Neo-Nazi military organization linked to NATO involved in Maidan sniper attacks

Originally from 21st Century Wire and Global Research
Reprinted November 20, 2014
By F. William Engdahl

This article was first published in March 2014

The events in Ukraine since November 2013 are so astonishing as almost to defy belief. An legitimately-elected (said by all international monitors) Ukrainian President, Viktor Yanukovich, has been driven from office, forced to flee as a war criminal after more than three months of violent protest and terrorist killings by so-called opposition.

His “crime” according to protest leaders was that he rejected an EU offer of a vaguely-defined associate EU membership that offered little to Ukraine in favor of a concrete deal with Russia that gave immediate €15 billion debt relief and a huge reduction in Russian gas import prices. Washington at that point went into high gear and the result today is catastrophe.

A secretive neo-nazi military organization reported linked to NATO played a decisive role in targeted sniper attacks and violence that led to the collapse of the elected government.

But the West is not finished with destroying Ukraine. Now comes the IMF with severe conditionalities as prerequisite to any Western financial help.

After the famous leaked phone call of US Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland (photo, left) with the US Ambassador in Kiev, where she discussed the details of who she wanted in a new coalition government in Kiev, and where she rejected the EU solutions with her “Fuck the EU” comment,[1] the EU went it alone. Germany’s Foreign Minister, Frank-Walter Steinmeier proposed that he and his French counterpart, Laurent Fabius, fly to Kiev and try to reach a resolution of the violence before escalation. Polish Foreign Minister, Radoslaw Sikorski was asked to join. The talks in Kiev included the EU delegation, Yanukovich, the three opposition leaders and a Russian representative. The USA was not invited.[2]

The EU intervention without Washington was extraordinary and reveals the deeping division between the two in recent months. In effect it was the EU saying to the US State Department, “F*** the US,” we will end this ourselves.

After hard talks, all major parties including the majority of protesters, agreed to new presidential elections in December, return to the 2004 Constitution and release of Julia Tymoshenko from prison. The compromise appeared to end the months long chaos and give a way out for all major players.

The diplomatic compromise lasted less than twelve hours. Then all hell broke loose.

Snipers began shooting into the crowd on February 22 in Maidan or Independence Square. Panic ensued and riot police retreated in panic according to eyewitnesses. The opposition leader Vitali Klitschko withdrew from the deal, no reason given. Yanukovich fled Kiev.[3]

The question unanswered until now is who deployed the snipers? According to veteran US intelligence sources, the snipers came from an ultra-right-wing military organization known as Ukrainian National Assembly – Ukrainian People’s Self-Defense (UNA-UNSO).


IMAGE: Members of UNA-UNSO marching in Lviv.

Strange Ukraine ‘Nationalists’

The leader of UNA-UNSO, Andriy Shkil, ten years ago became an adviser to Julia Tymoshenko. UNA-UNSO, during the US-instigated 2003-2004 “Orange Revolution”, backed pro-NATO candidate Viktor Yushchenko against his pro-Russian opponent, Yanukovich. UNA-UNSO members provided security for the supporters of Yushchenko and Julia Tymoshenko on Independence Square in Kiev in 2003-4.[4]

UNA-UNSO is also reported to have close ties to the German National Democratic Party (NDP). [5]

Ever since the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991 the crack-para-military UNA-UNSO members have been behind every revolt against Russian influence. The one connecting thread in their violent campaigns is always anti-Russia. The organization, according to veteran US intelligence sources, is part of a secret NATO “GLADIO” organization, and not a Ukraine nationalist group as portrayed in western media. [6]

According to these sources, UNA-UNSO have been involved (confirmed officially) in the Lithuanian events in the Winter of 1991, the Soviet Coup d’etat in Summer 1991, the war for the Pridnister Republic 1992, the anti-Moscow Abkhazia War 1993, the Chechen War, the US-organized Kosovo Campaign Against the Serbs, and the August 8 2008 war in Georgia. According to these reports, UNA-UNSO para-military have been involved in every NATO dirty war in the post-cold war period, always fighting on behalf of NATO. “These people are the dangerous mercenaries used all over the world to fight NATO’s dirty war, and to frame Russia because this group pretends to be Russian special forces. THESE ARE THE BAD GUYS, forget about the window dressing nationalists, these are the men behind the sniper rifles,” these sources insist. [7]

If true that UNA-UNSO is not “Ukrainian” opposition, but rather a highly secret NATO force using Ukraine as base, it would suggest that the EU peace compromise with the moderates was likely sabotaged by the one major player excluded from the Kiev 21 February diplomatic talks—Victoria Nuland’s State Department.[8] Both Nuland and right-wing Republican US Senator John McCain have had contact with the leader of the Ukrainian opposition Svoboda Party, whose leader is openly anti-semitic and defends the deeds of a World War II Ukrainian SS-Galicia Division head.[9] The party was registered in 1995, initially calling itself the “Social National Party of Ukraine” and using a swastika style logo. Svoboda is the electoral front for neo-nazi organizations in Ukraine such as UNA-UNSO.[10]

One further indication that Nuland’s hand is shaping latest Ukraine events is the fact that the new Ukrainian Parliament is expected to nominate Nuland’s choice, Arseny Yatsenyuk, from Tymoshenko’s party, to be interim head of the new Cabinet.

Whatever the final truth, clear is that Washington has prepared a new economic rape of Ukraine using its control over the International Monetary Fund (IMF).

IMF plunder of Ukraine Crown Jewels

Now that the “opposition” has driven a duly-elected president into exile somewhere unknown, and dissolved the national riot police, Berkut, Washington has demanded that Ukraine submit to onerous IMF conditionalities.

In negotiations last October, the IMF demanded that Ukraine double prices for gas and electricity to industry and homes, that they lift a ban on private sale of Ukraine’s rich agriculture lands, make a major overhaul of their economic holdings, devalue the currency, slash state funds for school children and the elderly to “balance the budget.” In return Ukraine would get a paltry $4 billion.

Before the ouster of the Moscow-leaning Yanukovich government last week, Moscow was prepared to buy some $15 billion of Ukraine debt and to slash its gas prices by fully one-third. Now, understandably, Russia is unlikely to give that support. The economic cooperation between Ukraine and Moscow was something Washington was determined to sabotage at all costs.

This drama is far from over. The stakes involve the very future of Russia, the EU-Russian relations, and the global power of Washington, or at least that faction in Washington that sees further wars as the prime instrument of policy.

Writer F. William Engdahl is a geopolitical analyst and the author of “Full Spectrum Dominance: Totalitarian Democracy in the New World Order”.

Notes

[1] F. William Engdahl, US-Außenministerium in flagranti über Regimewechsel in der Ukraine ertappt, Kopp Online.de, February 8, 2014, accessed in http://info.kopp-verlag.de/hintergruende/enthuellungen/f-william-engdahl/us-aussenministerium-in-flagranti-ueber-regimewechsel-in-der-ukraine-ertappt.html

[2] Bertrand Benoit, Laurence Norman and Stephen Fidler , European Ministers Brokered Ukraine Political Compromise: German, French, Polish Foreign Ministers Flew to Kiev, The Wall Street Journal, February 21, 2014, accessed in http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303636404579397351862903542?mg=reno64-wsj&url=http%3A%2F%2Fonline.wsj.com%2Farticle%2FSB10001424052702303636404579397351862903542.html

[3] Jessica Best, Ukraine protests Snipers firing live rounds at demonstrators as fresh violence erupts despite truce, The Mirror UK, February 20, 2014, accessed in http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/ukraine-protests-snipers-firing-live-3164828

[4] Aleksandar Vasovic , Far right group flexes during Ukraine revolution, Associated Press, January 3, 2005, Accessed in http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20050103&slug=ukraine03

[5] Wikipedia, Ukrainian National Assembly Ukrainian National Self Defence, Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, accessed in http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukrainian_National_Assembly_%E2%80%93_Ukrainian_National_Self_Defence

[6] Source report, Who Has Ukraine Weapons, February 27, 2014, private to author.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Max Blumenthal, Is the US backing neo-Nazis in Ukraine?, AlterNet February 25, 2014, accessed in

http://www.salon.com/2014/02/25/is_the_us_backing_neo_nazis_in_ukraine_partner/

Photographs: U.S., Lithuania hold war games near Russian border

Another example: the U.S. and South Korea hold frequent war games next to North Korea. Yet, anything North Korea does is termed an act of aggression, while South Korea and the United States are only supposedly engaged in benign activity, even though their exercises involved simulated invasions of North Korea.

This type of intimidation and threat should be completely unacceptable to all good people.

Xinhua News Agency
February 25, 2015

Soldiers attend the U.S.-Lithuanian combined training in Pabrade, Lithuania, on Feb. 25, 2015. Lithuania held combined training with 250 U.S. soldiers on Wednesday’s media day. (Xinhua/Alfredas Pliadis)

134018415_14249069189241n

134018415_14249069188001n

134018415_14249069188781n

134018415_14249069189661n

134018415_14249069187101n

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/photographs-u-s-lithuania-hold-war-games-near-russian-border/

Azov Battalion, Etc: U.S. paratroopers to train Ukrainian National Guard

U.S. Army Europe
February 25, 2015

USAREUR commander visits with Sky Soldiers in Vicenza
By Staff Sgt. Opal Vaughn

imagesCAGOC4BV

VICENZA, Italy: “I want to talk you today about Strong Europe,” said Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges, commander of U.S. Army Europe, speaking to paratroopers assigned to the 173rd Airborne Brigade here on Feb. 24, 2015, about their role in Europe and what they represent.

“Think of it in terms of people, places and things,” said Hodges. “The people, that’s all of you paratroopers. You all play a vital role and we want to continue that.”

During his visit, Hodges observed the brigade’s preparation for its scheduled training mission in western Ukraine, providing feedback for paratroopers who will train the newly-formed Ukrainian National Guard.

Hodges emphasized the important role the 173rd Airborne plays in enabling the NATO Alliance through multinational exercises.

“When you train in all these exercises with your allies, you build relationships,” he said, referring to the brigade’s participation in exercises such as Operation Atlantic Resolve and the upcoming Swift Response and Saber Junction. “It is U.S. Army Europe’s contribution to Europe on behalf of the Army, NATO and all the components that we support.”

Strong Europe represents the strategic framework that Hodges introduced since taking command last year of the approximately 30,000 Soldiers forward stationed in Europe.

Training allows paratroopers from the 173rd to exercise their own quick-response procedures. As the Army’s Contingency Response Force in Europe, the brigade maintains the ability to deploy on short notice to conduct the full spectrum of operations across the U.S. European, Africa and Central Command areas of responsibility.

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/02/26/azov-battalion-etc-u-s-paratroopers-to-train-ukrainian-national-guard/

U.S. ‘missile offense’ bases in Romania and Poland

Posted on Space4Peace, February 13, 2015
By Bruce Gagnon

The U.S. European Command (USEUCOM) headquarted in Stuttgart, Germany announces a second new “missile defense” (MD) base under construction.  These bases in Romania and Poland, and their interceptor missiles, will be aimed at Russia as part of the Pentagon-NATO military encirclement of that nation.

MD systems are key elements in US first-strike attack planning.  Their job is to pick off any remaining retaliatory nuclear response after the Pentagon unleashes its sword.  MD thus become the shield that the US seeks in order to deliver a ‘successful’ first-strike attack.

Each year the US Space Command computer simulates such a first-strike attack against Russia and China – the war game is called ‘blue team against red team’.

MD systems are being deployed on land and on Navy Aegis destroyers around the globe to surround Russia and China.

Here is part of the USEUCOM announcement about the new Poland base:

As a demonstration of our continued efforts to provide a ballistic missile defense (BMD) capability for U.S. and European NATO Allies against established and emergent threats, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Missile Defense Agency (MDA), U.S. European Command (EUCOM), the U.S. Navy, and the Polish Ministry of Economy hosted U.S. Industry Day in Warsaw, Poland, on Feb. 11 and 12.

The two-day event was designed to help provide information on the general scope of work…. to support a planned U.S. missile defense asset deployment in Poland.

“Missile defense is a critically important part of NATO security, and the United States deeply appreciates Poland’s contributions to the NATO missile defense effort,” said Ambassador Stephen Mull, U.S. Ambassador to Poland. “Poland plans to spend an estimated $10 billion USD on integrated air and missile defense systems over the next ten years. This is in addition to Poland’s decision to host an American missile defense base at Redzikowo.”

As approved by the President in September 2009, the purpose of the European Phased Adaptive Approach (EPAA) to ballistic missile defense is to protect European NATO allies, and U.S. forces in the region…. This key event demonstrates that we are moving forward with deploying an Aegis Ashore site in Poland in the 2018 time frame and that the U.S. continues to work in close cooperation with NATO allies to integrate BMD capabilities into a NATO missile defense system.

http://space4peace.blogspot.com/2015/02/us-missile-offense-bases-in-romania.html

Ukrainian-Polish-Lithuanian brigade to become operational in 2015

Posted on Fort Russ

2/20/2015

Poroshenko creates the Ukrainian-Polish-Lithuanian militarybrigade. Its command to be located in Poland.

Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

Petro Poroshenko signed the law ratifying the agreement with Lithuania and Poland on the creation of a joint military unit.

“The brigade is being formed in order to participate in international operations on the basis of a UNSC mandate and decisions by the appropriate government agencies of Lithuania, Poland, and Ukraine. The agreement is open to other countries upon their invitation by the three signatories,” the announcement states.

The president’s press service notes that the structure, manning, weapons, and equipment or other aspects of its activities will be regulated by a separate technical agreement between security institutions of the respective countries.

The brigade’s HQ will be located in the Polish city of Lublin. The HQ will operate in accordance with Polish law and relevant components of international law.

Each of the signatories is responsible for the financial support of its units included in the brigade during joint training exercises and operations.

The agreement was signed by Ukraine, Poland, and Lithuania in Warsaw on September 19, 2014 and was ratified by the Verkhovna Rada on February 4, 2015.

Defense Minister Poltorak announced earlier that the brigade should become fully operational in the first half of 2015. He estimates that the first group of Ukrainian military personnel will arrive in Lublin in the second quarter of 2015.

Poltorak also said that the number of Ukrainian soldiers included in the brigade will be determined during the working group meetings, and the troops will be subject to rotation.

It sounds something like “fascists of all countries unite.” They have united before, and have come to Russia before, but we also know how these marches had ended. If someone has a short memory, too bad for them.

J.Hawk’s Comment:  This announcement, coming very shortly after Poroshenko’s call for peacekeepers, makes one wonder whether this is how he intends to deal with the Donbass problem, namely by handing over the fighting to Poles and Lithuanians. Because once Poles and Lithuanians start dying, the rest of NATO might be drawn into the conflict. This is a rather artful way of overcoming the inevitable French and German objections to a NATO-led peacekeeping force being sent to Ukraine. This is a trilateral agreement that does not involve Germany or France, therefore they have no official say about it. But once this unit is deployed anywhere, it will quickly become a NATO mission simply because these are NATO countries. There can be absolutely no doubt that Poroshenko wants to continue the war until victory or Doomsday.

However, what is the likelihood if the brigade being deployed? There are many obstacles to the implementation of the plan. The brigade is unworkable, period, and it will not be a militarily effective formation. For starters, Lithuania and Poland are NATO countries whose militaries have been under NATO standards for years. Just to illustrate the level of difficulty here, Polish and Lithuanian soldiers use 5.56mm rifles (Kalashnikov clones, to be sure), while Ukraine uses actual 5.45mm AK-74s. Similar problems exist in all areas of interoperability.

But the real problem is political in nature. Poland and Ukraine (though probably not Lithuania, but we’ll never know) both pretend to be the regional leaders. Poland will treat its former colonies as if they were younger brothers in need of tutelage by their world-wise (and Iraq/Afghanistan experienced) older brother, while Ukraine will naturally feel that since it bore the entire burden of defending Civilization from Russian aggression, it should be in the driver’s seat. It’s unlikely that the shared Russophobia of the three partners is sufficient to overcome their mutual suspicions and megalomania. The Poles’ hatred of Nazis and Banderites might even prove stronger than  Russophobia, for what will happen should one of the units rotating to Lublin be one of the ones which treat Stepan Bandera as their patron saint?

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/ukrainian-polish-lithuanian-brigade-to.html

Poland launches $42-billion war buildup

Sofia News Agency
February 16, 2015
Poland Embarks on Massive Spending to Overhaul Military Hardware

NATO member Poland, bordering conflict-torn Ukraine, has earmarked a whopping EUR 33.6 B in spending to modernise its armed forces.

The plans will bring Poland in line with NATO’s recommended defense spending target of 2% of gross domestic product, AFP said on Monday.

The planned overhaul over a decade calls for the purchase of new military hardware including anti-aircraft systems, an anti-missile system as well as combat drones, armored personnel carriers and submarines.

Poland’s shopping list also includes helicopters and cruise missiles for submarines and drones.

According to Polish officials, “the risk of the conflict in eastern Ukraine heating up remains” even though a ceasefire agreement between the government in Kiev and pro-Russian separatists was signed last week in Belarus’ capital Minsk.

“The possibility of a lasting peace still isn’t close,” AFP quoted Poland’s President Bronislaw Komorowski as saying last week.

Defence Minister Tomasz Siemoniak said last week that Poland was drawing up a long-term plan to shift some of its military strength towards its eastern border, closer to Ukraine and Russia, in response to Moscow’s involvement in Ukraine.

 

Source:

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/02/18/poland-launches-42-billion-war-buildup/

NATO to establish Command Center in Lithuania within months

Xinhua News Agency February 18, 2015

NATO to establish command center in Lithuania in summer

VILNIUS: A NATO command center in Lithuania will be established in the summer, General Hans-Lothar Domrose, commander of Allied Joint Force Command Brunssum, said during his visit here on Tuesday.

The top general held discussions on security issues and NATO’s presence in the region with heads of the Lithuanian army.

According to Domrose, the final decision on command centers would be made by defense ministers from NATO member countries in June, but in terms of military preparedness Lithuania was ready.

“Today, I saw an excellent readiness for the establishment of NATO force integration unit in Lithuania. In my view, this staff in Lithuania will be established in the summer and will reach its full capacity this year,” the general was quoted as saying in a press release from the Ministry of National Defense of Lithuania.

“We are on the right track,” he added.

According to Domrose, around 40 officers will work at the command center, with around half of them being Lithuanians and others being sent from other NATO member countries.

Two weeks ago, defense ministers from NATO member countries agreed on posting international military staff in Lithuania and five other Central and Eastern European countries in response to new security threats in the region.

During his visit, Domrose emphasized that this year there will be more NATO military force exercises in the region. Military exercises are to be attended not only by U.S. soldiers but also by the forces of Portugal, Germany, the Netherlands and Hungary, according to Lithuania’s national television LRT.

 

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/02/17/nato-to-establish-command-center-in-lithuania-within-months/

German military association demands massive armaments increase

Welt.de reports that Lieutenant Colonel André Wüstner, President of the Armed Forces Association, said, “Whoever wants peace must prepare for war.” [1]
——————————————————————————

From World Socialist Web Site, February 14, 2015
By Johannes Stern

Against the backdrop of the Ukraine crisis, leading German politicians and military leaders are demanding a massive rearmament of the army.

On Sunday, the president of the armed forces association [Bundeswehrverband], André Wüstner, attending the Munich Security Conference, declared: “Whoever wants freedom must be ready for war.” He has precisely the same view as the German government, namely that the conflict in Ukraine cannot be solved militarily, but that the army must prepare itself for any emergency.

The past year has shown “how quickly risks can turn into dangers,” said Wüstner. The situation in Ukraine, Syria and Iraq is dramatic, he said.

“For us, that means insisting that the army should be fully equipped—equipment caps passed by the previous legislature must be abolished! That begins with the weapons system and goes all the way to the personal equipment of the individual soldier.”

“To achieve complete preparation of the army for deployment”, he added, “we must raise the defense budget step by step in the next few years. Otherwise, we risk losing the trust of our allies that we have only just won back.”

Wüstner was referring to “global challenges” and the German role in NATO. Germany has a “payback responsibility” with regard to the army and NATO.

The lieutenant colonel complained, “Since 1990, the budget was restructured to save money at the expense of the army,” and demanded: “It is time for that to end—there have to be credible assurances of funding for deterrence and security!”

This year’s defense report raises similar demands and read like a blueprint for the rearmament of the army. In the forward, the parliamentary defense commissioner Hellmut Königshaus (Free Democratic Party, FDP) describes the year 2014 as “the year of truth” for the army. It is being rebuilt into an army capable of intervening worldwide, but is “stretched to the limit of its capacity.”

The first part of the report creates the impression that the German armed forces are a chronically underfinanced scrapheap in need of redevelopment and in urgent need of a massive increase in budgetary allotments.

In nearly all units, there are personnel problems: the anti-aircraft missile unit stationed in Turkish territory, the speedboat squadron, the U-boat squadron, the tactical air force squadron, the marine planes and the signals division.

With regard to large military equipment, the report says there are massive “inadequacies and deficits.” It mentions, for instance, the Eurofighter, the transport helicopter NH 90, the transport airplane Transall and the marine mine warfare systems. There are not enough armored personnel carriers, and barracks are dilapidated. Replacement parts for military equipment and adequate ammunition are also lacking. And the main gun used by the army, the G36, does not shoot accurately.

Wüstner and the defense report demand what the German government and NATO have wanted for a long time but have previously only formulated cautiously because of widespread popular opposition.

Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen (Christian Democratic Union, CDU) said in her opening speech to the Munich Security Conference last weekend that Germany is working “very hard to bring the army’s weaponry and equipment into a condition that will allow us to maintain our role as enduring alliance partners.” NATO wants this to take place immediately. The military alliance has long demanded of its members that they raise their defense budgets to at least two percent of GDP. Recently, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg insisted that Germany set a good example.

Stoltenberg held talks with Chancellor Angela Merkel, Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier and Defense Minister von der Leyen about increasing military funding during his inaugural visit to Berlin in January. He also presented his plans to the parliamentary committees for defense and foreign policy.

Germany is a “key country” on the continent and has an important leadership role to play, said Stoltenberg. Therefore it must set an example for other NATO countries with its military. The security situation is changing “and we must adjust ourselves to that,” the NATO secretary general said.

Like Wüstner and von der Leyen, Stoltenberg directly related his plans for armaments with Russia’s “confrontation course”. NATO must stock up its arsenal, because only on the basis of a “position of strength” is a dialog with Moscow possible.

However, the most important reason for the demand to build up the army is not the NATO insistence, but the end of German restraint in matters of foreign policy announced by President Gauck and the German government a year ago. In order to be able to intervene worldwide to defend German economic, geopolitical and security interests, they need an army that is well equipped and prepared.

The complaints of the defense report about the bad condition of the army evoke historical parallels. In 1933, minister of the army of the Reich, Werner von Blomberg, prepared a memorandum in which he called the state of the German army “hopeless.” Like the current defense report, Blomberg’s memorandum complained that there were inadequate personnel reserves, military equipment and ammunition. Not even the equipment guaranteed by the Versailles treaty was available to the marines. Armoured ships were not delivered and the air force was almost nonexistent.

The dramatic development that then followed is well known. At the end of the same year, the Nazi regime began a rapid rearmament of the army. Within a short time, the German weapons industry, which had shrunk dramatically in accordance with the Versailles peace treaty, became a powerful fighting force that began the Second World War in 1939, left large parts of Europe in ruins and led a brutal war of destruction against the Soviet Union.

 

http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/14/bund-f14.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/german-army-association-demands-massive-armaments-increase/5431282

[1] http://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/article137224332/Deutschland-muss-auf-Krieg-vorbereitet-sein.html

 

“Loud Talk, Not Loud Deeds”–NATO aid to Ukraine

Posted on Fort Russ

By Alex Leshy, 2/16/2015
Translated from Russian by J.Hawk

I can’t characterize NATO’s position in any other way. A complete mess. The Secretary General says one thing, the supreme military commander something entirely opposite. While the heads of NATO member states say something different altogether. Which means that NATO has officially adopted a very curious position. Something along the lines of “we, as alliance will not give Ukraine any aid, but individual member states may make their own decisions. Any decisions.”

Officially that position is formulated as follows. The matter of arms supplies to Ukraine will not be raised at NATO level. This was announced by NATO SecGen Stoltenberg in an interview with Kommersant.

So the simple conclusion is that Ukraine will get no weapons. Instructors will appear. But only as instructors, and only very far away from the front line. Not that there will be much use from them, given their “effectiveness” at training Iraqis or Afghans. No successes anywhere. US military assistance is what is preventing their collapse. But as soon as the Americans start to “leave”, everything falls apart. The story of ISIS success is a perfect example.

Why would anyone expect something different? For example, German or US tanks? Which cost $6.2 million apiece?

During the summer of 2014 UAF had 600 perfectly fine tanks, while the militia had none. Did that help the UAF? On the other hand, let’s assume the UAF somehow could train its crews to operate NATO tanks. But how many would it expect to receive? The US has a total of 8725 M1 Abrams MBTs. UAF would need 600-700 vehicles to replenish their units. Does anyone seriously expect the US will simply give Ukraine 10% of its MBT fleet, which would cost $4.3 billion? Or perhaps 600 Leopard’s from the Bundeswehr, out of the total store of 1048 vehicles? There are also the French Leclercs, which total 776 [that’s the total number produced—the French army purchased only 400 of them]. Would France be willing to transfer virtually all of its heavy armor to Ukraine? Does anyone seriously believe that?

This does not even address the question of fuel and lubricants, which Ukraine likewise has in short supply, so that too would have to be imported, in other words, bought using hard currency which Ukraine doesn’t have. As a reminder, a single round of tank gun ammunition costs $25 thousand. In some cases it may be as low as $6-8 thousand. Still, that means a full load of 40 rounds costs a quarter of a million dollars minimum. And a single load can be easily expended in a single day. Even if you stretch it out over a week, it still means Ukraine would have to spend 150 million a week for tank ammunition. Or 450 million a month.

So I understand the NATO SecGen and the US president perfectly well. Supporting democracy is one thing, but are we going to gift them $4.3 billion worth of tanks, and then continue giving them half a billion a month worth of ammunition? For what? Just to watch as the Novorossia “radishes” blow up the expensive NATO tanks and then make selfies with the wrecks in the background? Well, to hell with Ukraine. And to hell with the money. But who will buy our “armored coffins” after that kind of advertising? Even the much praised and invincible Abrams tanks turned out not to be the wonderwaffles [a pun on the German word “wunderwaffe”, meaning wonder weapon] their marketing claimed. Even in the hands of skilled US crews. To say nothing of local crews. While the T-72s spat upon by the Western media are operating quite effectively. Even in the hands of local crews.

So would France want to turn over its entire tank fleet to Ukraine, only to then watch all potential buyers steer clear of them in the future. No thanks. But that’s politics. Loud words are no less important than loud deeds. Therefore when it comes to words the entire Western world is lined up shoulder to shoulder, full of readiness to help, support, strengthen, and supply. But when it comes to deeds…NATO already said noooo, not us. But hey, if individual countries want to help, that’s fine because democracy is sacred. We just can’t see any individual members do anything serious. For example, there have been many discussions about the Polish Dana152mm SP howitzers [actually a Czech design, though also used by the Polish Army] that have started last year, all these talks and so far not a single Dana had been seen in Ukraine. Not even a single blurry photograph. There are photos of everything else. Even of drunk US instructors asleep on the grass. But not of the Danas. So it would seem there no Danas in Ukraine. There were discussions, but that’s as far as things got.

In conclusion, it seems to me that Kiev’s hopes to get Western weapons and other “state of the art” stuff are about as likely to be fulfilled as the expectations that the EU will immediately open its borders to Ukrainians in February 2014.

J.Hawk’s Comment: I could only add that NATO countries have no guarantees the equipment they supply would not end on the international arms market. Which would be an even greater embarrassment than seeing it being destroyed on the Donbass.

 

http://alex-leshy.livejournal.com/456913.html
NATO-Ukraine Relationship: What is the best way of doing nothing?

http://www.fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/02/loud-talk-not-loud-deeds-nato-aid-to.html

 

The US-sponsored neo-Nazi coup d’etat in Ukraine — an act of war

Otan nazisme

The NATO logo has a right-turning and  a left-turning swastika in the four pointed star.

How much of the NATO war agenda is a recycled and updated German/U.S. Wall Street war agenda?
——————————————————————————

From Global Research

Violence and bloodshed continues to rock Ukraine as factions compete in the power vacuum of February 2014  coup in Kiev.

As the country struggles to find its way forward, however, it finds itself in the crosshairs of a NATO war agenda that has been unfolding for years.

This is the GRTV Feature Interview with our special guest, Professor Michel Chossudovsky. This GRTV program was first aired on March 21, 2014

This is the first Neo-Nazi government of the post war period.

Who are the architects of this Neo-Nazi government.

They claim to be Neoliberals, yet they support neo-Nazis.

 

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-neoliberal-neo-nazi-coup-detat/5431339