Obama refuses to rule out arming Kiev following talks with Merkel

The volume increases on the war talk. What will happen in Minsk? Who will pressure Obama to take lethal weapons off his options list, and to admit there has been no Russian invasion of Ukraine?

The White House phone number for making comments is 1-202-456-1111.

From World Socialist Web Site
by Patrick Martin and Barry Grey, February 10, 2015

At a joint White House press conference with German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Monday, President Barack Obama made clear he was considering authorizing the dispatch of advanced weapons to the US- and NATO-backed regime in Kiev, to be used against pro-Russian separatist forces in eastern Ukraine.

Obama indicated that he would wait to see the results of talks set for Wednesday in Minsk, the capital of Belarus, between Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, French President François Hollande and Merkel before making a decision on sending US arms to Kiev. The talks are aimed at brokering a new cease-fire agreement between Ukrainian government forces and pro-Russian separatists following the collapse of an agreement reached last September.

At the press conference following talks with Merkel, Obama said:

“If, in fact, diplomacy fails, what I’ve asked my team to do is to look at all options. What other means can we put in place to change Mr. Putin’s calculus? And the possibility of lethal defensive weapons is one of those options being examined.”

Obama then added, “I want to emphasize that a decision has not yet been made.”

The US president left open the sending of weapons such as antitank missiles and armored vehicles to the Kiev regime, which has lost territory in the east of the country to rebel forces in recent weeks, despite warnings from prominent officials and some newspapers internationally that doing so could dramatically escalate the conflict and trigger a military conflict between NATO and Russia, with the possibility of a nuclear Third World War.

Merkel and the leaders of Britain and France have made clear in recent days that they oppose a US move to directly arm Kiev. Instead, they call for tougher economic sanctions combined with increased NATO military forces in the Baltic states and Eastern Europe to compel Moscow to accept the transformation of Ukraine, a former Soviet republic, into a staging ground for US and European imperialist moves to reduce Russia to a semicolonial status.

In her remarks, Merkel indicated her opposition to the dispatch of American weapons to Ukraine, saying, “I don’t see a military solution to this conflict.” But she stressed that Europe and the US were united in backing the Ukrainian regime, which came to power last February in a US- and German-backed coup led by fascist militias, and forcing Russia to end its support for pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk, Luhansk and other Russian-speaking regions.

“On certain issues we may not always agree,” she said, suggesting that Germany would continue to back the US-led offensive against Russia even if Washington decided to arm the Kiev government.

Obama, for his part, seemed to echo Merkel, saying there “may be some areas where there are tactical differences” while the US and Europe remained united in basic strategy and goals.

US military and civilian officials, including some within the Obama administration, are pushing for a decision to begin sending heavy arms to Kiev. At the Munich Security Conference last Saturday, US Gen. Philip M. Breedlove, NATO’s military commander, said sending weapons to help Ukrainian forces crush the separatists should not be ruled out.

At a Senate confirmation hearing last week, Obama’s choice to become the next defense secretary, Ashton Carter, said he would be inclined to back Ukraine with American arms.

Ukrainian President Poroshenko triggered the latest crisis in eastern Ukraine by ordering an offensive by Ukrainian military forces, including some battalions of neofascist “volunteers.” It is inconceivable that he would have done so without Washington’s approval.

The Russian-backed forces routed the invaders around the Donetsk airport and have pressed a counterattack, taking control of an additional 500 square kilometers of territory and threatening the town of Debaltseve, which sits on the main road between Luhansk and Donetsk. As many as 3,000 Ukrainian troops are trapped in the town and could be forced to surrender.

Washington, NATO, the European Union and the media have portrayed the fighting in eastern Ukraine as a Russian invasion, although the vast majority of combatants are drawn from the Donbass region, where most people are Russian speakers and the government in Kiev is widely hated.

Obama repeated the claims of “Russian aggression” at the onset of his joint press conference with Merkel, saying that “Russian forces continue to operate” in Ukraine, “training separatists and helping to coordinate attacks.”

Last week’s sudden trip by Hollande and Merkel to Kiev and Moscow, setting the stage for Wednesday’s summit in Minsk, appeared to be driven by concern that a US decision to provide billions in weapons to Ukraine was imminent and could escalate the crisis enormously.

A top official of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe told journalists at the Munich conference that he feared weapons deliveries would turn the crisis into an “existential conflict for Russia against NATO.”

Similar concerns were expressed in the American media, albeit by a small minority in the US national security establishment. The New York Times published an op-ed Monday by Professor John Mearsheimer under the headline “Don’t Arm Ukraine,” which asked rhetorically whether the United States would accept Canada or Mexico joining a hostile military alliance.

Even the rabid anti-Russian publicist Anne Applebaum, a Washington Post columnist, expressed concern about “a new World War” emerging from the Ukraine crisis, although she offered the lesser evil of “a new Cold War” in which NATO would “build a Berlin Wall around Donetsk in the form of a demilitarized zone and treat the rest of Ukraine like West Germany.”

 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/10/merk-f10.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/obama-refuses-to-rule-out-arming-kiev-following-talks-with-merkel/5430577

Powerful explosions rock Donetsk; DPR commander briefs the press

Posted on Fort Russ, February 9, 2015

Submitted by: Joaquin Flores – uploaded from Kazzura

DPR dept corps commander Eduard Basurin’s morning briefing 09/02/15 — demonstration of the banned munition used against the Donetsk and answers questions regarding the powerful explosions, after the UAF strike at Donetsk last night.

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/video-big-explosion-dpr-commander.html

Another Ukrainian military expert says, no Russian invasion or regular troops, Kiev government acts as a terrorist. Are NATO troops involved in Kiev war crimes? (VIDEO)

By George Eliason, February 9, 2015
Posted on Washington’s Blog

In an interview with Ukrainian Espesso TV in December, Ukrainian military expert Major Aleksander Taran confirmed what General Muzenko head of the Ukrainian Armed Forces had to say on the subject.

During a briefing with General Muzenko he announced that “To date, we have only the involvement of some members of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and Russian citizens that are part of illegal armed groups involved in the fighting. We are not fighting with the regular Russian Army. We have enough forces and means in order to inflict a final defeat even with illegal armed formation present. “- he said.

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”https://www.youtube.com/embed/t_iZKJ0tJN0&#8243; frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

Both of these statements further confirmed the head of the SBU position.

November 6 th In an interview with Gromadske.TV, Markian Lubkivsky, the adviser to the head of the SBU (the Ukrainian version of the CIA) stated there are NO RUSSIAN TROOPS ON UKRANIAN SOIL! This unexpected announcement came as he fumbled with reporters’ questions on the subject. According to his statement, he said the SBU counted about 5000 Russian nationals, but not Russian soldiers in Donetsk and Lugansk Peoples Republics.

All of these statements add weight to the otherwise untrustworthy comments of Alexander Torchynov back in June of 2014.

According to speaker of the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine Alexander Turchynov, representatives of security agencies deliberately whipped up the situation systematically misinforming the country’s leadership about Russia’s possible military intervention, which had never happened.

 “Our intelligence agencies have about ten times a month reported that the time of a military attack on the part of the Russian Federation was defined – usually it was at three or four in the morning. And we sat in combat readiness at the command post… and the rest of the army was preparing for an open war with the Eastern neighbor. But it did not happen,” Alexander Turchinov said in an interview with Novoye Vremya, which is to be released tomorrow.

It would seem we have a long and illustrious history of Russia NOT attacking Ukraine in 2014.

Who is attacking then, that’s the question.

This morning NAF scouts spotted NATO tanks inside the encirclement(Cauldron) at Debaltseve. According to their information the possibility is strong that up to 25% of the trapped army may be NATO. Shell remnants marked clearly with US identifying numbers from 155mm shells, shot by the Paladin artillery system have been recovered from areas the Ukrainian army have attacked civilian targets. If the NATO troops are there, and who else would be running the complicated military equipment, the possibility that they won’t make it home is in the same government’s hands that brought the world a non-existent Russian invasion and is pushing the world to the brink.

This would explain both the US and EU trying to push a new peace initiative. If NATO troops are taken captive, what then? If hundreds of NATO troops are fighting for Ukraine in a war that even John McCain says is using prohibited weapons, what are the liabilities after? American troops in this case and just based on McCain’s admission are by any definition War Criminals for participating.

Support our Troops and keep them home.

What will Russia’s Reaction Be?

Until this point Russia has been the only country to show restraint and a desire to stop the conflict. The US and EU have wholeheartedly helped Kiev go forward knowing it was committing war crimes; terrorist bombings of buses, rockets and missiles at cities, and phosphorus bombs. The west knows the volunteer battalions are committing mass war crimes.

If NATO soldiers are captured or their remains recovered and confirmed it will certainly change the nature of the war. The Russian weapons that the entire MSM have insisted are here will no doubt show up. If NATO pushes back, where ever isn’t far enough. It will be the brink of WWIII.

Source:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/02/another-ukrainian-expert-russian-invasion-regular-troops-kiev-possible-war-crimes.html
Another Ukrainian Expert -No Russian Invasion or Regular Troops- Kiev Possible War Crimes

On Minsk eve, Kiev refuses most terms, refuses to freeze conflict, asserts America can “thrash Russia”

by George Eliason, February 9, 2015
Posted on Global Research

According to the BBC on Febuary 9th President Barack Obama: ”The possibility of lethal defensive weapons is one of those options that is being examined.” What this means is if the Minsk talks fail, the US will supply lethal heavy weapons openly to Ukraine if Russia does not get into line with western policy.

Kiev, which has openly denied Russia is invading or sending regular troops into the conflict is now giving Russia an ultimatum. In October I traveled through the Donbass region and did invasive passport checks on soldiers. My findings agree with Kiev on this point.

There are no Russian military units or regular soldiers in the region. I interviewed Spanish volunteers. I spoke with Chechens, Afghanis, Russian citizens, and Cossacks. They are private citizens that have family here or have come to fight fascism so it does not spread further into Europe or Russia.

Even in the face of this According to the BBC Obama further stated “Russia had violated “every commitment” made in the failing Minsk agreement, he added, after talks with the German chancellor on a new peace deal.”

President Obama is under tremendous pressure from the combined Eastern European Caucus on Capital Hill to make this happen. For the nationalists the largest threat to them hasn’t been American democracy as it should have been, and should be. It has been Russia that has taken the lead in this and suffered the most for it.

On February 10th the Deputy Head of the Poroshenko Administration, Valery Chaly released these statements.

“Every decision concerning outcome of the upcoming meeting (Minsk) has been made already. Kiev unilaterally rejects all proposals for federalization, the expansion of the DNR an LNR to their administrative borders, and granting rights of broad autonomy.

The only thing that Kiev is ready to agree to is abolish duties between Russia and Donbass at their borders and indulge Donbass in the use of the Russian language.”

By taking any and all negotiations off the table, Poroshenko’s government has effectively rendered the Minsk talks and agreement worthless.

Taking a Stick To Russia’s Putin

Speaking for Poroshenko’s administration, Chaly went much further by saying under no circumstances will the conflict be frozen. In an ultimatum to Vladimir Putin’s government in Russia he boldly said “If Putin does not accept these terms the “West will thrash Russia! Russia will pay a high price, and among the serious consequences resulting from Russia’s lack of obedience would be an escalation of the conflict.”

How can Poroshenko’s Kiev escalate the conflict more than openly attacking civilians with banned weapons and destroying entire towns? The Ukrainian governments crimes against humanity in front of the world is what frames this conflict. This escalation can only mean drawing Russia into the conflict further, well beyond the diplomatic cover and humanitarian aid Russia is currently providing Donbass today.

This hit’em with a stick diplomacy is part and parcel to Ukrainian ultra-nationalist ideology. Diplomacy can only be conducted with a weapon pointed and your “enemy” crushed.

Heavy NATO weapons such as the Paladin artillery system and tanks are used in the arena already. The Ukrainian military has no training or experience on these systems. Will American troops fight for the openly nationalist Ukrainians? To date by the current reckoning well over 100 American mercenaries are buried here. Two US army military trainers were reported killed near Mariupol last August training Azov Battalion.

In one of the few articles to openly show the stark realities for Donbass the BBC in a congratulatory piece showed how much Ukraine is receiving for weapons and aid from private donors. It then compares the level of support Russia gives Donbass which according to the pro-junta BBC is minimal humanitarian aid.

Ukraine sealed off Donbass from getting medicines and foodstuffs from the west. Now it is demanding Russian do it from the East. It also demands that Russia take responsibility for weapons it is not sending. The twisted side politically is that Ukraine and the west want Russia’s Putin to take responsibility for decisions made outside his own country by the leaders of DNR and LNR who have clearly shown that while cooperative with Russia, Novorossya will be its own country. Vladimir Putin has also made it clear Novorossya does not have a future being absorbed as part of Russia.

Russia’s Response to the Ultimatum

As I sit writing this, the Kremlin has responded to both the ultimatums and the threat of US heavy weapons shipped openly to the conflict area. Simply, “we will respond to the US sending weapons with diplomacy.”

If Kiev was telling the truth about a Russian invasion through MSN all this time then US and EU troops are about to come in direct contact and conflict with them. This most dangerous of lies may eventually solve the problem of people not knowing where the Donbass conflict is. Should the worlds Titan countries go head to head, the Ukraine war, with Kiev’s lies, manipulations, war crimes, and eventual escalated attacks on Russia itself, may find its way to your own backyard.

For the American way of life, a crossroads has appeared in front of us. The decision about which road we should take will have profound effects on who we are as a country. If we are a great people we need to rely on and restore democratic principles.

If we sit by that decision is being made by neo-liberals and neo-cons for us today. In that case America will be remembered as a once great country that lost itself in both self-absorption and a nation that lost faith in its people. It became a people managed by its government. It is the most horrible of epitaphs.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/ukraine-war-kiev-announces-americas-war-with-russia/5430558

German Foreign Minister says Germany reserves right to “act decisively against Ukrainian leadership, including sanctions”

From Fort Russ
2/9/2015

Ukrainian MFA summons Germany’s ambassador after Steinmeier mentions possible sanctions against Kiev

Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s announcement that sanctions against Kiev are possible cause a furious reaction by the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

The Foreign Minister Steinmeier made this statement in an interview with the ARD TV channel.

Steinmeier said that if no political decision is reached in Ukraine, the German government reserves the right to “act decisively against the Ukrainian leadership, up to and including sanctions”.

Germany’s ambassador to Ukraine Christoph Weil was forced to have a discussion with the Deputy Foreign Minister of Ukraine Andrey Olefirov due to Steinmeier’s statement.

Ukrainian diplomats are very sensitive to Western countries’ position on the ongoing crisis in the country. However, that sensitivity is very one-sided. In December Ukraine’s ambassador to the EU Andrey Eliseev similarly strongly reacted to Steinmeier’s statement that Ukraine is not wanted in NATO.

“Nobody can prevent Kiev from joining NATO!” was the Ukrainian diplomat’s reply. Germans, as usual, took no offense, and nobody summoned Ukraine’s ambassador to the German MFA.

J.Hawk’s Comment: Let’s not forget Steinmeier’s statement was made against the background of Angela Merkel’s visit to the US. It would seem that everyone knows what Poroshenko must do. It would seem that we now know what was agreed to between Putin, Merkel, and Hollande in Moscow, namely the federalization of Ukraine. It’s a solution that is consistent with the interests of both Russia and Germany, as the two countries in effect decide the zones of their respective zones of economic influence. It also has the benefit (from everyone’s perspective except the junta’s) of cutting the junta out of the equation to a significant degree. Poroshenko, for his part, is still insisting that the situation should revert to the original (and never implemented) Minsk agreement. “Finis Ucrainae” is still the most likely scenario, unless something snaps in Kiev. That Western leaders are, for the first time, suggesting the possibility of Kiev being sanctioned suggests Poroshenko is in process of graduating from “disappointment” to “liability.”

Source:
http://ruposters.ru/archives/11676

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/germany-reserves-right-to-impose.html

Stratfor: Ukraine coup plotted by U.S. due to Russian stance on Syria

From Sputnik News, December 19, 2014

MOSCOW, December 19 (Sputnik) – The United States is behind the February coup in Kiev, which came in response to Russia’s stance on Syria, said George Friedman, the founder and CEO of Stratfor, a global intelligence company.

Russia has repeatedly said that the coup in Kiev was organized by the US, Friedman told Kommersant newspaper. Indeed, it was the most overt coup in history, the political analyst stressed.

The United States decided to act following Russia’s successes in the Middle East, a key region for the US. Americans saw that Russians could influence what was happening in the Middle East, Friedman said. Russians are one of the many challenges in the region that the US faces, he stated. The US thought Russia’s activities were an attempt to harm Washington, the political analyst told the newspaper, adding that events in Ukraine should be viewed in this context.

Russians seem to have underestimated how seriously the US would react to Moscow’s activities in the region and that they would easily respond, Friedman said. The US understood that the thing Russia wants the least is instability in Ukraine, he added.

Related article: Lavrov: Ukraine Freedom Act to Undermine US-Russia Relations for Long Time

The head of Stratfor, also known as “The Shadow CIA,” insisted that Russia’s involvement in Syria was not the only reason for the Ukrainian crisis. However, many in Washington started to perceive Russia as a problem, the expert told the newspaper, adding that at that time the US decided to divert Russia’s attention away from the Middle East.

Syria has been in a civil war since March 2011. Over 100,000 people have died as a result of the armed conflict. Russia repeatedly stated that the election of Syria’s president Bashar Assad was legitimate, and that the people of Syria should control their future. From the beginning of the war the US supported the opposition and stated that the conflict would not be over with Assad in power.

 

http://sputniknews.com/politics/20141219/1016024377.html

American military expert to Ukraine: The territories are lost, Ukraine has no army left, weapons won’t solve this situation

In the interview below are interesting comments about Hillary Clinton and the Democrats, John McCain, and the overall situation. However, Mr. Kofman does not acknowledge the political situation, and he parrots the American and Kiev regime lie that Russia is attacking Ukraine. This is, after all, a Ukrainian publication doing the interview.

“Sanctions have not changed the policy of Russia” —  American/NATO policy and American/Western actions are the things that need changing. Until American and NATO leaders and the American people, in particular, start living in the real world instead of the fantasy one they’ve created, and take responsibility for what they’ve done, they will continue to create disasters everywhere while pretending they are the victims.

For information on George Kennan, which the Kennan Institute is named for:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/americas-blueprint-for-global-domination-from-containment-to-pre-emptive-war-the-1948-truman-doctrine/5400067

Posted on Fort Russ


February 8, 2015
Tatiana Kozak, Novoe Vremia, nv.ua (Ukrainian publication)
Translated by Kristina Rus

No one in history has ever won a war with Russia at its borders – an American military expert

Why Ukraine can not win the war with Russia and why America will not supply the Ukrainians with weapons, explained the military expert of the Academy of Public Policy at the Kennan Institute, Michael Kofman

In his last statement, Obama opposed arms deliveries to Ukraine. Why did he decide this, given that the opinion of some of his surrounding is the opposite?

You must understand, there are several problems.

First, the presidential circle is not trying to persuade him. The most important thing, is that our National Security Council, which is headed by Susan Rice, believes that this approach to Ukraine is not reasonable and will not solve the problems.

The second problem is that the head of the European policy towards Ukraine and in general the European resistance against the actions of Russia – is Germany. And in Germany, in Berlin, they agree [that weapons will not solve the problem in Ukraine].

Yes, this was recently stated by Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Foreign Minister of Germany.

If the US changed its decision, it would also put Germany in an awkward position. They would also have to change their mind. But we have to follow the same policy towards Ukraine, as Europe.

It is clear that any weapons today will not change the situation in Ukraine – in the sense of hostilities that are waged by the militia and Russia.

Why? We really could use those drones.

Even if we decide today, those weapons will not appear on the front tomorrow. It takes time. That is, it will not change the current situation. The main thing is to hope for the future.

Many believe that all problems are in the Ukrainian army. The Ukrainian army is unfit for combat, it has no coordination with the volunteer battalions – they do not fight as a unified force. It has many structural problems, that weapons will not solve, even if we sent our best tanks, and put rockets and grenade launchers on top of them.

The US has a good experience in this [deliveries of weapons – NV]. We did this in Iraq, and it backfired. We sent antitank weapons to the rebels in Syria – it did not change their destiny. It prolonged the war, they [the rebels] were still destroyed by the Syrian army.

The US goal is to find a political way out of this conflict so that we can actually be able to engage in Ukraine. This conflict gradually destroys the chances of Ukraine to become a new country, to reform and to continue their European path. Most important for the United States and Germany is not to engage in this war with Russia. The war with Russia on the border with Russia is almost impossible to win. It’s absurd. No one in history has ever won a war with Russia on it’s border. The plan to simply send weapons to Ukraine and see: may be, there will be some result, doesn’t work. There is no strategy.

How can you explain then all the statements of Republican senators who advocate that these weapons are sent to Ukraine?

They are senators, they can talk. But to do something – it is not their job. They do not take responsibility for the outcome of their recommendations. The President is responsible.

If he sends weapons to Ukraine – Russia will change its tactics and its approach in the worst for all of us way. Russians have many ways to fight and they can easily respond.

For example, we will send you an antitank missiles, and they will destroy Russian tanks – then will everything change? Of course, the Russians are not stupid. They will not lose tanks like that. It is clear that they will change their tactics. It is easy to write this on paper, but we all understand, because we have a serious combat experience.

John McCain actively supports the delivery of weapons.

John McCain… You know, his policy is to send arms to all and always. We joke like that. He never met such a problem, that he would not want to bomb. His entire life he wanted to bomb Iraq, Syria, Libya, Georgia, by the way, and now Ukraine. He has one answer to all problems. If John McCain had been President, we would have had four more wars.

Yes, now there is huge political pressure on the President, and, by the way, not from Republicans. Most of the people who wrote the report [on the provision of weapons to Ukraine] are former players and very influential people from the administration of Hillary Clinton. That is, this attack mainly is from the Democratic party, not the Republican.

So all these statements should be seen, rather, in the context of the upcoming elections? They are more related to the domestic policy of the States?

Yes, of course, since this report was signed by the most important person of the campaign – Michelle Flournoy, who, most likely, will participate in the election campaign of Hillary Clinton.

We all expect if Hillary Clinton becomes President in two years, then Michelle Flournoy is likely to be the first woman to become Secretary of Defense. It’s the nuances of our domestic policy.

She is one of eight people who signed this report, participated in its creation. The main idea of this report is to seriously push the President to change his policy. I think this is the wrong approach to Ukraine. Sending weapons will not change anything, except it will extend the war.

Which option would be better for Ukraine?

The main goal is to achieve a ceasefire, truce and bring the conflict to the political plane.

As for Ukraine, the USA needs to have a strategy for longer-term to build an army in Ukraine. Ukraine does not need weapons, it needs an army. Weapons without an army do not work. Ukraine needs to create a real strategic partnership with the US. In this structure we can work together and cooperate to solve fundamental problems of Ukraine. It’s economic reforms, it is democratic and political reforms, the creation of an efficient army, which Ukraine will be able to finance itself.

But not so we will send $1 billion per year for the Ukrainian army. The entire budget of the Ukrainian army now – $2 billion. That is, the armed forces, which will be in Ukraine in three years, will be 50% dependent on the money that will come from the States, but we will not continue to give endlessly. That is, your army will be financially dependent on us. Our goal is to create an army that Ukraine will be able to maintain, otherwise it makes no sense.

Are such cooperation programs being developed? The States help to train our future police. And the army?

We started a very modest training plan for four Ukrainian companies in the West, near Poland. Help to train your UAF. For today there is no overall strategic approach. Each is doing what they can. We train, Lithuanians train Ukrainians, Poles also send weapons, training. Britain sends armored personnel carriers. Canadians send military uniform, we – body armor. This is a temporary situation, because the situation is extreme. There is no strategic approach.

And most importantly, there are no financial resources to help Ukraine – this is the main problem. People say – let’s send weapons. But don’t want to give real money on the reform in Ukraine.

Will there be a case, if there will be no cooperation with Ukraine? Or this will not happen?

I think Ukraine will always be supported. But now the question is not whether to help or not to help. The question is, how to help effectively, what works and what doesn’t. This is the discussion in Washington.

In Ukraine, many are convinced that Ukraine needs American weapons, because without it we cannot achieve the ceasefire.

You cannot achieve a ceasefire with the armed forces. You simply don’t have any.

When can we achieve something? Sanctions against Russia are not particularly enhanced. It begins to attack harder. So everyone sees the solution in armed resistance.

You see, these are the illusions of the Ukrainian government.

The real problem in Ukraine is that no one – neither Poroshenko nor Yatsenyuk – don’t want to sign a real agreement on a compromise with Russia. They don’t want to realize what had happened, and to give some political status to this militia. They are very afraid of the people, a third Maidan.

Indeed, the probability of the third Maidan exists.

The fact is that the West in Ukraine is not allowed to make serious adult decisions in this environment. They just keep saying “yes” to Ukraine.

Because of this, Ukrainians continue to live in the illusion that they with their fighters can stand against one of the largest armed military in the world. This can not happen. My colleagues in Russia, associated with the General staff, are well aware that any day, if Russia wants to, it can completely destroy the entire UAF in 72 hours. They have such plans.

We understand that.

That won’t happen, because Russia doesn’t want to. But people need to understand that the problem is not with anti-tank missiles. If we will send anti-tank missiles, then Russia will send something else – aircraft, artillery, simply will wipe the area from the face of the earth.

Should we recognize these territories are not Ukrainian, to abandon them?

What did the conflict reach? These territories are really lost. The only result that I see over the past year, is that Ukraine has been losing territory and soldiers. And there are no improvements. Sanctions have not changed the policy of Moscow.

Why do they attack? Because the Minsk agreements did not give Russia anything. Russia believes that it made a serious mistake when it signed an agreement in Minsk. Ukraine had no sincere interest to observe Minsk protocol. Plus everyone knows that in addition to this protocol, between Kiev and Moscow, there was the second protocol signed on September 19, where there was a map of control between the UAF and the militia. According to this map Ukraine had to give them Donetsk airport and areas that Ukraine was not going to ever give up. It’s all well known. Ukraine was in no way going to give up, despite the fact that it signed the agreement. Nobody wants to go for a real compromise in Ukraine.

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/american-military-expert-to-ukraine.html

German intelligence says the death toll in East Ukraine is 50,000 people

Posted on Fort Russ

MOSCOW, 8 Feb – RIA Novosti. German intelligence agencies estimate the likely death toll in the ongoing military conflict in the East of Ukraine at 50 thousand people, which is almost ten times higher than the official data from Kiev, said a source in the intelligence services of Germany.

“Official figures are too low and not credible,” – reported the Sunday newspaper Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung, citing a source in German intelligence.

According to the latest official data of Kiev, the death toll is 1200 military and 5400 civilians. These figures were voiced by the President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko, speaking on February 7 at the Munich security conference. In turn, the security sources claim that the data of the Kiev authorities is one-sided, for example, after heavy fighting often not more than about ten victims were reported, although in fact the losses were much higher.

RIA Novosti http://ria.ru/world/20150208/1046536246.html#ixzz3RAfXFf9k

Kristina Rus: 

Of course German intelligence knew the truth all along, but why spill it now? A. – either it is a leak, or B. – judging by the timing this a tool to cool heads in Ukraine, back off, sit down and talk to the “rebels”, to salvage whatever is left of Ukraine. 

On the other hand, it may backfire and shake the boat even more, exposing Poroshenko was lying all along.

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/german-intelligence-death-toll-in.html