embroil powers across the world.
A Recipe For Unrest
As I’ve written previously, the West, especially the US, was instrumental in toppling the democratically-elected President of Ukraine back in February 2014. US officials were caught on tape plotting the coup, and then immediately supported the hastily-installed and extremist officials that now occupy the Kiev leadership positions.
In short, the crisis in Ukraine was not the result of Russia’s actions, but the West’s. Had the prior President, Yanukovych, not been overthrown, it’s highly unlikely that Ukraine would be embroiled in a nasty civil war. Relations between Russia and the West would be in far better repair.
Russia, quite predictably and understandably, became alarmed at the rise of fascism and Nazi-sympathetic powers on its border. Remember the repeated statements by Kiev officials recommending extermination of the Russian speakers who make up the majority living in Eastern Ukraine. Were a parallel situation happening in Canada, for example, I would fully expect the US to be similarly and seriously interested and involved in the outcome.
The only people seemingly surprised by this predictable Russian reaction towards protecting its people and border interests are the neocons at the US State Department who instigated the conflict in the first place. In my experience, these are dangerous people principally because they seem to lack perspective and humility.
Ukraine’s Civil War
Going Poorly For The Regime
Looking at the state of things, it’s not going well militarily for the Kiev regime. Huge losses and persistent reports of low morale among Ukrainian troops tell the tale: Kiev is losing badly.
Let’s begin with the reports of the fighting in Ukraine which have recently intensified:
Ukraine bloodshed intensifies ahead of peace summit
Feb 11, 2015
Kiev (AFP) – Intense fighting in Ukraine, including a devastating rocket strike on Kiev’s military headquarters in the east, killed at least 37 people on Tuesday, the eve of a four-way peace summit.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said rockets for the first time hit the military’s command centre in Kramatorsk, the government’s administrative capital in the region, well behind the frontlines and far from rebel positions.
The latest fighting also saw rebels seek to encircle railway hub Debaltseve and Ukrainian forces launch a counter-offensive around the strategic port of Mariupol.
(Source)
The rebels have encircled and ruined a number of Kiev forces over the past several months in what are called ‘cauldrons’, where the encircled forces are slowly ground down and destroyed. This appears to have finally happened in Debatlseve, which would be just another in a long string of heavy losses for Kiev.
The losses in prior cauldrons have been staggeringly high, with many analysts concluding that Kiev has been underreporting losses by as much as 90%.
I cannot vouch for all of these sources. But the following is a typical example of reporting coming from the front lines of the Ukraine conflict, which directly contradicts the official Kiev war reports:
Ukraine hides devastating losses as Russia-backed fighters surge forward
Jan 25, 2015
ARTYOMOVSK, Ukraine – An ashen-faced man in a loose-fitting military uniform shuffles past a blood-soaked stretcher propped against the wall. Slowly stirring a cup of tea, he watches Ukrainian military officials announce the day’s casualties – one killed and 20 wounded.
“Don’t believe what they tell you,” he says, checking the door is closed before continuing.
“There are many, many more. At least 280 were injured in just one day last week and 30 or 40 killed. There were many more killed this week, Debaltseve and Konstantinovka are the worst cities now. I take 18 wounded to Kharkiv myself every day.”
The man, who didn’t want to be named, is a medic in Ukraine’s overstretched, under-resourced army. Clearly traumatized, he speaks quietly and hesitantly, barely audible over the low rumble of artillery fire from the outskirts of town.
His words confirm Ukraine’s worst-kept secret – that the Ukrainian army is drastically understating its casualties. But only now is the scale of that understatement starting to become clear.
On Jan. 22, the director of Kostiantynivka hospital told Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe monitors that in the last two weeks that the number of soldiers admitted has “increased dramatically, with figures comparable to those in August and September 2014.”
Between Aug. 10 and Sept. 3, when Russian troops first entered Ukraine in support of a beleaguered rebel force on the brink of defeat, the Kyiv Post estimates at least 200 servicemen were killed.
Many of the recent casualties are coming from areas around the besieged town of Debaltseve, a strategic rail junction between Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, where thousands of Ukrainian soldiers are struggling to prevent being surrounded and cut off from Ukrainian lines.
The town’s defenders – and its civilian population – have faced an incessant artillery bombardment from three sides since Russian-backed rebels launched a massive offensive all along the front line last week.
(Source)
I have read enough first-hand reports to suspect that this article is pretty close to the truth. The contradicting numbers in the statements from the Kiev regime about losses are very hard to believe.
Part of what plagues Kiev’s forces is the age-old problem of fielding an unmotivated force. Not everybody is excited to be fighting against people from within their own country. Moreover, training is poor, equipment and ammunition are in poor shape and supply, and pay is often late in coming if it comes at all. This is a very usual litany of problems that have plagued struggling armies through the centuries.
On the other side of the battle lines, you have people fighting for their homes, their families and their ethnic community, which the Kiev regime has promised to exterminate if and when it’s given the chance.
Dubious Reporting
It’s interesting to contrast foreign reporting with US reporting on the conflict:
As fighting deepens in eastern Ukraine, casualties rise and truce is all but dead
Jan 20, 2015
MOSCOW — Intensifying battles, mounting death tolls and new accusations of Russian interference in eastern Ukraine have marked some of the worst fighting between government troops and pro-Russian separatists since last summer, rendering a months-old cease-fire agreement effectively defunct.
The two sides have been trading heavy fire at the Donetsk airport, a prize that, though more symbolic than strategic, has been at the center of punishing recent attacks that have reduced much of the facility to rubble. Each side has claimed control of the airport at various points, and militia and army fighters there continued to launch strikes against each other over the past several days.
The U.S. ambassador to Ukraine, Geoffrey R. Pyatt, bolstered Ukraine’s accusations Tuesday, saying the United States was alarmed by what he called a Russian-provoked military escalation, coupled with the arrival of large quantities of weaponry from Russian territory, according to the Russian Interfax news service.
Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin told reporters Tuesday that pro-Russian separatists were “taking advantage” of the military’s compliance to seize “very substantial territory — more than 500 square kilometers.”
(Source)
Let’s decode this piece of writing from the Washington Post and provide some essential context that is, regrettably, missing far too often from US media sources when reporting on the Ukraine conflict.
To begin, there’s the assertion once again that Russia has been supplying “large quantities” of weapons to the separatists. While this may or may not be true, not one shred of satellite or other imagery or any other evidence has been provided by the US to support that charge.
In this day and age it is literally not possible to move large amounts of heavy weaponry across open land without satellites and/or drones taking pictures of them.
Furthermore, in this case the charges are being levied by one Geoffrey Pyatt, the infamous US ambassador to Ukraine who was caught on tape discussing the imminent coup of then-President Yanukovych. He also famously tweeted out a crudely doctored photo purporting to show that the missile attack on MH-17 came from the separatists — evidence that was quickly defrauded by the intelligence community.
Why the Washington Post would report anything from Pyatt as worthy of our serious consideration given his blighted track record so far is a complete mystery to me. It would be like recommending your friend to a doctor you knew had committed gross malpractice multiple times.
Next, the separatists are not ‘taking advantage’ of a one-sided lull in the fighting to claim territory. They have been winning battle after battle. What they have taken advantage of is the poor training and lackluster military strategy undertaken by Kiev’s forces.
It should also be noted that the above article presents the status of the conflict an even match. There’s no indication that one side is winning or losing.
This is par for the course with US media reports these days and it’s really a disturbing indication that the shoddy journalistic ethics on display during the horrendously mis-reported weapons of mass destructions lies that led to the most recent US attack on Iraq are still with us today.
It’s quite sad, really. Because when it comes to an issue as important as a potential conflict with Russia, the US owes it to itself to get the facts right. The stakes are worthy of that.
As a final point about the shortcomings of the Washington Post piece above concerns the heavily contested Donetsk airport. Five days prior to the above article’s publication, the airport had been clearly reported by other outlets to have already been lost by Kiev forces:
Russia-backed separatists seize Donetsk airport in Ukraine
Jan 15, 2015
Russian-backed separatists announced that they have captured the shattered remains of the Donetsk airport terminal in eastern Ukraine and plan to claw back more territory, further dashing hopes for a lasting peace agreement.
The airport, on the fringes of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk, has been at the centre of bitter battles since May. Control over it was split between the separatists and Ukrainian forces, who had held onto the main civilian terminal. Reduced to little more than a shell-strewn wreck, the building is of limited strategic importance but has great symbolic value.
An AP reporter saw a rebel flag hoisted over that building Thursday, although fighting still appeared to be ongoing. Ukraine insisted government troops were holding their positions at the airport.
(Source)
Instead of the airport being up for grabs as the WaPo article implies, it has had the rebel flag flying over it as of five days ago. It’s clearly in the hands of one side, the separtists’. That’s a huge difference, and is just one more example of heavily slanted writing that passes for news in the US these days.
But leaving the shoddy reporting aside, the main summary here is that the intense fighting in Ukraine has resulting in mounting losses for Kiev.
All of which provides the context for this week’s hurriedly-brokered ‘peace summit’ that will involve France, Germany, Russia and Ukraine.
Splitting Away
Europe has begun the process of splitting away from the US on the matter of Russia and Ukraine.
What’s interesting is that an emergency meeting is being convened amongst several of the top leaders in the world, but looks who’s suspiciously absent from the talks:
Merkel and Hollande’s surprise Moscow visit raises hopes of Ukraine deal
Feb 5, 2015
The leaders of Germany and France abruptly announced a summit with the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, in Moscow on Friday in response to overtures from the Kremlin, raising hopes of a breakthrough in the year-old Ukraine conflict.
The sudden and unusual decision by the chancellor, Angela Merkel, and the president, François Hollande, to travel to Moscow, with the French leader talking of decisions of war and peace, increased the stakes in the crisis while also raising suspicions that the Kremlin was seeking to split Europe and the US. Putin was said to have made “initiatives” to the European leaders in recent days.
Merkel and Hollande met the Ukrainian president, Petro Poroshenko, in Kiev on Thursday evening but left without making any comment.
EU diplomats and officials said that growing US talk of arming Ukraine was pushing the Russians and Europeans towards a diplomatic deal, with both sides keen to avoid weapons deliveries but also to keep the US on the sidelines of the diplomacy.
(Source)
Note the progression of what transpired, which we can piece together from this and other articles. US Secretary of State John Kerry was in Kiev meeting with the president and prime minister of Ukraine, but did not attend similar meetings with Hollande and Merkel held on the same day.
Then Hollande and Merkel jet straight off to Moscow for high level talks.
Missing in action from the Germany-France-Ukraine-Russia talks is John Kerry, President Obama, or any other ranking US official. This speaks volumes about where we are in this narrative.
When the US started down this path of confrontation with Russia, which remains a complete strategic mystery to nearly all thoughtful observers, there were two large possible outcomes: isolating Russia and fracturing its growing ties with Europe, or accidentally fracturing the strong ties between the US and Europe.
Oops. Looks like we’ve opened Door #2.
I didn’t know how serious it was until I read this:
Kerry Insists ‘There Is No Split’ With Europe on Russia, Ukraine
Feb 8, 2015
MUNICH — Secretary of State John Kerry on Sunday denied any divisions between the U.S. and Europe over how to handle Russia, as Germany announced another high-level summit aimed at stemming the crisis in Ukraine.
Kerry told a security conference in Munich that he wanted to “assure everybody there is no division, there is no split” between Washington and its European allies amid the crisis in Ukraine.
“We are united, we are working closely together,” he told the conference following meetings with his French and German counterparts. “We all agree that this challenge will not end through military force. We are united in our diplomacy.”
(Source)
It’s not terribly hard to read through that diplomatic double-speak here. The US is “united in our diplomacy” with Europe, even though the US was apparently not invited to be part of the biggest gathering of heads of state on what could be the flash point for a major regional war.
Nice try, John.
There’s a saying that news is never official until it’s denied. Well, I guess that makes it official: there’s an emerging split between the US and Europe over the matter of Russia and Ukraine. And it’s about time.
The key issue, apparently, is that the US, true to form, is ready to send in military arms to the Ukraine regime, and Europe thinks that’s a bad idea for multiple reasons. I could not agree more.
After all, when has the US arming one side of a regional conflict led to regional peace and a good outcome for the citizens of any particular area? If you can’t think of any recent examples, neither can I. The track record of late is nothing short of being a complete disaster for the people of the various countries involved. Iraq, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, and Nicaragua come to mind.
But the people of Ukraine have to be kicking themselves right about now. Not only did they fall for the rosy promises of change and hope peddled by the West, they also believed the West would be a better partner for them than Russia. Worse, instead of finding a way to have both as partners, they adopted the West’s idea that it had to be one or the other. And now their country is being rent apart.
Why We Should Care, Deeply
So what? the average American might ask. Ukraine is half a world away. Who cares what happens there?
Putting aside the humanitarian reasons for not prolonging or intensifying a regional conflict, we risk not just only America’s century-long ties with western Europe, but possibly the next world war. We are pushing our agenda and armaments right up against the Russian border — for reasons that are still completely opaque at this time — and Russia, understandably, will simply not stand for that.
In Part 2: America Vs Russia: What’s At Risk, we explore in depth what’s truly at risk here, why a lasting peace agreement in Ukraine is highly unlikely to happen anytime soon, and the biggest risks concerned citizens in the West should prepare for right now.
Click here to access Part 2 of this report (free executive summary; enrollment required for full access)
Exchange on Lew Rockwell today — interview with Doug Casey.
Notice what Lew has to say about Putin. Jeezus, even he buys into the bullshit?? The “good guys” are numbering fewer and fewer by the day.
=================================
Lew: So with that big picture in mind, do developments like the Russians canceling their South Stream pipeline idea in favor of a new route through Turkey matter?
Doug: Not really. The devil can be in the details, but these are just details. More important, as Marin points out in his new book, The Colder War, Putin is the smartest and toughest politician on the international scene today. Whether or not we like him isn’t relevant; we should expect his decisions to be intelligent, given his goals.
For example, as we’ve discussed before, from the Russian perspective, his actions helping Russian populations break their provinces away from Ukraine make perfect sense. The actions of the US-installed puppet government in Kiev are criminal and insane, trying to recapture those people who want independence in eastern Ukraine by force.
So even though he’s not a “nice guy,” I’m a Putin fan.
Lew: We’re going to have to agree to disagree on that one. I FEAR THE MAN WANTS TO BE TSAR OF THE WORLD — and he may be ruthless enough to pull it off. And I don’t understand why you’re so quick to dismiss US/EU propaganda but buy into Russian propaganda. You haven’t been to Ukraine to determine the facts for yourself. Neither have I, but I have friends there, and I believe you’re misinformed.
The Minsk Agreement on Ukraine – Putin’s Victory
Posted on February 13, 2015 by Martin Armstrong
In the Belarusian capital Minsk representatives of Ukraine, Russia and the rebels from the Donbass signed a 13-point agreement on a ceasefire and other measures to resolve the conflict in Ukraine under OSCE supervision.
The essence of the plan is to take account of the self-determination of peoples, which is the reason for the conflict: the ethnic Russians in the Donbass do not want to submit to a central government from Kiev itself. The Obama Administration really opposed this sort of settlement on the grounds of old-world empire theory predicated on territorial integrity of Ukraine. Such policies have led to the death of hundreds of millions of people over the centuries..
The leaders of Russia, Ukraine, France and Germany have reached a ceasefire deal after 17 hours of talks in Minsk, Belarus, on the Ukrainian conflict.
The ceasefire will come into force on Sunday as part of a deal that also involves the withdrawal of heavy weapons from the front line.
Russian president Vladimir Putin was the first to announce the deal, saying: “We have agreed on a ceasefire from midnight 15 February.” Putin went on to say “There is also the political settlement. The first thing is constitutional reform that should take into consideration the legitimate rights of people who live in Donbass. There are also border issues. Finally there are a whole range of economic and humanitarian issues.”
Putin achieve a major political victory as the deal was brokered with Germany and France. The US did not participate and given Obama’s policies, there would not have been any such deal and Kerry, well he may go down as the worst Secretary of State in history.
In particular, the agreement provides for a truce starting February 15, 0.00 local time clock is a strictly complied ceasefire comes into force. Furthermore, all heavy weapons systems should be withdrawn 50 km behind the line of demarcation with weapons greater than 50 caliber should be moved 70 km and 140 km for missile systems. The negotiated in September boundary lines apply to the separatists as starting points. The withdrawal shall begin no later than two days after the ceasefire and be completed within 14 days.
On the first day of truce to begin talks on local and regional elections “in accordance” with Ukrainian law. No later than 30 days after the signing of the agreement, the Ukrainian parliament adopted a resolution to establish the areas that receive a special status. This should apply to those areas in the regions of Donetsk and Luhansk, who were at the time of the Minsk Agreement under control of the rebels in September. There will also be a general amnesty for all rebels. Five days after the withdrawal of the weapons of the exchange of prisoners and hostages on both sides should be terminated.
A day after the regional elections to the Ukraine again assume full control of the border with Russia in rebel-held areas. This should apply to the completion of a comprehensive political settlement, which is aimed at the end of 2015. Moreover, all foreign fighters and weapons are to leave the country. All “illegal groups” are to be disarmed. That would include American supported private armies.
By the end of 2015, a constitutional amendment is to be implemented, which provide for decentralization and a special status for areas in eastern Ukraine. As part of this reform about an amnesty for the rebels, a linguistic self-determination of the best Russian-speaking population and close, cross-border cooperation between the regions of Lugansk and Donetsk with the neighboring Russian border areas should be committed. The areas to the east should have the right to the formation of local police forces
This was simply inevitable and should have been the political solution from the outset. This idea of territorial integrity rather than the desire of the people in any region is old-world thinking that has to stop.
There are about seven thousand Nazi Ukies trapped in some “cauldron” in Eastern Ukraine. Nazi Ukies who came to the east to slaughter and kill their own countrymen.
Hopefully, the Pro Russian Separatists will kill most of them before the ceasefire takes effect.
Stucky, I tend to agree. But I kinda feel sorry for those “Nazi Ukies” who have been duped by Kiev (and with US backing) into the situation they find themselves in.
In any case, remember the saying: “In war the first casualty is truth”…(or something like that).
Point being, propaganda is rampant so it’s difficult to find out that is true and what is not.
What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?
[img
[/img]
Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is allegedly “threatened by the Islamic State”.
The “Global War on Terrorism” is heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.
We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.
Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.
The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.
One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. As the political legitimacy of the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates must be dispelled.
The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World.
Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia, China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.
Xenophobia and the Military Agenda
The wave of xenophobia directed against Muslims which has swept across Western Europe is tied into geopolitics. It is part of a military agenda. It consists in demonizing the enemy.
Muslim countries possess more than 60 percent of total oil reserves. In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Iraq has five times more oil than the United States. (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, Jannuary 4, 2007).
A large share of the World’s oil lies in Muslim lands. The objective of the US led war is to steal and appropriate those oil reserves. And to achieve this objective, these countries are targeted: war, covert ops, economic destabilization, regime change.
The American Inquisition
A consensus building process to wage war is similar to the Spanish inquisition. It requires social subordination, the political consensus cannot be questioned. In its contemporary version, the inquisition requires and demands submission to the notion that war is a means to spreading Western values and democracy.
A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. We must go after the bad guys.
War is peace.
The ‘big lie’ has now becomes the truth … and the truth has become a ‘conspiracy theory’.
Those who are committed to the Truth are categorized as “Terrorists”.
According to Paul Craig Roberts (2011), the conspiracy theory concept “has undergone Orwellian redefinition”…
A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps….
In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.
Fiction becomes fact.
Investigative journalism has been scrapped.
Factual analysis of social, political and economic issues is a conspiracy theory because it challenges a consensus which is based on a lie.
What is the Truth
The real threat to global security emanates from the US-NATO-Israel alliance, yet realities in an inquisitorial environment are turned upside down: the warmongers are committed to peace, the victims of war are presented as the protagonists of war.
The homeland is threatened.
The media, intellectuals, scientists and the politicians, in chorus, obfuscate the unspoken truth, namely that the US-NATO led war destroys humanity.
When the lie becomes the truth there is no turning backwards.
When war is upheld as a humanitarian endeavor, Justice and the entire international legal system are turned upside down: pacifism and the antiwar movement are criminalized. Opposing the war becomes a criminal act. Meanwhile, the war criminals in high office have ordered a witch hunt against those who challenge their authority.
The Big Lie must be exposed for what it is and what it does.
It sanctions the indiscriminate killing of men, women and children.
It destroys families and people. It destroys the commitment of people towards their fellow human beings.
It prevents people from expressing their solidarity for those who suffer. It upholds war and the police state as the sole avenue.
It destroys both nationalism and internationalism.
Breaking the lie means breaking a criminal project of global destruction, in which the quest for profit is the overriding force.
This profit driven military agenda destroys human values and transforms people into unconscious zombies.
Let us reverse the tide.
Challenge the war criminals in high office and the powerful corporate lobby groups which support them.
Break the American inquisition.
Undermine the US-NATO-Israel military crusade.
Close down the weapons factories and the military bases.
Bring home the troops.
Members of the armed forces should disobey orders and refuse to participate in a criminal war.
” … so it’s difficult to find out that is true and what is not. ” ———- Rise Up
Yes. But, this is a good start …
Whatever the USA!USA!USA! government says ….. the opposite is most likely true.
The useless agreement which everybody wanted
I have to say that I am both amused and appalled at the completely over-the-top reaction of most commentators to what we might as well call the Mink-2 Agreement (M2A). Apparently, analysis has been abandoned altogether and has now been replaced with hyperbole and vociferous but empty statements. Reading some of the comments made here one could be forgiven for thinking that somehow the war in the Ukraine was over and that the AngloZionist Empire, aided by Putin, Surkov and an anonymous but sinister army of Russian oligarchs, has just inflicted a terrible and final blow to the Novorussian dream.
What is going on here? Has everybody just gone crazy?
In part, this is due that one could read anything, everything and its opposite into this agreement (more about that later) and also to the fact that the western media simply had to present any agreement as a triumph of western willpower, diplomacy and sanctions. This is all utter nonsense, of course, but that is what you get for exposing yourself to the corporate media. So let’s set aside all the loud clamoring and use our brains to actually *think*.
First, I would remind everybody that the junta as broken every single agreement it committed to. Every single one. And there is absolutely no reasons at all to believe that this time around this will change.
Second, Poroshenko can promise all he wants, but the real power in the “independent Ukraine” is held by Uncle Sam and by the “Maidanites” he controls.
Third, why do you think that Merkel and Hollande suddenly felt a powerful urge to “scratch their diplomatic itch” and decided to intervene? Could that sudden urge to negotiate have a little something to do with a place called Debaltsevo? If yes, what does the M2A say about Debaltsevo? Exactly. *Nothing*.
Fourth, the agreement not even signed by Poroshenko, but by Kuchma on behalf of the Ukraine.
Fifth, check out this section:
9. Restoration of full control over the state border of Ukraine by the government throughout the conflict zone, which should begin on the first day after the local elections and be completed after a comprehensive political settlement (local elections in some areas of Donetsk and Lugansk regions on the basis of the Law of Ukraine and constitutional reform) at the end of 2015, subject to paragraph 11 — in consultation and agreement with the representatives of individual areas of Donetsk and Lugansk regions in the framework of the Three-Party Contact Group.
Do you see what I see? Nevermind that the border is supposed to get back under Kiev’s control only after “something” happens, but check out the “something” itself: constitutional reform in consultation and agreement with Novorussian leaders!!!! Does anybody seriously believe that the Rada will participate in anything even remotely looking like this? Liashko? Farion? Tsiagnibok and Iarosh all working together with the “subhuman colorads” from the Donbass to change the Ukrainian Constitution? Of course not!
So so far, let’s sum this up. M2A was:
1) signed by a person with no authority
2) on behalf of a junta with no powers
3) it does not say a word about the main reason for the meeting in Minsk
4) it contains clearly impossible sections
How is that for a brilliant text?
In truth, there is a short section of the document which does contain one realistic elements: a ceasefire followed by a withdrawal of heavy weapons. That’s it. The rest is nonsense. See for yourself
#4: local elections organized by the junta and Novorussians together. Nonsense
#5: pardons and amnesties. Blanket amnesty for all the war crimes (including MH-17 and Odessa “barbecue”). Disgusting.
#6: exchange of “all for all”. Except that most folks in the junta hands are long dead.
#7: humanitarian assistance. Empty statement, the assistance is already coming in.
#8: payment of pensions: the junta does not have the money anyway. Will not happen.
#9: Constitutional reform. Will not happen
#10: Withdrawal of all foreign forces. Nonsense: those who are there (NATO countries) will stay, those who are not there (9000 Russian soldiers) cannot “leave” since they are not there to begin with.
#11: Constitutional reform including the creation of “The creation of people’s militia”. LOL – apparently, that will be the new name for the Novorussian armed forces.
#12: Elections if all of the above happens first. Since it ain’t, they won’t.
#13: Creation of “working groups”. Right. Keep dreaming.
The fact is that what is the most interesting about M2A is not what it says, but what it does NOT say:
1) not a word about Debaltsevo
2) not a word about the junta actually sitting down to negotiate with the Novorussian authorities
3) not a word about the future status of the Ukraine
4) not a word about the Ukrainian economy (which is still in free fall)
5) not a word about any peacekeepers (which are indispensible to make any ceasefire stick)
6) not even a word about the fact that the Novorussians are not “terrorist” but people seeking national independence. Poroshenko has still not spoken to them directly.
It is possible that these issues were, in fact, discussed, but that this will not be revealed to the general public. There might be secret clauses to M2A. However, it is at least as likely that these issues were discussed and that no agreement whatsoever was found, hence they were set aside.
But if nothing really important was decided, why did everybody participate to this exercise? Simple: everybody got something from it (assuming any parts M2A are actually implemented):
1) The Novorussians:
a) a stop of the terror attacks by the junta on Novorussian cities.
b) the recognition of the line of contact
c) the assurance that Voentorg remains open (control of border)
d) time to mobilize and train their planned 100’000 extra men
e) the recognition by all parties (including the Europeans) that they deserve a special status
2) Poroshenko:
a) the apparent and symbolic support for world leaders
b) a stop of the Novorussian advance
c) a vague hope that junta forces will be allowed to leave the Debaltsevo cauldron
d) money from the IMF (not nearly enough, but better than none).
3) Merkel and Hollande:
a) the illusion of relevance of a EU foreign policy
b) the (probably misguided) hope to stop the crazy Americans
c) the hope to an easing of the economic war with Russia (Mistrals?)
4) Putin:
a) the right to control the border until the constitutional reforms are made, in other words ad aeternam.
b) the recognition that without him no solution can be found
c) the hope for some easing of sanctions
Everybody got what they wanted and left with a smile on their face. Good for them, but none of that does anything to really settle the conflict or even begin to seek a solution.
The reality is that nothing at all happened in Minsk, at least nothing of any importance. The Novorussians won the latest battle (yet again) so they came in a position of strength and they got the junta to promise to stop the crazy shelling, and since Debaltsevo was not even mentioned, it looks to me that the junta forces there will be allowed to quietly withdraw as long as they leave their weapons behind. So the Debaltsevo cauldron will be controlled by Novorussia. Putin got political recognition and the hope of at least no more sanctions (remember after Minsk 1 the EU immediately imposed more sanctions on Russia). The Europeans got a little something too, mainly some good PR, and the big loser is most definitely Poroshenko who will now have the highly unenviable task of “selling” M2A to a totally crazy Rada (which, by the way, is currently considering an law proposed by Poroshenko’s party to make the denial of the Russian aggression against the Ukraine a criminal offense).
Conclusion:
Just like in a chess game, time is a critical factor. M2A gave everybody a little time-out, but the conflict will resume and the only thing which will stop this conflict will be a double collapse of the Ukrainian economy and armed forces which I believe will most probably happen this summer. Until then, the conflict will be more or less frozen, though I will believe in a junta withdrawal of heavy weapons systems only if/when I see it. Also – remember that one can very well fight with tanks, mortars and infantry.
Nazi Baderastan and Novorussia are two civilizationally different project which cannot and will never coexist under one roof. Yes, for tactical reasons there might be the need to pretend that this is possible, but the reality is that it will not. The only way to keep Novorussia inside the Ukraine is to denazify the latter and until that is done, Novorussia will never really return to the Ukraine. That is a hard fact which nobody in the West is willing to accept. In Kiev, they fully understand that, but their “solution” is to empty Novorussia form Novorussians and to give this much needed Lebensraum to the “Ukr” Master Race of western Ukraine. And that is something which Russia will never allow. Which leaves only two possible outcomes: the EU gives up and the Ukraine is denazified, or the US starts a full-scale war against Russia in a desperate attempt to prevent that outcome.
[img
[/img]
[img
[/img]
Stucky
Those two pics are funny as hell, the top photo is a keeper. I have no doubt they laugh at our POTUS puppet on a daily basis.
Bea Lever
Generally speaking, for something to be funny, it must have an element of truth to it. Yes, indeed, that’s why those two pics are funny.
Putin Wins, Obama Loses
The announcement of the agreement opens as follows:
“Russian President Vladimir Putin; President of Ukraine, Peter Poroshenko; French President Francois Hollande; and Chancellor of the Federal Republic of Germany Angela Merkel, confirmed full respect for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. They firmly believe in the inevitability of peaceful resolution.”
U.S. President Barack Obama is not mentioned there; but, for him to reject their deal, and to send lethal weapons to Ukraine now and so escalate the war and its massive bloodshed — which has already cost “up to 50,000” dead and millions of refugees — would be extremely embarrassing for the United States: no American “boots on the ground,” just tens of thousands of Ukrainian corpses under it, in a war that Obama himself had initiated (and even the founder of Stratfor, the “private CIA” firm, says that the February 2014 overthrow of Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, which started the war, was “the most blatant coup in history,” which it certainly was, and is increasingly recognized as having been).
If, during coming days, Putin does nothing that causes Merkel or Hollande to say Putin is violating what had been understood between the negotiants, then Putin will be essentially in control on those crucial remaining details too, and the U.S. position (which favors more war) (and this is so not only from Obama but also from the Congress) will go down in flames. The next few days and weeks will thus be crucial, and Merkel and Hollande hold the top cards, because Obama needs to avoid an open break with them — something that would be an open break with the EU itself, which America’s aristocracy very much don’t want to happen (since America’s aristocracy would then lose their enormous influence over the EU).
The U.S. position has been for war against Russia from the start, which goes back at least to before 20 November 2013, when it was revealed in Ukraine’s parliament or “Rada” that the U.S. had already very skillfully set to spring a Euromaidan movement to bring down the Ukrainian Presidency of Viktor Yanukovych, which “Euromaidan” then started the very next day, when President Yanukovych announced that Ukraine had received a better economic offer from the Eurasian Economic Community than from the European Union, and that therefore it would be in the best interests of the Ukrainian people for Ukraine to join with the EEC (which the people in eastern Ukraine wanted), than with the EU (which the people in western Ukraine wanted) and that this joining of the EEC would now happen. The Euromaidan protest, which had been organized by America’s CIA, began on 21 November 2013. Its mass-members were regular western Ukrainians, but its leadership, the people who were armed, were Ukraine’s nazis, a special group of western Ukrainians, who viscerally hate ethnic Russians and actually want to exterminate them (thus making these people ideal for Obama’s purposes of crushing Russia).
Immediately after the coup when Yanukovych was overthrown, the EU sent an investigator, Urmas Paet, to find out whether the extremely violent overthrow of Yanukovych had been due to Yanukovych, or else to “someone from the new coalition [meaning the EU and U.S.],” and he reported, on 26 February 2014, to the EU’s foreign affairs chief, Catherine Ashton, that it was due to “someone from the new coalition [our side].” This information shocked her. (As Obama’s chief agent controlling the coup, Victoria Nuland, had said on 4 February 2014, preparing the coup, “F—k the EU!” In that same phone call, she also selected Arseniy Yatsenyuk as the person who would take over the Ukrainian Government after the coup, which he did, 22 days later. Anyone who denies that it was a coup is either ignorant or lying, because this is the first coup in history that was fully documented on live videos.) However, rejecting Ukraine as a new candidate for the EU didn’t fit Ashton’s job-description, and she could do nothing about the matter anyway; so, she accepted it, and tried to make it work, as peacefully as possible.
The EU’s reason for wanting Ukraine is chiefly economic, for its gas and agricultural resources. The chief reason that America’s aristocracy want Ukraine is as a launching-pad for NATO missiles against Moscow, because Russia is the world’s main military hold-out against control by the U.S. aristocracy, and America’s aristocracy are eager to use taxpayers’ money, which is to say the U.S. military, to bring Russia to heel and within their economic control — it’s then a freebie to them.
Russia’s President Vladimir Putin is primarily concerned to avoid Ukraine having a Government that wants U.S. strategic (i.e., aimed against Moscow) missiles; in other words: he wants to avoid Ukraine’s becoming a member of NATO — the anti-Russian military club of nations, which now surrounds Russia. The only way that he can achieve this crucial objective is for the far-eastern region of Ukraine, Donbass (the region shown in dark purple on this map), which had voted 90% for Yanukovych and 10% for America’s candidate (Yulia Tymoshenko) in the 2010 Presidential election (the last election in which all parts of Ukraine voted), to remain as being voters in Ukrainian national elections, so as to counterbalance the anti-Russian northeastern half of Ukraine and thus avoid any more nazis being elected to national power in Ukraine.
Donbass is the region where Obama’s Ukrainian Government is trying to exterminate the residents (whom they call ‘Terrorists’ and try to kill in their “Anti Terrorist Operation” there, fooling the western Ukrainian public that those are “Terrorists” instead of simply Donbass’s residents, the people who live there). If Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko, or whomever the U.S. supports, doesn’t succeed at exterminating or else driving out the residents in Donbass, then Ukraine’s Government will probably not be able to join NATO and bring in its strategic missiles aimed at Russia — which is what this is all about, from the standpoint of Barack Obama: it’s part of surrounding Russia with NATO missiles.
Looking at that draft agreement, it seems to meet Putin’s basic national-security needs for Russia. Doubass’s people would retain their right to vote for Ukraine’s President.
In order for him to do this, it is essential for the breakaway region to stay within Ukraine as regards the voters there participating in future elections for Ukraine’s President. As I headlined on 19 September 2014, “Russia’s Leader Putin Rejects Ukrainian Separatists’ Aim to Become Part of Russia.” The current draft agreement meets this Russian-national-security need. As I commented at that time: “Perhaps Putin’s declining to accept Ukrainian territory into Russia is part of an agreement between the two leaders in which Obama is, for his part, declining the urgings from congressional Republicans and conservative Democrats for the U.S. to provide weapons to the Ukrainian military to expedite their ethnic cleansing campaign.” However, if U.S. President Obama goes ahead with the Republicans’ position, of sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, then the United States will end up becoming internationally isolated, unless either Merkel, or Hollande, or both, declare that Putin is failing to comply with the new agreement, and rejoin with the United States in its ethnic-cleansing effort to eliminate the residents in the separatist region, “Donbass,” which includes the Donetsk and Luhansk republics.
So, although Putin has won this opening round of obtaining a new peace agreement, Obama still yet can win in the later stages and increase the ethnic cleansing, if either Merkel or Hollande abandon Putin.
The draft agreement also includes other features that would be necessary for the economic reconstruction of the Donbass region, which the Ukrainian Government has been bombing in its ethnic cleansing campaign. For the first time (if the initial statements from the IMF become borne out in additional ‘loans’ actually taxpayer donations, to Ukraine), Western taxpayers will be contributing to that economic reconstruction, which will be vast, especially considering that around 50,000 civilians and soldiers have probably thus far been slaughtered in Obama’s ethnic-cleansing campaign there, and more than a million residents have fled and become refugees (mainly in Russia), and the cities and villages have been bombed and even firebombed. So, while some aristocrats may have gained from Obama’s coup, taxpayers in the West will now be paying tens of billions to undo some of the economic damage that Obama and the U.S. Congress (especially Republicans there) have caused in Ukraine by means of the coup and of its essential ethnic-cleansing aftermath. Since ‘we’ taxpayers (the public) caused the war (from which only some international aristocrats might benefit — and those were the people behind it), we (and not those aristocrats) shall be cleaning up from it — if the current deal doesn’t fall apart and the damages from the war thus soar even further.
But, at least in the first draft of this agreement, Putin has won, and Obama has lost.
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/putin-wins-obama-loses-draft-plan-ukraine.html
Neo-cons only want war with the objective of world domination. Unfortunately, a neo-con even worse than Rumsfeld is our new Sec Defense:
http://mikenormaneconomics.blogspot.com/2014/12/glenn-greenwald-new-pentagon-chief.html