Vladimir Putin’s interview with Egyptian newspaper Al-Ahram

Posted on The Kremlin, February 9, 2015

Excerpt:
In the run-up to his visit to the Arab Republic of Egypt, Vladimir Putin gave an interview to the Al-Ahram daily newspaper…

QUESTION: How would you assess the situation in Ukraine and around it? What do you think will be the most appropriate way out of the Ukrainian crisis?

VLADIMIR PUTIN: I would like to remind Egyptian readers that the Ukrainian crisis was not caused by the Russian Federation. It has emerged in response to the attempts of the USA and its western allies who considered themselves ‘winners’ of the cold war to impose their will everywhere. Promises of non-expansion of the NATO to the East (given yet to the Soviet authorities) have turned out to be hollow statements. We have seen how NATO’s infrastructure was moving closer and closer towards Russian borders and how Russian interests were being ignored.

Moreover, in the framework of the EU Eastern Partnership Program there have been attempts to tear states which had been parts of the former USSR off Russia and to prompt them to make an artificial choice “between Russia and Europe.” The Ukrainian crisis has become a high point of these negative trends. We repeatedly warned the USA and its western allies about harmful consequences of their interference in Ukrainian domestic affairs but they did not listen to our opinion.

Last February the USA and a number of EU member states supported the coup d’état in Kiev. The ultranationalists who seized the power using military force put the country on the edge of disruption and started the fratricidal war.

Unfortunately, today we can see how the ‘war party’ in Kiev actively supported from the outside continues its attempts to push the Ukrainian people over the edge of a catastrophe. The situation in Donbas has aggravated dramatically. Ukrainian security forces resumed the bombing of Donetsk, Lugansk and other residential areas in the region. They are building up their military presence there. The “new wave” of mass mobilization has been announced in the country; there are calls for “taking revenge” after summer “military failures” and for a forceful “Ukrainization of Donbas.”

Ukraine is militarizing rapidly. We can judge by the statistics: in 2014, the Ukrainian military budget increased by almost 41 percent. This year, according to preliminary data, it will more than triple and reach more than $3 billion – which is about 5 percent of the country’s GDP. And this is happening when its economy supported mostly with international, including Russian, funds is in rather deplorable situation.

We certainly feel worried. We hope that common sense will prevail. Russia strongly calls for a comprehensive and exclusively peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis based on the Minsk agreements which were largely achieved owing to the initiative and efforts of the Russian side.

The most important condition for the stabilization of the situation is immediate cease-fire and ending of a so called ‘anti-terrorist’, but in fact punitive, operation in the south-east of Ukraine. Kiev’s attempts to exert economic pressure on Donbas and disrupt its daily life only aggravate the situation. This is a dead-end track, fraught with a big catastrophe.

It is evident that the crisis will continue until the Ukrainians themselves agree with each other. Until the unbridled radicalism and nationalism are finished with, and the society is consolidated around positive values and genuine interests of Ukraine. To achieve this, Kiev authorities need to listen to their people, find a common language and reach an agreement with all political forces and regions of the country. They need to elaborate such constitutional state system formula that would provide for a safe and comfortable living for all citizens with human rights being fully observed.

In the meantime, it is necessary to do one’s utmost to make all the parties to the conflict gather around the negotiating table. In this context, the Russian side stands for forging sustainable and direct contacts between Kiev and Donetsk and Lugansk, for continued work within the Contact Group. On our part, we intend to actively contribute to that process.

For the full interview with questions on many topics:

http://eng.kremlin.ru/transcripts/23575

Bulgarian protesters denounce planned NATO base

From Stop NATO

Press TV
February 9, 2015

Bulgarian protesters censure NATO base plans

Bulgarian protesters have held a demonstration to condemn the government’s plan to allow the setting up of a NATO military command base on the country’s soil.

The demonstrators assembled in front of the presidency building in the capital city of Sofia on Sunday and later marched to the parliament, carrying banners that bore anti-EU and NATO messages.

25 years of American democracy – robbery, ruin, destruction of the state,” read one banner.

The demonstrators also called for the resignation of Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev.

The protest came after NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg announced earlier this month that NATO would immediately be establishing command and control units in six eastern European states, including Bulgaria.

The Western military block has over the past year increased its presence and conducted several drills in Eastern Europe amid the crisis in Ukraine. In 2014, NATO forces held some 200 military exercises with Stoltenberg promising that such maneuvers would continue.

Russia has also condemned NATO’s exercises and military buildup toward its borders on numerous occasions.

https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/02/09/bulgarian-protesters-denounce-planned-nato-base/

NATO Chief: Military cohesion needed to “prevent new age of disorder”

From Stop NATO

U.S. Department of Defense
February 9, 2015
Unity Will Prevent New Age of Disorder, NATO Chief Says
By Jim Garamone

[Perhaps Stoltenberg meant to employ the verbs create, spread or maintain for “prevent.”]

WASHINGTON: Solidarity is needed to prevent a new age of disorder, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said yesterday in Munich.

“History is not written in advance,” the secretary general said at the annual Munich Security Conference. “We can prevent an age of disorder if we have the will. We can keep the international order that has served us so well if we stand up for its rules and if we stand up for each other.”

Last year marked a turning point for European security and the global order, he said. In Europe, Russia annexed Crimea and is seeking to destabilize Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin is seeking to intimidate the Baltic republics, Poland, Romania and Georgia.

“North Africa and the Middle East are also in turmoil,” Stoltenberg said. “States are breaking up, and conflict is at our borders. Extremism is fueling barbaric violence across the region and inspiring terrorism on our own streets.”

Maintaining Order

But the international order can be maintained if like-minded nations stick together, he said.

One of the tools, he said, is NATO — the most successful international security pact in history. “Since its foundation, NATO has been a resolute guardian of the international order,” Stoltenberg said. “That order is being challenged, and we must do our utmost to protect it.”

NATO must change to address the threats of the 21st century, and it must maintain and increase its strength, the secretary general said…

NATO and allied forces must be ready to deploy at a moment’s notice and must be able to deter any threat from any direction, Stoltenberg said, including countering the so-called “hybrid warfare” that Russia has used in Ukraine.

‘We Cannot Do More With Less Forever’

This is going to require resources, the secretary general said, noting that since the end of the Cold War, European defense spending has fallen steadily. “We cannot do more with less forever,” he added.

At NATO’s summit in Wales, alliance leaders agreed to increase defense spending as their nations’ economies grow. “It cannot be done overnight,” Stoltenberg said, “but it can be done.”

“We are stepping up our support for Jordan, and Iraq has asked us to help improve its defense capacity,” he added. “In this way, we can project stability without deploying large numbers of troops, because most of the time, it will be more effective to help countries look after their own security.”

NATO Chief: Military Cohesion Needed To “Prevent New Age Of Disorder”

February 6 NATO meeting heightens danger of war with Russa

NATO leaders continue to lie about Russian aggression when even the Ukrainian military says there are no Russian troops in Ukraine. It is NATO aggression, pushing against Russian borders, arming neighboring countries, conducting constant military exercises in those countries, and arming and equipping the Ukrainian military to conduct genocidal operations against the Ukrainian people.

By Johannes Stern, February 5, 2015
World Socialist Web Site

NATO defense ministers are meeting in Brussels today to consolidate the military alliance against Russia, increasing the risk of a direct military confrontation between nuclear-armed powers.

NATO sources have revealed plans to establish a long-term presence in Eastern Europe, according to a report in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Sonntagszeitung (FAS). So-called NATO “Force Integration Units” will be established in Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. There are also plans to deploy such a unit in Hungary at a later time.

The units will consist of 40 soldiers each. They will be tasked with preparing exercises for a new NATO rapid response force and coordinating military activities in emergencies. Germany, which is spearheading the operation this year, intends to deploy a total of 25 soldiers within the units.

The ground troops of the rapid response force are to consist of a brigade of some 5,000 soldiers. The goal is for their most flexible units to have the capability to move to a new location within 48 hours. The entire brigade will be trained and equipped to be able to move to a new location within a week. The leadership of the operation will rotate yearly between NATO member countries.

According to the FAS, NATO defense ministers have already decided on the equipment to be provided during the “test phase,” which is to last until the beginning of next year. Starting in April, a company of German paratroopers will supplement American units that have been stationed in the Baltic States and Poland since last year.

Two weeks ago, the FAS revealed that NATO defense ministers will convene the Nuclear Planning Group (NPG) at the beginning of today’s meeting to discuss “the nuclear threat scenario from Russia in the past few months.”

Unlike previous years, according to the FAS, this will not merely be a routine meeting. An analysis of threat scenarios worked out at NATO headquarters will be presented to the defense ministers. Afterwards, the ministers “will for the first time discuss the consequences for the nuclear strategy of the alliance.” A separate consultation session is planned with France, which is not a member of the NPG.

NATO’s nuclear simulations underscore the fact that the imperialist powers are ready to risk nuclear war in order to force Russia to its knees. In the past week, a number of prominent figures, including former Soviet head of state Mikhail Gorbachev, have warned of the danger of a Third World War if NATO, led by the United States, continues to take aggressive measures against Russia.

Under conditions of escalating fighting between troops of the Western-backed Kiev regime and pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine, Gorbachev warned of a “hot war” that “could well inevitably turn into an atomic war.”

On Sunday, the Süddeutsche Zeitung quoted the Russian military expert Yevgeny Buchinsky, who warned that, in response to an offensive against the Donbass by Kiev,

“Russia will have to intervene, and then, bluntly speaking, to take Kiev. Then NATO would be in a difficult situation. Then you would have to start World War III, which no one wants.”

In spite of such warnings, the imperialist powers and their proxies in Kiev are escalating the conflict. On Monday, the New York Times revealed that the Obama administration is considering sending advanced weapons to Kiev. The newspaper listed high-ranking current and former administration officials and military officers who are pushing for such a move.

The Times report triggered opposition among sections of the European elite. The Süddeutsche Zeitung wrote that a decision by Washington to arm the Kiev regime with offensive weapons would be taken by Russia as the equivalent of a declaration of war. Russian officials and German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke against any such move during a visit to Hungary.

Washington intends to use today’s NATO meeting to bring the member states into line behind its provocative and reckless course. At the beginning of the week, Alexander Vershbow, a former US ambassador to Russia and currently the deputy secretary general of NATO, referred to “Russian aggression” in Ukraine as a “game changer in European security.”

He emphasized the necessity of deploying rapid response troops in Eastern Europe, extending NATO’s reach in the east, and arming the Ukrainian military. Referring to Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, all former Soviet republics, he said,

“The more stable they are, the more secure we are. So helping Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova—to strengthen their military forces, reform their institutions and modernize their economies—is not an act of generosity, it is in our fundamental strategic interest.”

He added,

“NATO is doing its part. To help Ukraine to modernize and reform its armed forces, we have launched five trust funds to assist in areas like command and control, logistics, cyber defense and military medicine. We are sending more advisors to Kiev and will be carrying out exercises with Ukraine’s armed forces. And we are helping Moldova and Georgia to strengthen their defense capacity in similar ways, and, in Georgia’s case, to help it prepare for future membership in the Alliance.”

At the end of his speech, Vershbow warned:

“This time around, having chosen our course, we must stick to it. We must stay united, stay firm and increase the costs to Russia of its aggression.”

Meanwhile, voices in favor of arming Ukraine are growing louder. Michael Gahler (Germany’s Christian Democratic Union—CDU), who is the spokesman on security policy for the European People’s Party in the European Union parliament, spoke in favor of sending weapons to Ukraine in an interview on Deutschlandfunk radio.

Wolfgang Ischinger, leader of the Munich Security Conference, which takes place this weekend, has adopted the same line. On ZDF Television he spoke in favor of the “announcement of possible weapons shipments” to Ukraine. “Sometimes one needs to use pressure to enforce peace,” he declared. While he cautioned that Germany should not send weapons, he said he could “imagine that other members of the alliance would want to do this.”

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, whose regime was brought to power nearly a year ago by a fascist-led putsch backed by the US and Germany, and has since waged a brutal war against the population of eastern Ukraine, made an appearance yesterday in Kharkiv, which is near the border with Russia and the contested areas. He said that “we will need lethal weapons, and I am sure that foreign weapons will be sent to Ukraine.” He continued: “I don’t have any doubt that the US and other partners will provide help with lethal weapons so that Ukraine will be able to defend itself.”

Poroshenko will take part in the Munich Security Conference along with 20 other heads of state and 60 foreign and defense ministers. He is meeting with US Secretary of State John Kerry in Kiev today.

Source:
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2015/02/05/nato-f05.html

Re-posted on
http://www.globalresearch.ca/nato-meeting-in-brussels-heightens-danger-of-war-with-russia/5429695

Ukraine: “We target civilians.” Separatists: “Their targeting maps prove it.”

Eric Zuesse. 1 Feb. 2015
Posted on Fort Russ

The pro-regime Ukrainian TV station Hromandske TV — which is funded by the U.S. Government, the Dutch Government, and George Soros (via his International Renaissance Foundation or ‘Fund’) —  has reported that the Ukrainian Government is specifically targeting civilians to die in the Donbass region in the former Ukraine’s southeast. It’s being done in order “to clean the cities.”
This is open acknowledgement that the operation, which the U.S. is financing (and Ukraine is bankrupt so it can never reimburse its donors), is actually an ethnic-cleansing campaign.
Previously, on Hromadske TV, a proponent of doing just that (ethnic cleansing) was interviewed. He said: “If we take, for example, just the Donetsk oblast, there are approximately 4 million inhabitants, at least 1.5 million of which are superfluous. … Donbass must be exploited as a resource, which it is. … The most important thing that must be done — no matter how cruel it may sound — is that there is a certain category of people that must be exterminated.”
Here is how it’s done:
[9 September 2014, from Slavyangrad, pro-separatists’ clips are shown, taken from pro-Ukrainian-Government telecasts]
Video of Commander of the Ukrainian Government’s volunteer battalion ’Shaktarsk,’ Ruslan Onishchenko:
“Our mission, being employees of the Ministry of the Interior, is to clean the cities, after the army has ‘worked’ this territory with aircraft, artillery and heavy military equipment. This is a normal tactical approach to warfare.”
Retired Col. General Vladimir Ruban, interviewed on the pro-Ukrainian-Government Hromadske TV, then says:
“I want to offer the Ukrainian artillerists medals, to those who shell the city [Donetsk], the houses and the civilian population,
… for they [artillerists] have deserved it [medals], both because of the accuracy and inaccuracy.
… It’s one thing if attack groups or any mobile mortar troops drive through the city and shoot,
… but if the artillery units fired from the airport [i.e., from the distance], then no one can claim that the separatists shoot themselves [i.e., that the people who are being killed in the city are victims of separatist troops mistakenly hitting passers-by when aiming at Government troops. He is saying that artillerists will clearly get the blame, whereas street-fighters can always blame the ‘terrorists.’].
The shelling there is done as intimidation, … not just object destruction, but intimidation [to get the population to flee to nearby Russia]. The civilian population is intimidated by a chaotic bombardment of different objects. There are many shells that plug directly into the streets or vegetable gardens [and so make the very ground on which these people live terrifying to them].
TERVIEWER: This refers to those that didn’t explode?
ANSWER:  Yes, … there are many of those, … shells that fail to detonate. But Gorlowka has been fortunate to have not yet been totally eradicated from the face of the earth, along with the civilian population.
INTERVIEWER: You mean that the city is bombarded violently? ANSWER: Gorlowka was shelled by our troops, [even] as I went there for the prisoner exchange. Although  it was known that I was there, they [our troops] kept up the bombardment of Gorlowka. 

General Ruban might not have known it at the time of his interview, but on February 1st, Life News in Russia bannered “Militia DNR: Ukrainian Army Uses US Missiles,” and reported that in Gorlovka were found “shells that do not belong to Ukrainian artillery, and even more so do not use Soviet or post-Soviet military equipment. According to their hypothesis, the weapons are from NATO. Deputy brigade commander Army DNR [Donetsk People’s Republic] callsign ‘Biker’ showed shells and said that …  this is a special projectile 155 caliber self-propelled artillery of the M109 A1 American production, which is used by NATO countries.” Furthermore,
“The presence of foreigners in their army and radio intercepts confirms our intelligence when we hear in interceptions, phrases in English and Polish.”
Germany’s Bild, and Britain’s Mail, are also among the international news organizations that have previously reported on American mercenaries, including the former notorious Blackwater organization, ‘advising’ the Ukrainian army in this war.  The finding of U.S. military provisions on the battlefields in Donbass is, furthermore, routine; but U.S. soldiers, like Russian ones, are probably not fighting there. Ukraine is only a proxy war between the two major nuclear powers, not yet a direct war between them.
Within just the past few days, further video evidence was uploaded which indicates that the targeting of civilians is a central purpose of the U.S.-funded Ukrainian war campaign.

[29 January 2015] The journalists of Ren TV [a major Russian network, privately owned by Russian aristocrats] today received the first documentary evidence that residential areas of Donbass [the rebelling region of the former Ukraine; the farthest-east part of Ukraine, shown here in the darkest purple] are being targeted. Although Kiev may claim that ‘stray shells’ hit a hospital or a kindergarten, we have found on the front line that is being left behind by departing Ukrainian soldiers, artillery maps, where the targets were restaurants, cafeterias and shops. Here is an exclusive report by our correspondent Valentin Trushin from the former UAF’s [Ukrainian Armed Forces} trenches:
This is a field near the village of Ozeryanovka, from which recently was a Ukrainian battery firing at Gorlovka:
… [The rebel soldier says that many of these abandoned tanks and other weapons are undamaged, and ‘They will say tomorrow that Russia supplied them to us, but it’s actually their equipment that will be repaired if necessary but will be used at war against them.’ Views of Government-destroyed Gorlovka are shown.]
… In the [rebel-]destroyed dugouts were found … notebooks of cannon commanders, maps. The documents show that shelling of the city [by the Government] was not random, but deliberate. The coordinates of the targets are shown. For examples, one is a restaurant, another a cafeteria or a market where no militiamen were stationed.
Here are their target-maps,
… irrefutable evidence of war crimes 
Little over a month ago, a rebel commander explained why the Ukrainian armed forces are losing:
[13 Dec. 2014, from Cassad TV in Crimea, run by a man whom the U.S. aristocracy describe as being a far-right Marxist
“How the Elite UA [Ukrainian Army] Troops Were Defeated by the Militia. Interview with Commander Kedr” (head of the anti-Ukrainian-Government Semyonovka battalion in the outskirts of Slovyansk):
How did you manage to defeat them?
ANSWER: The most surprising thing is that they were eliminated by the [rebel] militias, who haven’t graduated from any military academies. Many of them haven’t even served in the army before. The majority of them had only for the very first time recently taken weapons in their hands [they hadn’t previously owned or used even a gun]. I think that victory … [resulted from] … the high motivation of our troops, and it was guaranteed by the high morale, the example that was being given by the commanders who were taking part in the fight themselves. It provided such a result. Good trophies [weapons] were captured then, … [and it even] happened before the Ilovaisk cauldron [when the enemy was encircled], and at a time when the situation was very difficult for the militias themselves, … [so] there was only one injured soldier from our side in that battle, but from the enemy’s side were killed 15-12 men, practically all of them [that were fighting]. … Six [of them] were taken captive. [The battlefield is shown with enemy corpses].
… Our unit arrived to collect the corpses of two of their shot-down pilots. But the enemy managed to save one of their pilots. I repeat: Our troops weren’t professional military but people like miners and trolley-bus drivers.
[3:17] I’d say to Ukrainian mothers that our soldiers have nowhere to retreat from their own land, while the enemy have a chance to turn around and go home. 
[4:14: video is shown of the enemy’s combat ration.] It’s an American combat ration.
The actual reason why this southeast-Ukrainian ethnic-cleansing campaign is necessary for Obama, who installed the current regime in Ukraine, is that, if it is not done, and, if the people who lived and voted in the Donbass region (Ukraine’s far-east) were still to remain there and allowed to vote there as being citizens of Ukraine, then they would vote at least 90% against the regime’s candidates, and for moderates, because, even before the regime had started to exterminate these people, they had voted 90% for Viktor Yanukovych in the last democratic Ukraine-wide Presidential election (which was back in 2010), and he was the very same man whom Obama overthrew. Now, after this extermination-campaign, the vote there against the Obama stooges would be virtually 100% — not just 90%.
In other words: Obama needs to get rid of those people. They can die, or else they can flee to Russia, but Obama needs them gone from Ukraine.
As regards why Obama had wanted their land to begin with, it was because unless the gas and other assets in the ground there can be privatized or sold off by the Ukrainian Government to pay its debts, the Ukrainian Government will go bankrupt and become an enormous drag on everyone who had previously lent to it, including the U.S., IMF, EU, World Bank, and others (ironically including even Russia).
Now that the situation is becoming increasingly clear that this land will not be able to be controlled by the Ukrainian Government, Obama’s best bet (in terms of his objectives) is to allow the war simply to end with Ukraine’s defeat, so that no more good money will go to Ukraine after the previous bad money is thus lost, but just cut the losses and bring this truncated and rabidly anti-Russian western half of Ukraine into NATO for the goal that is, apparently, Obama’s top foreign-policy objective: surrounding Russia with U.S. nuclear missiles and with regimes that hate Russia, in order to get Russia’s capitulation to America’s aristocracy.
Vladimir Putin wants Donbass to instead remain a part of Ukraine, as a counter-weight there against the rabidly anti-Russian voters in Ukraine’s western region, so as to produce yet another Yanukovych-like leadership in Ukraine and thus reduce the likelihood of a global nuclear war (which would be Russia’s only alternative if Obama were to succeed in his surround-Russia-with-missiles plan).
After all: John Fitzgerald Kennedy didn’t like it when the Soviet Union in 1962 tried to place nuclear missiles in just one location near the U.S.: Cuba. For Putin, Ukraine is like a nuclear Cuba was to America, but more like around ten nuclear Cubas, in Russia’s case. For Ukraine to join NATO would, perhaps, alone be sufficient threat to Russia so as to produce an immediate Russian nuclear attack against the U.S. and other NATO nations (a pre-emptive Russian attack, against us). The insane ones there would be the U.S. and any nation that supports it — the nations that then are clearly aiming to ‘conquer’ Russia. The U.S., under Kennedy, refused to stand for it in reverse; and Russia, under Putin or any other leader, shouldn’t stand for it, either. NATO needs to end, immediately. It had started as an anti-communist club, and was then valid; but what it was and is after the end of the Soviet Union, is the greatest threat to the entire world. It is now nothing but an anti-Russian club: not just insane, but also evil.
So: that’s the reason why the United States has been supporting (and, until now, even demanding) an ethnic-cleansing campaign in the former Ukraine. It’s part of the evil and supremely dangerous insanity that is NATO.
 
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of  They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records1910-2010,  and of  CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.

NATO authorizes new NATO headquarters in Central and Eastern European states

UNIAN
January 23, 2015

NATO to create offices in six countries of Central and Eastern Europe

NATO’s Military Committee on Thursday approved the establishment of international headquarters in Lithuania and another five countries of Central and Eastern Europe and intends to submit the proposal to defense ministers, Chief of the Armed Forces of Lithuania Major General Vytautas Jonas Žukas told Baltic news agency BNS on Thursday.

The decision is positive. These headquarters will be established,” the general told the agency by phone from Brussels, according to Baltic online news site Delfi.

The headquarters, which will be directly subordinated to the head of the Allied forces in Europe, is proposed to be set up in Vilnius near the building of the Joint Staff. The staff will consist of 50% Lithuanians and 50% international forces.

The general also said that other similar offices should be established in Latvia, Estonia, Poland, Romania and Bulgaria. They are to be set up this year.

The establishment of offices should be approved by NATO defense ministers in early February.

“It’s good news for Lithuania. We were able to achieve what we wanted,” Žukas said.

The offices will liaise between national forces, NATO forces in Lithuania, and NATO leadership in Europe.

“During the discussions we also approved plans to create a Very High Readiness Joint Task Force (VJTF) and raised the question of NATO rethinking its strategy and assessing new threats,” he said.

 

Re-posted on https://rickrozoff.wordpress.com/2015/01/23/military-chiefs-new-nato-headquarters-in-six-eastern-european-states/

Kolomoisky is preparing a massive private army for a coup in Kiev

Posted on Fort Russ:

<iframe width=”480″ height=”270″ src=”//www.youtube.com/embed/YdX5dqMIyvQ” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen>

January 22, 2015
Phillip Ekozyanz – Oplot
Translated from Russian by Kristina Rus

Good evening, this is important and urgent information for all the Ukrainian people. Right now on the territory of our country there is a diversion operation taking place. What is it about, and what is its goal?

Active military operation along the entire front in South East. Bombing of residential neighborhoods. Soaked in incredible cynicism scenes of crying Poroshenko family on the graves of the people, killed by himself. New mobilization and callous forcing of peaceful people to war. Clear demonstration of helplessness of the Ukrainian army. All of this is just a curtain that is hiding the really important events.

Here is what is hidden from us. You may have noticed that just recently the pages of Boris Filatov’s (the right hand of Igor Kolomoisky) disappeared from social networks. At the same time appeared the rumors that the head of the European Jewry is folding. Exiting the game in Ukraine. And these rumors considering whats’ happening seem believable. But it is not truth. As one respected person said: “Benya is folding? You must be idiots!”

So what is happening in reality? Now, behind the scenes of Ukrainian theater, namely in Dnepropetrovsk, a powerful military formation is in the final stages of preparation.  It consists of foreign military battalions, and has a strong skeleton from NATO specialists. Dnepropetrovsk needed time to prepare, and a good smoke screen. This is why we see what we see. We observe the highest activity at all the areas of military-political field of Ukraine, all except for Dnepropetrovsk. It is hot in Donbass, Kiev, Kharkov, Odessa. Even Western Ukraine is heating up. Only Dnepropetrovsk is quiet. One does not hear from the masters of fate or the stars of Skype anymore . But as soon as Dnepropetrovsk ripens it will capture the power in Verkhovnaya Rada along with the right to institute a martial law. Dnepropetrovsk doesn’t need the Ukrainian army which exists now, created by hoarding the factory workers, peasants and shop keepers. In front of us it is being spent on the territory of Donbass, which is desperately defending itself.

In the next several weeks a new phase of Ukrainian crisis will begin – a destruction of Ukraine, and it will begin from Dnepropetrovsk. Everything is almost ready there. Repeating the words of Boris Filatov: “the time for promises is over, the time has come to hang all of us, Ukrainians”..

 

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/01/kolomoisky-is-preparing-massive-private.html

Alert: Beginning January 6-7, Christmas false flag events may be planned in Ukraine

Remember the multiple warnings in late November and in December about a false flag event that could involve tactical nuclear explosions? Such an event would be used to justify attacking Russia.

One of the warnings was from Russia’s State Advisor, Director of The Institute of Problems of Globalization, Doctor of Economics, author Mikhail Delyagin[i]

He said:

“And it is unlikely to happen right now, in mid-December. Because for a shock value it must happen on a Holy day. So I think that the threat exists before Christmas. The strongest threat.”

Christmas is celebrated in January in Ukraine and Russia. January 6 is Christmas Eve, and January 7 is Christmas Day. The holiday goes until January 19. So, “for shock value it must happen on a Holy day” would mean January 6 or 7, as the soonest.

… The sequel is coming. there will be another provocation. And what will the next provocation be? We got some information. .. I really hope that it’s a fake. I really hope that this is hostile propaganda. But you know, better be safe than sorry. The point is: Ukrainian army goes on the offensive. Yes, it doesn’t have the strength for the offensive and the level of demoralization is monstrous. Therefore it pretends to attack. Valiant soldiers carry out a massive artillery preparation. And all the Western media, not to mention Ukrainian, shout in unison about the liberation of another 300 square meters of Donetsk airport, for example. After that a tactical nuclear warhead explodes in the zone of the offensive of the Ukrainian army. Then everyone shouts that the monstrous Russia used nuclear weapons. Conversations about changing our military doctrine are moving in that direction. The liberal intelligentsia is already hysterically screaming about it. This is that which will be extremely difficult to clean up from. That which our military is not capable of, in principle, even theoretically. And that which is quite normal for the Americans, because both times of the use of nuclear weapons in the history of mankind it was them. To use it the third time is not so difficult.

Moreover, there were reports about wonderful Estonian port Paldiski – former Baltic, there is now a large warehouse of radioactive waste from all over Estonia, may be even from across the Baltic States. Spent x-ray medical devices and so on. And there NATO, U.S. military reportedly delivered some cargo, which also radiates, but in no case is it a waste to be disposed of. Just that the stock of radioactive waste is used as a disguise for the background.

…So [they] will explain to everyone that the damned Russian barbarians had used nuclear weapons against defenseless Ukrainian army. 

… – If possible, do you have information about how this warhead would be delivered to the zone of the Ukrainian army?

… In principle, it could be a cruise missile that will fly somewhere from afar, just on a low flight, below all of the locators. This could be a fixed delivery.

– Is the follow up script known?

It’s very simple. They all begin to shout, as we have just seen with the story of Malaysian Boeing that Putin is personally to blame. Actually no officer in the Russian Federation, no general of the Russian Federation, no last idiot in the Russian Federation can deploy a tactical nuclear weapon without the direct order from the Supreme Commander.

Because they will be shown Ukrainian children burnt with radiation disease and all that is necessary to present in such cases. And this is not Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Because then the Americans were the winners. Now we will be the losers. That’s the difference. Global media is tightly controlled by the Americans.

Secondly, there are the apparent preparations by Kiev for a false flag event, with Ukrainian military vehicles being re-badged with Russian insignias and carrying Russian flags.[ii]

Thirdly, there have been a number of reports that the United States is planning to launch a nuclear first strike against Russia.[iii]

It is critical that information get to the public, to elected officials, and to the media on the real situation in Ukraine as well as information on a possible false flag attack happening this week.

These events could happen anywhere in Europe, too, since NATO leaders have been creating a high pitch of fear, even hysteria.

The only hope of preventing such foul deeds is to shine the bright light of publicity on the potential perpetrators so that the elements of surprise are gone. That is the only protection for the people of Ukraine, Russia, and Europe, as well as for all of us.

Be watchful and aware, learn, share, and build peace.

 

[i] http://delyagin.ru/articles/83509-zadacha-amerikantcev-otorvat-rossiyu-ot-evropy.html#.VIc493VQ2Jg.facebook
http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/is-ukraine-preparing-for-nuclear-false.html
Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/14/are-ukraine-and-u-s-nato-preparing-for-a-nuclear-false-flag-to-frame-russia/

[ii] http://rusvesna.su/news/1418742084 http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/naf-intel-kiev-is-preparing-false-flag.html
Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/19/naf-intel-kiev-is-preparing-false-flag-terrorist-attacks-on-strategic-facilities/

[iii] http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2014/06/indications-u-s-planning-nuclear-attack-russia.html Posted on my website: https://freeukrainenow.org/2014/12/14/indications-that-the-u-s-is-planning-a-nuclear-attack-against-russia/

http://www.globalresearch.ca/us-plans-first-strike-attack-on-russia-or-china/5384799

 

 

Yushchenko: More than half of Ukrainians will not support joining NATO or a single official language

Posted on Fort Russ, December 30, 2014
Dnrespublika.info
Translated from Russian by J. Hawk

The former President of Ukraine gave Poroshenko and his advisors a lecture on how to end the civil war and how to start a national dialogue.

The former President of Ukraine Viktor Yushchenko stated in an interview that more than half of Ukrainians would not support the country joining NATO or enshrining the Ukrainian language as the only official language.

“If you are in favor of a single official language in Ukraine, please keep in mind that more than half of the people would not support this idea.”

Yushchenko also believes that the Poroshenko regime’s desire to push the country into NATO is likewise a measure to which 60% of Ukrainians are opposed.

“If you want to transform Ukraine’s security policy toward membership in a European collective security structures, keep in mind that 60% of the country will not understand why.”

In addition, Viktor Yushchenko argued in favor of a general national dialogue:

“Whenever we talk of policies that may be given the label “Yanukovych policies”, one has to remember that, in addition to Yanukovych, these policies were backed by 12-14 million of Ukrainians. So if we want to reach a national consensus, a national rapprochement, we shouldn’t speak of Yanukovych but rather those 14 millions who think along the same lines as Yanukovych. We have to understand our strategic interests and our past, all the while preserving a national dialogue.”

The former president underscored the need for the national dialogue to compel Poroshenko and his supporters to take into consideration the interests of all citizens of Ukraine, so that Ukraine’s diversity would never again become the source of conflict:

“The diversity of our country cannot simply be a set of contradictions, but rather a distinguishing feature, and once we realize that these differences exist then the next step is to plan how to reconcile these differences.”

Translator’s Note:

Given the mounting pressure from the West to come to terms with Russia (as evidenced by newly announced IMF conditions for the next loan to Ukraine, which include Russia’s postponement of Ukraine’s repayment of its debt to Russia), it may be that Yushchenko, while an opponent of Yanukovych in the presidential elections, is nevertheless being seen both by Ukrainians and (especially) the West as someone more capable of effectively enforcing a more conciliatory Ukrainian policy toward Russia. This is something that Poroshenko (due to the absence of his own political team) is incapable of doing (which is reflected by the cold shoulder he has received from the EU) and the Yatsenyuk/Turchinov clique is unwilling to do, preferring instead to attempt extorting billions of euros by threatening Ukraine’s collapse—which would be very difficult to avoid in the absence of the resumption of favorable Russian economic policies toward Ukraine. Yushchenko represents a substantially pro-Western political tilt without the virulent anti-Russian rhetoric that the current Kiev government excels at, which arguably makes him the most qualified to move Ukraine out of its current crisis.

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2014/12/yushchenko-more-than-half-of-ukrainians.html

Original: http://dnrespublika.info/yushhenko-bolshe-poloviny-ukraincev-ne-podderzhat-kurs-v-nato-edinyjj-gosyazyk/

Saker: End of 2014 report and a look at what 2015 might bring

http://vineyardsaker.blogspot.com/2014/12/2014-end-of-year-report-and-look-into.html

Introduction:
By any measure 2014 has been a truly historic year which saw huge, I would say, even tectonic developments. This year ends in very high instability, and the future looks hard to guess. I don’t think that anybody can confidently predict what might happen next year. So what I propose to do today is something far more modest. I want to look into some of the key events of 2014 and think of them as vectors with a specific direction and magnitude. I want to look in which direction a number of key actors (countries) “moved” this year and with what degree of intensity. Then I want to see whether it is likely that they will change course or determination. Then adding up all the “vectors” of these key actors (countries) I want to make a calculation and see what resulting vector we will obtain for the next year. Considering the large number of “unknown unknowns” (to quote Rumsfeld) this exercise will not result in any kind of real prediction, but my hope is that it will prove a useful analytical reference.

The main event and the main actors
A comprehensive analysis of 2014 should include most major countries on the planet, but this would be too complicated and, ultimately, useless. I think that it is indisputable that the main event of 2014 has been the war in the Ukraine. This crisis not only overshadowed the still ongoing Anglo-Zionist attack on Syria, but it pitted the world’s only two nuclear superpowers (Russia and the USA) directly against each other. And while some faraway countries did have a minor impact on the Ukrainian crisis, especially the BRICS, I don’t think that a detailed discussion of South African or Brazilian politics would contribute much. There is a short list of key actors whose role warrants a full analysis. They are:

  1. The USA
  2. The Ukrainian Junta
  3. The Novorussians (DNR+LNR)
  4. Russia
  5. The EU
  6. NATO
  7. China

I submit that these seven actors account for 99.99% of the events in the Ukraine and that an analysis of the stance of each one of them is crucial.  So let’s take them one by one:

1 – The USA

Of all the actors in this crisis, the USA is by far the most consistent and coherent one.  Zbigniew Brzezinski, Hillary Clinton and Victoria Nuland were very clear about US objectives in the Ukraine:

Zbigniew Brzezinski: Without Ukraine Russia ceases to be empire, while with Ukraine – bought off first and subdued afterwards, it automatically turns into empire…(…)  the new world order under the hegemony of the United States is created against Russia and on the fragments of Russia. Ukraine is the Western outpost to prevent the recreation of the Soviet Union.

Hillary Clinton: There is a move to re-Sovietise the region (…) It’s not going to be called that. It’s going to be called a customs union, it will be called Eurasian Union and all of that, (…) But let’s make no mistake about it. We know what the goal is and we are trying to figure out effective ways to slow down or prevent it.

Victoria Nuland: F**k the EU!

Between the three, these senior US “deep-staters” have clearly and unambiguously defined the primary goal of the USA: to take control of the Ukraine to prevent Russia from becoming a new Soviet Union, regardless of what the EU might have to say about that.  Of course, there were other secondary goals which I listed in June of this year (see here):

As a reminder, what were the US goals in the Ukraine: (in no particular order) [Editor: I’ve substituted Saker’s colors for words]

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Still possible ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Still possible ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Compromised ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Still possible ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Still possible ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Still possible ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

I have color-coded these objectives into the following categories:
Achieved – black 
Still possible – too early to call – blue
Compromised – pink
Failed – red

Current “score card”: 1 “achieved”, 5 “possible, 2 “compromised” and 3 “failed”.

Here is how I would re-score the same goals at the end of the year:

  1. Sever the ties between Russia and the Ukraine [Achieved ]
  2. Put a russophobic NATO puppet regime in power in Kiev [Achieved ]
  3. Boot the Russians out of Crimea [Failed ]
  4. Turn Crimea into a unsinkable US/NATO aircraft carrier [Failed ]
  5. Create a Cold War v2 in Europe [Still possible ]
  6. Further devastate the EU economies [Achieved ]
  7. Secure the EU’s status as “US protectorate/colony” [Achieved ]
  8. Castrate once and for all EU foreign policies [Achieved ]
  9. Politically isolate Russia [Failed ]
  10. Maintain the worldwide dominance of the US dollar [Compromised ]
  11. Justify huge military/security budgets [Achieved ]

New score card: 6 “achieved”, 1 “possible”, 1 “compromised” and 3 “failed”

At first glance, this is a clear success for the USA: from 1 achieved to 6 with the same number of “failed” is very good for such a short period of time.  However, a closer look will reveal something crucial: all the successes of the USA were achieved at the expense of the EU and none against Russia.  Not only that, but the USA has failed in its main goal: to prevent Russia from becoming a superpower, primarily because the US policy was based on a hugely mistaken assumption: that Russia needed the Ukraine to become a superpower again.  This monumental miscalculation also resulted in another very bad fact for the USA: the dollar is still very much threatened, more so than a year ago in fact.

This is so important that I will repeat it again: the AngloZionist Empire predicated its entire Ukrainian strategy on a completely wrong assumption: that Russia “needed” the Ukraine.  Russia does not, and she knows that.  As we shall see later, a lot of the key events of this year are a direct result of this huge miscalculation.

The US is now facing a paradox: “victory” in the Ukraine, “victory” in Europe, but failure to stop a rapidly rising Russia.  Worse, these “victories” came at a very high price which included creating tensions inside the EU, threatening the future of the US shale gas industry, alienating many countries at the UN, being deeply involved with a Nazi regime, becoming the prime suspect in the shooting down of MH17 and paying the costs for an artificially low price of gold.  But the single worst consequence of the US foreign policy in the Ukraine has been the establishment of a joint Russian-Chinese strategic alliance clearly directed against the United States (more about that later). Continue reading