Uncategorized

Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov’s statement at the UN – September 23, 2023

Posted by

0

From the Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s statement at the General Debate at the 78th session of the UN General Assembly, New York, September 23, 2023

Mr President,

Ladies and gentlemen,

Many previous speakers have expressed the idea that our shared planet is experiencing irreversible change. Right in front of our eyes, there is a new world order being born. Our future is being shaped by a struggle, one between the Global Majority in favour of a fairer distribution of global benefits and civilisational diversity, and the few who wield neocolonial methods of subjugation to maintain their elusive dominance.

Rejections of the principle of equality and a total inability to reach agreement has long been the signature of the collective West. Being accustomed to looking down on the rest of the world, Americans and Europeans often make promises, take on commitments, including written and legally binding ones, and then they just do not fulfil them. As President Vladimir Putin pointed out, it is the West that is truly an empire of lies.

Russia, like many other countries, knows this firsthand. In 1945, when we, together with Washington and London, were vanquishing our enemy on the front lines of World War II, our allies in the anti-Hitler coalition were already making plans for  Operation Unthinkable, a military operation against the Soviet Union. Four years later, in 1949, the Americans drafted Operation Dropshot to deliver massive nuclear strikes on the USSR.

These ghastly senseless ideas did remain on paper. The USSR created its own weapon of retaliation. However, it took the Cuban Missile Crisis in 1962, with the world balancing on the brink of a nuclear war, for the idea of unleashing it and the illusion of winning with it to cease being the underlying basis of US military planning.

At the end of the Cold War, the Soviet Union played a decisive role in reuniting Germany and agreeing on the parameters of a new security architecture in Europe. At the same time, the Soviet, and then the Russian leadership, was given specific political assurances regarding the non-expansion of the NATO military bloc to the east. The relevant records of the negotiations are in our and in Western archives and they are openly accessible. But these assurances of Western leaders turned out to be a hoax as they had no intention whatsoever of upholding them. At the same time, they were never bothered by the fact that by bringing NATO closer to Russia’s borders they would be grossly violating their official OSCE commitments made at the highest level not to strengthen their own security to the detriment of the security of others, and not to allow the military or political domination of any country, group of countries, or organisations in Europe.

In 2021, our proposals to conclude agreements on mutual security guarantees in Europe without changing Ukraine’s non-aligned status were rudely rejected. The West continued its ongoing militarisation of the Russophobic Kiev regime, which had been brought to power as a result of a bloody coup, and to use it to wage a hybrid war against our country.

A series of recent joint exercises by the United States and its European NATO allies was something unprecedented following the end of the Cold War, along with the development of scenarios for the use of nuclear weapons on the territory of the Russian Federation. They stated their aim of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on Russia. This obsession has finally blurred the vision of irresponsible politicians who have grown accustomed to impunity and bereft of the basic sense of self-preservation.

Washington-led NATO countries are not only building up and modernising their offensive capabilities, but are also shifting the armed confrontation into outer space and the information sphere.  An attempt to extend the bloc’s area of responsibility to the entire Eastern Hemisphere under the pernicious slogan of “indivisible security of the Euro-Atlantic and the Indo-Pacific region” has become a new dangerous manifestation of NATO expansionism. To this end, Washington is creating subordinate military-political mini alliances such as AUKUS, the US-Japan-Korea trilateral summit, and the Tokyo-Seoul-Canberra-Wellington Quartet, pushing their members into practical cooperation with NATO, which is bringing its infrastructure into the Pacific theatre. It is obvious that these efforts are targeting Russia and China, as well as the collapse of the inclusive regional architecture of ASEAN, and generate risks for a new hotbed of geopolitical tension on top of the European one, which has already reached its boiling point.

One certainly has the impression that the United States and the “Western collective” fully subordinate to it have decided to give the Monroe Doctrine a global dimension. These ideas are both illusory and extreme, but this does not seem to stop the ideologists of the new edition of Pax Americana.

The global minority is doing its utmost to slow down the natural course of events. In the Vilnius Declaration of the North Atlantic Alliance, the “growing partnership between Russia and China” is described as “a threat to NATO.” Speaking recently to his ambassadors abroad, President Emmanuel Macron said he was sincerely concerned about the expansion of BRICS, seeing it as evidence that the situation was getting “more complex” and that this runs the risk of “weakening the West and our Europe in particular.” That there was a “our international order where the West has occupied and occupies dominant positions is being revised.” He made a few revelations: if someone somewhere is convening without our participation, is becoming closer without us or without our consent, that poses a threat to our dominance. NATO’s pushing into the Asia-Pacific region is seen as something good, but the expansion of BRICS is a threat.

However, the logic of the historical progress is undeniable, the main trend of which being that states constituting the global majority are strengthening their sovereignty and defending their national interests, traditions, culture, and ways of life. They no longer want to live under anybody’s yoke; they want to be friends and trade with each other, but also with the rest of the world – only on an equal footing and for mutual benefit. Associations such as BRICS and the SCO are on the rise, providing the countries of the Global South with opportunities for joint development and defending their rightful role in the multipolar architecture, which is emerging beyond anyone’s control.

Perhaps for the first time since 1945, when the United Nations was established, there is now a chance for genuine democratisation of global affairs. This inspires optimism in all those who believe in the rule of law internationally and want to see a revival of the UN as the central coordinating body for global politics – a body where decisions are made by consensus, based on an honest balance of interests.

For Russia, it is clear that there is no other option. However, the United States and its subordinate “Western collective” continue to spawn conflicts that artificially partition humanity into hostile blocs and hamper the achievement of its common goals. They are doing everything they can to prevent the formation of a truly multipolar and fairer world order. They are trying to force the world to play by their notorious and self-serving “rules.”

I would like to urge Western politicians and diplomats once again to carefully re-read the UN Charter. The cornerstone of the world order established after World War II is the democratic principle of the sovereign equality of states, large and small, irrespective of their form of government, or their domestic political or socioeconomic structure.

However, the West still believes that it is superior to everybody else, in the spirit of the notorious statement made by EU diplomacy chief Josep Borrell that Europe is a blooming “garden,” while everything around is a “jungle.” He is not bothered by the fact that in this garden, there is rampant Islamophobia and other forms of intolerance towards the traditional values of most world religions. Burnings of the Quran, desecration of the Torah, persecution of Orthodox clergy and the disdaining of the feelings of believers have all become commonplace in Europe.

In gross violation of the principle of sovereign equality of states, the West is using unilateral coercive measures. Countries that are victims of these illegal sanctions (and there are increasing numbers of them) are well aware that these restrictions harm first and foremost the most vulnerable strata of society. They provoke crises in food and energy markets.

We continue to insist on an immediate and full cessation of the United States’ unprecedented inhumane trade, economic, and financial blockade of Havana and for the lifting of the absurd decision to declare Cuba a state sponsor of terrorism. Washington must, without any preconditions, abandon its policy of the economic suffocation of Venezuela. We call for the lifting of unilateral US and EU sanctions against the Syrian Arab Republic, which openly undermine its right to development. Any coercive measures that circumvent the UN Security Council must be ended, as must be the West’s weaponised practice of manipulating the Security Council’s sanctions policy to exert pressure on those they find objectionable.

The Western minority’s obsessive attempts to “Ukrainise” the agenda of every international discussion while pushing onto the backburner a number of unresolved regional crises, of which many have been in place for years and decades now, have become a blatant manifestation of its self-centered policy.

Full-fledged normalisation in the Middle East cannot be achieved without resolving the main issue, which is the settlement of the protracted Palestine-Israel conflict using as its basis UN resolutions and the Arab Peace Initiative put forward by Saudi Arabia. The Palestinians have been waiting for more than 70 years to have their own state, which was solemnly promised to them, but which the Americans, who monopolised the mediation process, are doing everything in their power not to allow this. We call for a pooling of efforts of all responsible countries to create the conditions for a resumption of direct Palestine-Israel negotiations.

It is gratifying that the Arab League has got its second wind and is stepping up its role in the region. We welcome the return of Syria to the Arab family, and we welcome the start of the normalisation process between Damascus and Ankara, which we are shoring up with our Iranian colleagues. All these positive developments reinforce the efforts in the Astana format to promote a Syrian settlement based on UN Security Council Resolution 2254 and the restoration of Syria’s sovereignty.

We do hope that with the assistance of the UN, the Libyans will be able to properly prepare for general elections in their long-suffering country, which for more than ten years has been struggling to get back on its feet after the NATO aggression that destroyed the Libyan state and opened the floodgates to the spread of terrorism to the Sahara-Sahel region and to waves of millions of illegal migrants to Europe and other areas. Analysts note that as soon as Gaddafi abandoned his military nuclear programme, he was immediately eliminated. Thus, the West has created the most dangerous risks for the entire nuclear non-proliferation regime.

We are concerned by Washington and its Asian allies who are whipping up military hysteria on the Korean Peninsula, where the US is building up its strategic capabilities. Russian-Chinese initiatives to consider humanitarian and political tasks as priorities have been rejected.

The tragic development of the situation in Sudan is nothing less than the result of another failed Western experiment to export its liberal democratic dogma. We support constructive initiatives to expedite the settlement of the Sudan’s domestic conflict, primarily by facilitating direct dialogue between the warring parties.

When we see the nervous reaction in the West to the latest events in Africa, in particular in Niger and Gabon, it is impossible not to recall how Washington and Brussels reacted to the bloody coup in Ukraine in February 2014 – a day after an agreement was reached on a settlement under EU guarantees, which the opposition simply trampled on. The United States and its allies supported the coup, hailing it as a “manifestation of democracy.”

We cannot fail to be concerned by the ongoing deteriorating situation in the Serbian province of Kosovo. NATO’s supply of arms to the Kosovars and assistance to help them establish an army grossly violates the key Resolution of the UN Security Council 1244. The whole world can see how the sad story of the Minsk agreements on Ukraine is being repeated in the Balkans. There was a stipulation that the republics of Donbass were to have a special status; however, Kiev openly sabotaged this with the support of the West. Such is the case now, when the European Union does not want to force its Kosovo protégés to implement the agreements that were reached between Belgrade and Pristina the 2013 to establish the Community of Serb Municipalities of Kosovo, which would have special rules regarding their language and traditions. In both cases, the EU acted as a guarantor for the agreements, and apparently, they share the same fate. When we see the EU as the sponsor, we can expect the same outcome. Now Brussels is imposing its “mediation services” on Azerbaijan and Armenia, along with Washington, thus bringing destabilisation to the South Caucasus. Now that the leaders of Yerevan and Baku have actually settled the issue with the mutual recognition of the countries’ sovereignty, the time has come for establishing peaceful existence and trust-building. The Russian peacekeeping troops will contribute to this in every possible way. 

As for other decisions of the international community that remain on paper, we call for the completion of the decolonisation process in accordance with the resolutions of the General Assembly and for an end to all colonial and neo-colonial practices.

A vivid illustration of the “rules” by which the West wants us all to live is the fate of its commitments that were made in 2009 to provide developing countries with $100 billion annually to finance climate change mitigation programmes. If you compare what happened to these unkept promises with the amounts that the US, NATO and the EU have spent on supporting the racist regime in Kiev – an estimated $170 billion over the past year and a half – you will come to realise what the “enlightened Western democracies” with their notorious “values” really think.

In general, it is time to reform the existing global governance architecture, which has long been failing to meet the needs of our time. The United States and its allies should abandon their artificial restraints on the redistribution of voting quotas in the IMF and the World Bank and the West must recognise the real economic and financial weight of the countries of the Global South. It is also important to unblock the work of the WTO Dispute Settlement Body without delay.

There is an ever-increasing need to expand the composition the Security Council simply by eliminating the underrepresentation of countries from the World Majority – in Asia, Africa, and Latin America. It is important that the new members of the Security Council, both permanent and non-permanent, be able to use their authority in their regions, as well as in global organisations such as the Non-Aligned Movement, the Group of 77, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation.

It is time to look at fairer methods of making up the UN Secretariat. The criteria that have been in place for many years do not reflect the actual influence of states in global affairs and artificially ensure the excessive dominance of citizens of NATO and EU countries. These imbalances are further exacerbated by the system of permanent contracts, which link people to positions in host countries of international organisations’ headquarters, the overwhelming majority of them located in capitals that promote Western policies.

A new type of association is being called upon to reinforce the reform of the UN, where there would be no leaders or followers, teachers or students, and all issues would be resolved based on consensus and balance of interests. One of those is certainly BRICS, which has significantly increased its authority following its summit in Johannesburg and has gained truly global influence.

At the regional level, there has been a clear renaissance of organisations, such as the African Union, CELAC, LAS, GCC, and others. In Eurasia, there is an increasing harmonisation of integration processes as part of the SCO, ASEAN, CSTO, EAEU, CIS, and China’s Belt and Road project. A natural formation of the Greater Eurasian Partnership is underway as well, and it is open to all associations and countries on our shared continent without exception.

These positive trends, unfortunately, are being undermined by the increasingly aggressive attempts by the West to maintain their dominance in world politics, economics, and finance. It is in the common interest to avoid fragmentation of the world into isolated trade blocs and macro-regions. But if the United States and its allies do not want to negotiate on making the globalisation processes fair and equitable, those remaining will have to draw their own conclusions and think about steps that will help them make their socioeconomic and technological development not dependent on the neocolonial instincts of their former colonial powers.

The main problem lies with the West because developing countries are prepared to negotiate, including in the G20, as the recent G20 summit in India showed. The main conclusion in its report is that the G20 can and should be free of any political agenda and given the opportunity to do what it was created for: to work out generally acceptable methods for governing the global economy and finance. We have opportunities for dialogue and agreements. We must not miss this opportunity.

All these trends should be fully taken into account by the UN Secretariat as its statutory mission is to seek consent from all member states within the UN and not somewhere on the side.

The UN was established at the end of World War II and any attempts to revise this would undermine the foundations of the UN. As a representative of a country that made a decisive contribution to the defeat of fascism and the Japanese militarism, I would like to draw attention to a glaring trend to rehabilitate Nazis and their collaborators in a number of European countries, primarily in Ukraine and the Baltic States. A particularly alarming fact is that last year, Germany, Italy, and Japan for the first time voted against the UN General Assembly resolution condemning the glorification of Nazism. This regrettable fact calls into question the true repentance of these states for the mass crimes they committed against humanity during World War II and runs counter to the conditions under which they were accepted into the UN as fully-fledged members. We strongly urge you to pay special attention to this “metamorphosis” that runs counter to the approaches of the global majority and to the principles of the UN Charter.

Mr President,

Today, humanity is at a crossroads again, as has happened many times in the past. It is entirely up to us what will become of history. It is in our shared interest to prevent a downward spiral towards a large-scale war and avoid the final collapse of the mechanisms for international cooperation that were put in place by generations of our predecessors. The Secretary-General has put forward an initiative to hold a Summit of the Future next year. This can only be successful if a fair and equitable balance of interests of all member states is ensured and with due respect for the intergovernmental character of the organisation. At our meeting on September 21, the members of the Group of Friends in Defence of the UN Charter agreed to actively contribute to achieving this.

As Antonio Guterres said at a news conference shortly before this session, “if we want a future of peace and prosperity based on equity and solidarity, leaders have a special responsibility to achieve compromise in designing our common future for our common good.” This is an excellent response to those who divide the world into “democracies” and “autocracies” and dictate their neo-colonial “rules” to others.

https://mid.ru/en/press_service/video/posledniye_dobavlnenniye/1905973/

Expert: U.S. Flouts International Law With Pacific Military Claims

Posted by

0

From AntiWar.com

Officials argue that Washington has the authority to block enemy navies from an area ‘nearly as large as the continental United States’

By Edward Hunt
September 26, 2023

In defiance of international norms and rules, U.S. officials are laying claim to the large oceanic area in the central Pacific Ocean that is home to the compact states.

Now that they are renewing the economic provisions of the compacts of free association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia, U.S. officials are insisting that the compacts provide the United States with exclusive control over an area of the central Pacific Ocean that is comparable in size to the United States.

“We control essentially the northern half of the Pacific between Hawaii and Philippines,” U.S. special envoy Joseph Yun told Congress in July.

For decades, the United States has overseen compacts of free association with Palau, the Marshall Islands, and the Federated States of Micronesia. Under the compacts, the United States provides the three countries with economic assistance while it maintains powerful military controls over the islands and their waters.

One of these military controls, “the defense veto,” enables the United States to prevent the compact states from forging international agreements that could impede U.S. military priorities. Consequently, the compact states have never joined the Treaty of Rarotonga, which established a nuclear free zone in the region.

Another U.S. military control is “the right of strategic denial” by which U.S. officials assert that they can prevent other countries from accessing the compact states’ lands, waters, and airspace.

“The compacts do give us full defense authority and responsibility in those countries and provide our ability to strategically deny third country military access,” U.S. diplomat Jane Bocklage told Congress earlier this year.

Although the compacts include language that permits the United States to foreclose access to the islands by third-party military forces, U.S. officials have broadly interpreted this language to mean that they can exclude third parties from the compact states’ exclusive economic zones (EEZs), which extend up to 200 miles around each island’s coastlines.

At a congressional hearing in July, Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) asserted that strategic denial authority “allows us to deny access to any potential adversary in an area of the Pacific comparable in size to the continental United States.” An associate presented a map that portrayed the EEZs as one contiguous area under U.S. control. “It’s nearly as large as the continental United States,” Barrasso remarked.

Defense Department official Siddharth Mohandas agreed with the senator’s interpretation. He claimed that the United States maintains unfettered and exclusive access to the area. “We have the ability to deny foreign militaries access and the ability to operate in the exclusive economic zones of the Freely Associated States,” Mohandas said, referring to the compact states.

This interpretation of strategic denial is inconsistent with international law. Under the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, all countries have the rights of navigation and overflight in the exclusive economic zones of other countries, as stipulated by Articles 58 and 87.

Most countries, including the compact states, are parties to the convention. The United States has never ratified the convention, but high-level U.S. officials have expressed their support for it.

“Although not yet a party to the treaty, the U.S. nevertheless observes the UN LOSC as reflective of customary international law and practice,” the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration explains, referring to the Convention on the Law of the Sea.

When U.S. officials say that they have a right to exclude third-party actors from the compact states’ exclusive economic zones, they are making claims that are inconsistent with the UN Convention. There is no legal basis for the United States to prevent ships from other countries from peacefully traversing the compact states’ exclusive economic zones.

More than two decades ago, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) acknowledged in a major report that strategic denial does not extend to the compact states’ exclusive economic zones. According to the GAO report, strategic denial is limited to the 12-mile territorial waters that surround each island. Even within these smaller zones, the GAO noted, military vessels from other countries maintain the right of “innocent passage.”

“Statements by policymakers that indicate the United States has a right to deny military access to the islands and a vast area of the Pacific Ocean – a widely cited U.S. interest – overstate the breadth of this right, which only covers the individual islands and their 12-mile territorial waters,” the GAO explained.

A map included in the GAO report shows that strategic denial applies to small isolated areas rather than the much larger expanse of the Pacific Ocean that is often claimed by U.S. officials. A key implication of the GAO’s map is that the United States cannot legally exclude third parties from the vast oceanic area that surrounds the compact states.

In fact, U.S. officials have long taken the position that exclusive economic zones must remain open to navigation. Across the world, they have promoted “freedom of navigation,” which they have presented as the freedom of ships to sail the world’s oceans and waterways wherever the law allows, including in the exclusive economic zones of other countries.

When U.S. officials have sent warships through some of the world’s most contested waterways, such as the South and East China Seas, they have said that they are defending “freedom of navigation.” The presence of U.S. military forces has often created tensions, possibly even violating Article 88 of the U.N. Convention, which requires ships to have peaceful purposes, but U.S. officials have always insisted that these operations are consistent with international law.

“We’re committed to ensuring that every country can fly, sail, and operate wherever international law allows,” Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin said in a speech in June. “Every country, large and small, must remain free to conduct lawful maritime activities.”

The U.S. mass media has often sided with the U.S. government’s position on freedom of navigation, especially as it concerns U.S. military operations in the exclusive economic zones of rival countries. In a July 2023 report about North Korean criticisms of U.S. military activities in North Korea’s exclusive economic zone, The New York Times indicated that North Korea has no legal basis for excluding U.S. military forces from the area.

“A country can claim the right to exploit marine resources in its so-called exclusive economic zone, which extends 200 nautical miles from its 12 nautical-mile territorial waters,” The New York Times reported. “But it does not hold sovereignty over the zone’s surface and the airspace above it.”

When countries such as China and North Korea claim that they have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their exclusive economic zones, U.S. officials always disagree, insisting that these areas must remain open to freedom of navigation, particularly for U.S. warships.

Regarding coastal states such as China and North Korea, the U.S. position is that they “do not have the right to regulate foreign military activities in their EEZs,” according to a report by the Congressional Research Service. “The United States will continue to operate its military ships in the EEZs of other countries.”

By claiming to have a right of strategic denial over the compact states’ exclusive economic zones, however, U.S. officials are taking a position that is inconsistent with international law and their own practices in many parts of the world, including the Indo-Pacific. If they were to use force to prevent a third party from accessing the vast expanse of waters around the compact states, then they would be violating the law and the very principles that they apply to other countries.

In short, U.S. officials have no legal basis for their claims to control the vast oceanic area that is home to the compact states, just as the GAO confirmed in its landmark report more than two decades ago.

Edward Hunt writes about war and empire. He has a PhD in American Studies from the College of William & Mary. Originally published in Lobelog. Reprinted with permission from Foreign Policy In Focus.

https://original.antiwar.com/Edward_Hunt/2023/09/25/us-flouts-international-law-with-pacific-military-claims/

U.S. bulldozes jungles – trees, plants, and wildlife – for its coming war against China

Posted by

0

Caitlin Johnstone
September 14, 2023

The US Air Force Is Clearing Out Jungles In The Pacific To Prepare For War With China

The US Air Force is clearing out jungles in the Pacific and replacing them with airfields for its coming war with China,
because there exist people on this earth who look at a jungle and think, “This should be replaced with an airfield to prepare for a war with China.”

There are people on this earth who say, “You know the world would be a much better place if all these trees and exotic insects and birds were replaced with long stretches of concrete lined with nuclear bombers on high alert.”

There are people on this earth who see bulldozing rainforests to make way for war planes as much simpler and easier than just making peace.

There are people on this earth who would spend their entire lives making up new excuses to fight new enemies, and then tear up every inch of the biosphere looking for ways to defeat those enemies.

There are people on this earth who would rather wipe out all biodiversity than allow for any diversity in world leadership.

There are people on this earth who would rather rule supreme over a wasteland of irradiated dust and ashes than see the rise of a multipolar world.

There are people on this earth who would rather annihilate everything than take a brief moment to pause and look inward.

There are people on this earth who would rather stare down the barrel of nuclear armageddon than turn and stare at themselves.

There are people on this earth who would light the skies on fire before they’d take even a minute to just be here now.

There are people on this earth who would rather destroy everything than make peace with anything.

There are people on this earth who look at the staggering beauty of the natural world and think how wonderful it would be if they could tear it all down and funnel it into a factory to make Tomahawk missiles.

The biosphere is dying,
and we are hurtling toward nuclear war,
and it is so very, very heartbreaking,
and yet even in the midst of that heartbreak
nature shines as majestically as ever,
and some moments all you can do is take in the beauty
and take it as your solemn, sacred duty to appreciate it while it lasts,
and look at the trees and the bugs and the birds and the critters
who never had anything to do with this madness,
and bow as deeply as your body can bow,
and say I’m sorry.
I’m so sorry.

https://www.caitlinjohnst.one/p/the-us-air-force-is-clearing-out

From AntiWar.com

US Air Force Clearing Out Jungles in Pacific for New Airfields

The US Air Force is increasing its number of bases in the Pacific to prepare for a future war with China

Dave DeCamp
September 13, 2023

The head of US Pacific Air Forces said Monday that the Air Force was clearing out jungles in the Pacific to build new airfields and restore old ones as part of the branch’s preparation for war with China in the region.

The Air Force is working to expand its bases as part of a plan to become more mobile in the Pacific, a concept known as Agile Combat Employment (ACE). Pacific Air Forces Commander Gen. Kenneth Wilsbach said the Air Force is looking for more money to facilitate the military buildup.

“We’re going to be clearing out the jungle [and] we’re going to be resurfacing some of the surfaces there so that we will have a fairly large and very functional Agile Combat Employment base, an additional base to be able to operate from and we have several other projects like that around the region that we’ll be getting after,” he said at the Air & Space Forces Association’s Air, Space & Cyber conference, according to Defense One.

“That takes resources to be able to accomplish and so those are some of the resources that I argue for when I go back to the headquarters,” Wilsbach added. He said the Air Force requested funds for additional construction in the Pacific for its 2024 military budget.

Wilsbach said that every new base in the region is a new area China would have to target. “Every single additional airfield that I can operate from is another in a contingency or crisis, or a conflict is another airfield that China has to put into their targeting folders and, and then allocate resources toward them, which dilutes their ability to shut us completely down,” he said.

The Biden administration has been working to expand the US military footprint in the Asia Pacific. This year, the US signed a deal with the Philippines to gain access to four new bases in the country and inked an agreement with Papua New Guinea to gain access to airports and sea ports in the Pacific island nation. The US is also expanding its presence in Australia under the AUKUS pact.

Wilsbach also has his eye on newer weapons and said the Air Force needs to modernize to face China. “There’s some modernization for some of our current platforms that are very critical for maintaining dominance in some of our mission areas because while we have been doing a lot of things in the Middle East in the last 20 years, China’s been resourcing for near-peer competition,” he said.

Air Force Secretary Frank Kendall made similar comments at the conference. “The threat of attack from violent extremist organizations still exists, and we will address those threats as they occur. But China is by far our pacing challenge,” he said.

https://news.antiwar.com/2023/09/13/us-air-force-clearing-out-jungles-in-pacific-for-new-airfields/

Was “No NATO expansion east” more than a promise?

Posted by

0

From the Libertarian Institute

By Ted Snider
July 17, 2023

At the NATO summit in Bucharest in 2008, eventual membership in NATO was promised to Ukraine and Georgia with the statement that “NATO welcomes Ukraine’s and Georgia’s Euro-Atlantic aspirations for membership in NATO. We agree today that these countries will become members of NATO.” Russian President Vladimir Putin “flew into a rage,” and, according to a Russian journalist quoted by John Mearsheimer, warned that “if Ukraine joins NATO, it will do so without Crimea and the eastern regions. It will simply fall apart.”

A decade and a half later, Putin sent the message [1] to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky: “Tell me you’re not joining NATO, I won’t invade.”

Putin is consistently accused in the West of dangerous melodrama and of historical revisionism when he points to NATO’s broken promise that it wouldn’t expand east if the Soviet Union permitted a united Germany to join NATO.

In 2007, Putin complained, “What happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw Pact? Where are those declarations today? No one even remembers them.” A year later, former Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev complained that the United States “promised that NATO wouldn’t move beyond the boundaries of Germany after the Cold War but now half of central and Eastern Europe are members, so what happened to their promises? It shows they cannot be trusted.”

Then U.S. Secretary of State James Baker has claimed [2] that the discussion of NATO expansion applied only to East Germany, not to Eastern Europe: “There was never any discussion of anything but the GDR (East Germany].” A 2014 NATO report claimed, “No such pledge was made, and no evidence to back up Russia’s claims has ever been produced.”

But declassified documents [3] now reveal that NATO was lying, and that it is Baker, and not Putin, who was engaging in historical revisionism.

After complaining that no one remembers the West’s assurances, Putin went on to remind his audience what they said: “I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: ‘The fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.’ Where are those guarantees?”

Putin was quoting correctly. He might have added, as we know from the recently declassified documents, that Woerner also “stressed that the NATO Council and he are against the expansion of NATO (13 out of 16 NATO members support this point of view).” The NATO Secretary General also assured the Russians on July 1, 1991 that, in an upcoming meeting with Poland’s Lech Walesa and Romania’s Ion Iliescu, “he will oppose Poland and Romania joining NATO, and earlier this was stated to Hungary and Czechoslovakia.” (Document 30)

As for Baker’s insistence that no such promise was made, he articulated some of the most important statements of that promise. On February 9, 1990, Baker famously offered Gorbachev a choice: “I want to ask you a question, and you need not answer it right now. Supposing unification takes place, what would you prefer: a united Germany outside of NATO, absolutely independent and without American troops; or a united Germany keeping its connections with NATO, but with the guarantee that NATO’s jurisdiction or troops will not spread east of the present boundary?”

Baker has been dismissive of this statement, categorizing it as only a hypothetical question. But Baker’s next statement, not previously included in the quotation, but now placed back in the script by the documentary record, refutes that claim. After Gorbachev answers Baker’s question, saying, “It goes without saying that a broadening of the NATO zone is not acceptable,” Baker replies categorically, “We agree with that.” (Document 6)

There are a number of other declassified statements that now solidify the evidence against Baker’s claim. The most important is Baker’s own interpretation of his question to Gorbachev at the time. At a press conference immediately following this most crucial meeting with Gorbachev, Baker announced that NATO’s “jurisdiction would not be moved eastward.” He added that he had “indicated” to Gorbachev that “there should be no extension of NATO forces eastward.”

And while Baker was meeting with Gorbachev, Deputy National Security Adviser Robert Gates was asking the same question of KGB leader Vladimir Kryuchkov in clearly non-hypothetical terms. He asked Kryuchkov what he thought of the “proposal under which a united Germany would be associated with NATO, but in which NATO troops would move no further east than they now were?” Gates then added, “It seems to us to be a sound proposal.” (Document 7)

On that same busy day, Baker posed the same question to Soviet Minister of Foreign Affairs Eduard Shevardnadze. He asked if there “might be an outcome that would guarantee that there would be no NATO forces in the eastern part of Germany. In fact, there could be an absolute ban on that.” How did Baker intend that offer? In Not One Inch, M.E. Sarotte reports that in his own notes, Baker wrote, “End result: Unified Ger. Anchored in a changed (polit.) NATO—whose juris. would not be moved eastward!” According to a now declassified State department memorandum of their conversation, Baker had already in this conversation assured Shevardnadze, “There would, of course, have to be ironclad guarantees that NATO’s jurisdiction or forces would not move eastward.” (Document 4)

And, according to a declassified State Department memorandum of the conversation, on still the same day, Baker told Gorbachev and Shevardnadze, not in the form of a question at all, that, “If we maintain a presence in a Germany that is a part of NATO, there would be no extension of NATO’s jurisdiction for forces of NATO one inch to the east.” (Document 5)

Continue reading →

Vigil in Nevada: Protect native peoples, sacred land and water from Thacker Pass lithium mining; prayer camps raided by police

Posted by

0

From Lakota Law Project

May 31, 2023

Warm greetings to you. Today, I share with you my story of a very important experience. Earlier this month, I joined my father, Lakota Law co-director Chase Iron Eyes, and our videographer, Chuck Banner, on a trip to Thacker Pass in Nevada – or Peehee Mu’Huh, as it’s known in the Paiute language. We were there to support our Paiute and Shoshone relatives in a direct action to stop a massive lithium mine, which threatens a sensitive ecosystem and disturbs sacred burial grounds. Upon my return, I wrote a blog and shot a video, which I encourage you to read and watch.

I won’t go into a ton of detail for you here, because the blog and video do that. Suffice to say that the Indigenous People of Nevada need our attention and support. Just like Standing Rock with the #NoDAPL struggle, they’re on the frontlines of extractive capitalism, and their homelands are being desecrated without their consent. 

It hasn’t yet reached the same extremes as the coordinated effort by law enforcement and Big Oil at Standing Rock, but once again, activists on the frontlines are being targeted. My colleague Chuck was among several people hit with Temporary Protective Orders; another was Dorece Sam, a Fort McDermitt Paiute-Shoshone tribal member and Nevada President of the Native American Indian Church. These actions by law enforcement are meant to stifle our ability to exercise First Amendment rights to free speech and protest.

We must not stand down. We should use this moment to grow the movement. It’s time to recognize and reinforce the latest front in the battle to protect Indigenous People, defend sacred lands, and preserve precious, life-giving water.

Wopila tanka — thank you for standing with our Paiute and Shoshone relatives!

Tokata Iron Eyes
Organizer
The Lakota People’s Law Project

June 12, 2023

I remain on the sacred grounds at Peehee Mu’huh, where the resistance to protect Thacker Pass from a massive lithium mine suffered a major blow last week. On Wednesday, police raided the two prayer camps set up by our Paiute and Shoshone relatives, extinguishing the sacred fire lit since May 11 when the grandmother-led action began, destroying the two ceremonial tipi lodges, mishandling and confiscating ceremonial instruments, and arresting an Indigenous land protector. Ox Sam Camp shared a video they captured with us. facebook(dot)com/LakotaPeoplesLawProject/videos/1298934087643579/

During breakfast, law enforcement arrived. Almost immediately and without warning, a young Diné (Navajo) water protector was singled out by Lithium Nevada security and arrested. Even as two non-Natives were allowed to “move” in order to avoid arrest, the Diné woman was quickly handcuffed and subsequently loaded into a sheriff’s SUV for transport to Winnemucca for processing. 

While on the highway, she says – again without warning or explanation – she was transferred into a windowless, pitch-black holding box in the back of a pickup truck. “I was really scared for my life,” she told Ox Sam Camp. “I didn’t know where I was or where I was going. I know that [the epidemic of missing and murdered Indigenous women] is a real thing, and I didn’t want to be the next one.” She was eventually transported to Humboldt County Jail, where she was charged with criminal trespass and resisting arrest, then released on bail. Again, I urge you to watch the video. Resisting arrest? I don’t think so.

Just hours before the raid, Ox Sam camp’s water protectors bravely stood in the way of large excavation equipment, shutting down construction at the base of Sentinel Rock for the second time that week. To many Paiute and Shoshone People, Sentinel Rock is a “center of the universe.” It’s been a site to gather traditional medicines, tools, and food supply for thousands of years, integral to many Nevada tribes’ way of life.

On Wednesday, at least five Sheriff’s vehicles, several Lithium Nevada work vehicles, and two security trucks arrived at the original tipi site containing the ceremonial fire. After the arrest and once the main camp was secured, law enforcement moved to dismantle the tipi site at Sentinel Rock, a mile away. There is a proper way to take down a tipi and ceremonial camp, and then there’s the way Humboldt County Sheriffs proceeded on behalf of Lithium Nevada Corporation. They knocked down tipis, snapped tipi poles, and rummaged through, mishandled, and impounded ceremonial objects and instruments. They approached and secured tents in classic SWAT-raid fashion. 

As we mentioned to you previously, Peehee Mu-huh is the site of two massacres of Paiute and Shoshone people. The remains of the massacred ancestors have remained unidentified and unburied since 1865. They are now being bulldozed and crushed by Lithium Nevada without consent or permission from the area’s Indigenous Peoples.

It’s clear that Lithium Nevada and law enforcement are now doing all they can to stifle this resistance before it can grow. Our videographer, Chuck, was one of several people served with restraining orders over the past several weeks, and we’re hearing threats of further legal action designed to stop continued media coverage of the events now unfolding. Ox Sam Camp has put out a call for legal defense assistance. If you can help, contact them through their website. And please stay tuned for further developments and potential action opportunities.

Wopila tanka – thank you for standing with water and land protectors!

Chase Iron Eyes
Co-Director and Lead Counsel
The Lakota People’s Law Project

Lakota People’s Law Project
547 South 7th Street #149
Bismarck, ND 58504-5859

The Lakota People’s Law Project is part of the Romero Institute, a nonprofit 501(c)(3) law and policy center. All donations are tax-deductible.

https://lakotalaw.org/

Russian Foreign Ministry: No sign that U.S. is committed to arms control

Posted by

0

From Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Foreign Ministry Spokeswoman Maria Zakharova’s answer to a media question in connection with the remarks by National Security Adviser to the President of the United States Jake Sullivan

June 3, 2023

Question: What can you say about Jake Sullivan’s remarks at the Arms Control Association on June 2 which stirred heightened interest among the Western media?

Maria Zakharova: We believe this kind of frenzied media response is not entirely justified. We note that, in fact, these remarks do not contain anything fundamentally new that would respond to Russia’s concerns or take our positions into account. What we heard were the same old calls for Russia to immediately resume interaction with the United States in the field of arms control, including, in particular, the drafting of a new agreement to replace the START Treaty which expires in 2026 and do so, of course, on American terms.

Even though Mr Sullivan tried to present these calls in more brightly coloured wrapping paper and even outlined some “bonuses” which, apparently, were supposed to make them more appealing to Russia, Washington continues to stubbornly ignore the reasons that have led to the ongoing crisis in that area. The US officials continue to act as if this crisis has nothing to do with the openly hostile American policy towards Russia, which eventually took the form of an all-out hybrid war against our country.

We have seen no sign that, in the name of Washington’s declared commitment to arms control, the United States is ready to drop the goal of inflicting a “strategic defeat” on us and actually removing Russia from the international scene as a sovereign and full-fledged political player.

Disconnecting practical aspects of arms control from the general political context, as Jake Sullivan suggested, is not an option. No one should have any illusions in that regard. There is no need to cite the Cold War experience. We have experienced many other phases and learned a lot since then, so we will not fall for it and repeat previous mistakes.

If the United States and its anti-Russian coalition allies are truly interested in improving the international situation and are willing to return to meaningful work on arms control, they should start with forgoing their irresponsible and reckless attempts to build a world fitting the American patterns at any cost and turn away from the path which could clearly lead to a global disaster.

It is time to finally understand that the era of undisputable US dominance is over and that there is no return to it. The goal at hand is to have a clear grasp of the new realities and to begin to build the foundations for a more just, balanced and stress-resistant international system based on genuine equality, inclusiveness and, most importantly, indivisible security, and also on taking into account the interests and concerns of all countries without exception.

There’s no doubt that arms control and strategic risk reduction mechanisms, which would form the necessary safety net for such a system, could become a crucial element of it. Russia has never said no to political or diplomatic methods of ensuring security. They may take various forms and be implemented in various formats. However, we know from experience that these methods can be effective and viable only if all parties are genuinely committed to equal and constructive cooperation and honour the existing agreements without trying to cheat or repackage them to suit their needs.

Otherwise, even the most beautiful plans tend to hang in mid-air and, as the classic said, “lose the name of action” (William Shakespeare, Hamlet). Unfortunately, we do not see such commitment on the part of our American colleagues.

https://mid.ru/en/foreign_policy/news/1873993/

Minsk agreements allowed me to arm Ukraine – Poroshenko

Posted by

0

From RT
6-6-23

Pyotr Poroshenko has said he turned to NATO to prepare for war instead of implementing the peace roadmap

Former Ukrainian President Pyotr Poroshenko has boasted about his role in rebuilding his country’s military under the cover of the Minsk agreements. The documents were ostensibly intended to reconcile Kiev with eastern regions that had not endorsed the 2014 Western-backed coup.

“Do you know how many battalions I had north of Kiev when I became president? Zero. What about the state budget? Below zero. What about working tanks? A pittance,” the former leader said, describing the state of Ukraine nine years ago in an interview with Italy’s Corriere della Sera newspaper published on Monday.

Poroshenko took office in June 2014, as the post-coup Ukrainian government was attempting to quash a rebellion in Donetsk and Lugansk Regions with military force. The two Minsk agreements were adopted with Poroshenko at the helm. They were supposed to de-escalate the conflict and reintegrate the regions into Ukrainian political systems under wide autonomy, but Kiev stonewalled their implementation.

Instead, Poroshenko told the newspaper that his government had opted for a military buildup with the help of foreign sponsors.

“Immediately after the signing, I invited NATO instructors, bought weapons and vehicles. During my presidency we built an army,” he declared.

The former president insisted that this had allowed Ukraine to prepare for the current confrontation with Russia. Moscow cited Kiev’s failure to implement the Minsk accords, its continued attacks on Donetsk and Lugansk, as well as NATO’s encroachment into Ukraine as key reasons for the launch of its military operation in February 2022.

Russian officials have claimed that the Minsk agreements, which were mediated by France and Germany, were negotiated in bad faith. Former French President Francois Hollande and ex-German Chancellor Angela Merkel have since confirmed that the deals were intended to buy time for Kiev.

Poroshenko suffered a landslide defeat to Vladimir Zelensky, the current president, in the 2019 election. The comedian-turned-politician promised to reverse his predecessor’s bellicose policies and reconcile with Donbass. However, Zelensky performed a U-turn after coming to power, as extremist nationalist forces objected to any attempts to negotiate.

In the interview, Poroshenko endorsed the opinion of Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko, who argued last week that Minsk and Moscow should have “resolved” the Ukrainian situation in 2014-2015, instead of pursuing diplomacy. Poroshenko implied that his government would have been toppled in that scenario.

https://www.rt.com/russia/577553-poroshenko-minsk-accords-nato/

Ukraine blew up Kakhovka dam as revenge for failed offensive – Kremlin

Posted by

0

From RT
6-6-23

The act of sabotage may lead to “very serious consequences,” Dmitry Peskov has warned

Ukrainian forces sabotaged the Kakhovka hydroelectric dam in Russia’s Kherson Region in a bid to deprive Crimea of drinking water and distract from Kiev’s faltering counteroffensive, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov claimed on Tuesday.

The dam was partially destroyed early on Tuesday morning, sending torrents of water downstream and flooding towns and villages along the path of the Dnieper River. 

“We are talking about a deliberate sabotage by the Ukrainian side,” Peskov told reporters. “This sabotage could potentially lead to very serious consequences for several tens of thousands of inhabitants of the region, environmental consequences and consequences of a different nature, which have yet to be established.”

Peskov claimed that one of the key goals of the attack was to deprive Crimea of water. Crimea’s 2 million residents largely receive their water from the North Crimean Canal, which is fed from the reservoir above the Kakhovka dam.

“This sabotage is also connected with the fact that, having launched large-scale offensive operations two days ago, the Ukrainian armed forces are not achieving their goals,” Peskov continued. Russia’s Defense Ministry has said it repelled several large-scale attacks in the southern sector of the front in recent days. These “offensive actions are choking,” Peskov stated.

Ukrainian officials and their European backers have accused Russia of blowing up the dam, with European Council President Charles Michel calling the attack “a war crime.” Moscow “strongly rejects” the accusation, Peskov said.

While the flooding now makes it difficult for Ukrainian forces to cross the Dnieper and attack Russia’s defensive lines, the destruction of the dam also appears to aid a number of Ukraine’s key objectives. The flooding mostly threatens the eastern bank of the river, where Russian troops withdrew to last year amid concerns that the Ukrainian military would blow up the dam. 

With the dam destroyed, the level of the Dnieper has fallen further upstream, including at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant. Ukrainian troops made several attempts to cross the river to recapture the plant from Russian forces last year, and lowering the water level would remove a major obstacle to future attempts. Additionally, the Soviet-era plant depends on water from the Dnieper to cool its reactors and its spent fuel rods. 

The Ukrainian military conducted a test strike on the dam using an American-supplied HIMARS launcher last year, Ukrainian General Andrey Kovalchuk told the Washington Post in December. 

Two months earlier, Russia’s envoy to the United Nations, Vassily Nebenzia, warned the UN Security Council that Kiev’s forces were considering a “reckless” attack on the dam with sea mines or missiles. “The authorities in Kiev and their Western backers will bear full responsibility for all the consequences of such a devastating scenario,” Nebenzia cautioned. 

https://www.rt.com/russia/577573-ukraine-destroyed-kherson-dam/

Also

https://www.rt.com/russia/577548-kakhovskaya-hydroelectric-dam-breach/
https://www.rt.com/russia/577555-city-novaya-kakhovka-flooded-mayor/

https://sputnikglobe.com/20230606/fact-check-who-attacked-novaya-kakhovka-dam-1110946820.html

https://sputnikglobe.com/20230606/scott-ritter-kakhovka-dam-attack-designed-to-cure-wests-ukraine-fatigue-1110958667.html

Ukraine sabotages Kakhovka Dam, causing widespread flooding; Kiev ‘offensives’ disrupted

Posted by

0

From Strategic Stability
June 6, 2023

Report # 254. Statement by Russian Defence Minister

1. Sergei Shoigu: Two Ukrainian ‘offensives’ disrupted

On June 6 Russian Defence Minister, Army of General Sergei Shoigu made the following statement (full text translated from Russian)

“Over last three days, the Ukrainian regime launched a long-promised offensive in different areas of the front, concentrating large quantities of hardware and manpower for this purpose.

On 4 June 2023, the 23rd and 31st Mechanised Brigades of the AFU attempted an offensive in five directions.

The enemy did not succeed in any of them and suffered significant losses: 300 servicemen, 16 tanks, 26 armoured fighting vehicles, and 14 motor vehicles.

On 5 June 2023, the Kiev regime attempted an offensive in seven directions with five brigades.

The enemy was stopped and suffered even greater losses: more than 1,600 troops, 28 tanks, including 8 Leopard tanks and 3 AMX-10 wheeled tanks, 136 other military vehicles, including 79 foreign-manufactured ones.

The attempted offensive was thwarted, the enemy was stopped, and Russian troops showed courage and heroism in the fighting.

I repeat that the enemy failed to achieve its goals, and suffered considerable and incomparable losses.

The units of the 433rd Motorised Rifle Regiment of the 127th Motorised Rifle Division, the 37th and 60th Motorised Rifle Brigades distinguished themselves in battles, displaying persistence and fortitude. The 3rd Company of the 37th Motorised Rifle Brigade under the command of Junior Lieutenant Yury Zhelanov and the commander of the 1st Battalion of the same brigade Major Vladimir Polozhentsev displayed special heroism.

The divisions, having appeared on a direction of the main attack, steadfastly defended the occupied positions and have caused considerable losses to superior forces of the enemy’s 37th Marine Infantry Brigade. Under the threat of being surrounded, Junior Lieutenant Zhelanov, being wounded, led his company to previously equipped defensive positions, where he successfully stopped the advancing enemy units.

The skilful actions of our Operational-Tactical, Ground-Attack and Army aviation should be especially noted. They employed 50 anti-tank guided missiles. As a result, 5 tanks and 29 other armoured fighting vehicles were destroyed.

All in all during 3 days of fighting in all directions, the losses of the AFU amounted to 3,715 troops, 52 tanks, 207 armoured fighting vehicles, 134 motor vehicles, 5 aircraft, 2 helicopters, 48 pieces of field artillery, and 53 UAVs.”

Unfortunately, we have some losses too. A total of 71 servicemen died and 210 were wounded in repelling the enemy offensive by the combined group of forces. Fifteen tanks, 9 infantry fighting vehicles, 2 motor vehicles, and 9 guns were hit.

Tonight, the Kiev regime committed another terrorist crime: the Kakhovka Hydroelectric Station facilities were blown up, flooding a large area. The purpose of these actions is reportedly as follows.

Having failed to succeed in the offensive operations, the enemy intends to redeploy the units and hardware from Kherson direction to its offensive area in order to strengthen its potential, significantly weakening its position in Kherson direction. The enemy has begun building defensive positions on the right bank of the Dnepr River, which indicates the intention to turn to defence there.

In order to prevent Russia’s offensive actions in this section of the front, the Kiev regime has carried out a sabotage, essentially a terrorist act, which has resulted in the flooding of significant areas and will have serious and long-lasting environmental consequences.

In addition, the release of water from the Dnieper Hydroelectric Station, according to available data, has been significantly increased, leading to even greater flooding of areas. Fact proves that the large-scale diversion was planned in advance by the Kiev regime.”

2. It is a deliberate Ukrainian sabotage

Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov claimed that the incident “was caused by a deliberate Ukrainian sabotage,” warning of “dire ramifications” for tens of thousands of local residents and the ecosystem.

City of Novaya Kakhovka flooded after dam destruction – its mayor said. He noted that the sabotage was aimed at cutting the water supply to the Russian Crimea peninsula, adding that the strikes appeared to have been linked to the recent large-scale Ukrainian attacks on the Donbass front, which were thwarted by Russian defenses.

Note: The Kakhovka Hydroelectric Station was built in 1951-1956. It has the 30-meter tall and 3.2-kilometer-long hydroelectric dam that contains some 18 cubic kilometers of water. Its main door was destroyed by a direct AFU fire (preliminary by the U.S.HIMARS MLRS). The water level downstream went up by nearly 11 meters. The critical level is 12.5 meters. 14 populated centers with 22,000 citizens have been flooded as the result of such ecological disaster intentionally arranged by aggressive Kiev regime still supported by NATO and the EU.

A STRAIGHT-FORWARD QUESTION:

HOW LONG NATO AND THE EU WILL BACK THAT CLOWN IN SHABBY DRESS BEGGING FOR MORE AND MORE WEAPONS TO INTIMIDATE AND TORTURE MORE AND MORE PEOPLE?

Annex

The area before the dam was destroyed by Kiev

And after ….

Moscow’s basic terms for a peace deal with Kiev; Ukraine continues attacks on Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant

Posted by

0

From Startegic Stability
May 28, 2023

1. Russia outlined conditions for a peace accord

The Ukraine conflict could be settled if Kiev were to re-commit to its neutral status, recognize “new territorial realities,” and declare Russian as a state language, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikhail Galuzin said in an interview released on May 28. He is convinced that a peace settlement will be possible only if the Ukrainian Armed Forces cease aggression against Russia, and Western weapons shipments to Kiev are stopped completely.

Galuzin added that to achieve a durable peace, Kiev must return to a non-aligned status and refuse to join NATO, recognize the “new territorial realities” that emerged after people in Ukraine exercised their right to self-determination in 2014 and 2022.

The diplomat was referring to Crimea and four former Ukrainian regions that overwhelmingly voted to join Russia in public referenda, respectively, in 2014 and 2022.

Deputy Foreign Minister noted that another crucial element of any peace settlement is Kiev’s commitment to respect the rights of the country’s Russian-speaking population and other ethnic minorities. “Russian should be designated as a state language at the legislative level. It is necessary to ensure that basic human rights, including freedom of faith, are observed in Ukraine,” he stressed.

On May 28, Mikhail Podoliak, an aide to Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky, dismissed Moscow’s conditions, issuing Kiev’s own list of demands. Those include the immediate withdrawal of all Russian troops from territory Kiev claims as its own, the creation of a “buffer zone” on Russian territory, as well as voluntary renunciation of Russian assets seized in other countries in favor of Ukraine.

Earlier this week, Kremlin Press Secretary Dmitry Peskov said that while Moscow does not want the Ukraine conflict to be frozen, there are no prerequisites for a peace settlement yet, pointing out that Kiev has prohibited any talks with the current Russian leadership.

2. Russia expects its sanctions to follow against Kiev

Ukraine’s “puppeteers” in London and Washington start begin to concern themselves with mental stability of top officials in Kiev and Russia hopes that sanctions against the Ukrainian leadership will follow over the threats against Russian President Vladimir Putin, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said in an interview published on May 27.

“I have no doubts that the puppeteers in Washington and London begin to concern themselves with how mentally stable these people are,” the Minister said. “I hope that sanctions will follow against these so-called officials. All statements that it is necessary to kill all Russians, wherever they are – that was said both by [Ukrainian Presidential Office Head Advisor Mikhail] Podolyak and [National Defense and Security Council Secretary Alexey] Danilov – and now personal [threats] against a leader of a sovereign state, the Russian Federation – is the most serious thing.”

Lavrov also stated that Ukraine is a terrorist state, with its authorities “driving themselves into this quality.”

Commenting on the threats against the Russian leadership, Lavrov underscored that a word has been uttered, and the West must bear responsibility for these words.”.

3. Rogov: Kiev is plotting new provocation at ZNPP

Ukraine is plotting a provocation at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) to put the blame on Russia and cut short the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) mission, Vladimir Rogov, leader of the We Are Together With Russia movement, told TASS on May 26. “Ukraine is announcing this strike in order to accuse us – and this is obvious, so that IAEA inspectors are not present [at the station] any longer,” he said, commenting of allegation by the Ukrainian defense ministry’s main intelligence directorate that Russia was hatching a provocation at the nuclear facility.

He noted that tensions around the Zaporozhye NPP have been growing in recent time. “Moreover, the rotation of the IAEA experts [at the ZNPP] has been postponed again. Vasilyevka is under shelling all the time: they are using artillery, HIMARS [multiple rocket launchers], and so on. Plus, an attempted terror attack on a journalist from federal mass media in Enerhodar to demonstrate that the situation in the city is too bad to visit it,” Rogov said.

Kiev is drawing attention to this topic, which means that it “is really plotting something,” he said. “Bearing in mind that they have both Grom-2 and Storm Shadow, and other weapons they can use, if the announce that, it is highly likely that they already have a scenario, he added.

Renat Karchaa, an adviser to the director general of Russia’s Rosenergoatom nuclear power engineering company, told TASS earlier on Friday that Ukraine had once again derailed the rotation of International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) inspectors at the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP) due to take place on May 26 following a postponement. In his words, no date has been appointed as of yet. The ninth team of IAEA experts was to arrive at the ZNPP on May 25. According to Karchaa, Kiev has once again demonstrated the lack of interest in ensuring nuclear security as the Ukrainian authorities are indulging in “shady games, which have no relations to nuclear energy.”

Despite all massive Kiev’s military provocations and artillery shelling of the ZNPP, the IAEA Director General Rafael Grossi since February 2022 has not made any critical remarks on continuous Ukrainian nuclear blackmail Involving NPP, prohibited by the international law.