June 22, the day Nazi Germany invaded the Soviet Union; President Putin addresses the State Duma

From Kremlin.ru

Vladimir Putin addresses the State Duma’s plenary session
April 22, 2016

The President reviewed the Duma deputies’ results and work over the last five-year parliamentary session.

President of Russia Vladimir Putin: Colleagues,

I wanted to meet with you as the parliament’s sixth convocation comes to the end of its mandate and thank you for your work over these years. I want to thank you and say a few words about the results of your work. Of course, I want to take a look forward too at the tasks the next parliament will have before it.

But first of all, let me turn to the tragic date we are marking today. Seventy-five years ago, Nazi Germany treacherously invaded the Soviet Union and the Great Patriotic War began. By this time, as we know, the Nazis has already enslaved many European countries.

The Soviet people took the brunt of the Nazis’ force, but they met the enemy with tremendous unity and resistance, and withstood the onslaught, fighting literally to the death to protect their homeland. They drove the enemy right back to its lair, inflicted a crushing defeat on the invaders and achieved the Great Victory.

Today, we bow our heads before this heroic generation. Our fathers and grandfathers gave their lives to save Russia and all of humanity from the fascist scourge. We will always remember their sacrifice and courage. We treasure the bright memory of all who gave their lives in that war, and all our veterans who are no longer with us now. I propose that we honour their memory with a minute of silence.

(Minute of silence)

It was the Nazis who unleashed this war. Their ideology of hatred, blind faith in their own exceptional nature and infallibility, and desire for world domination led to the twentieth century’s greatest tragedy.

We know the biggest lesson of that war: it could have been prevented. It could have been stopped if efforts had been made to firmly rein in the Nazis and their accomplices’ wild ambitions in time. But this did not happen. Our country, the Soviet Union, made direct proposals for joint action and collective defence, but these proposals were simply left hanging.

The leaders of a number of Western countries chose instead to pursue a policy of containing the Soviet Union and sought to keep it in a situation of international isolation. But it was Nazism that was the real and terrible global threat. Politicians underestimated its danger, overlooked the threat and did not want to admit that enlightened Europe could give birth to a criminal regime that was growing ever stronger.

The international community let its vigilance down and lacked the will and unity to prevent this war and save the lives of millions and millions of people. What other lesson do we need today to throw aside tattered old ideological differences and geopolitical games and unite our forces to fight international terrorism?

This common threat is spreading its danger before our very eyes. We must create a modern collective security system beyond blocs and with all countries on an equal footing. Russia is open to discussions on this most important issue and has repeatedly stated its readiness for dialogue.

For now though, as was the case on the eve of World War II, we see no positive response. On the contrary, NATO is stepping up its aggressive rhetoric and aggressive actions close to our borders. In this situation, we have no choice but to devote particular attention to the tasks we must address in order to increase our country’s defence capability.

I would like to thank the State Duma deputies for their deep and substantive understanding of Russia’s state interests and for knowing how to defend these interests decisively. Of course, I also want to thank you for your consolidated legislative support for the proposals on strengthening our country’s security.

Colleagues, your work and its results deserve a worthy assessment. It is particularly important that the laws you have adopted have played a big part in enabling us to fulfil our social obligations to our citizens, develop our most important economic sectors and improve our country’s political system. I want to stress this point.

You have accomplished a tremendous amount of work in all these areas. This successful work is the result of the efforts made by all parliamentary parties and their willingness to pursue a constructive dialogue with each other, with the Government, and with the other participants in the legislative initiative.

A truly historic result of this convocation’s work was the legal integration of Crimea and Sevastopol, which followed on your sincere and heartfelt moral support for the peninsula’s people on the eve of the referendum on joining the Russian Federation. You were active in supporting the view shared by the vast majority of Crimea and Sevastopol’s people, sometimes emotionally, and when needed, very professionally.

During this time, all parliamentary parties displayed a degree of unity of which your voters can be deservedly proud. In a very short period of time, you adopted more than 120 laws that smoothed the way for Crimea and Sevastopol’s entry into the Russian Federation. You helped people to get through the transition period’s difficulties, feel at home in Russia and know that their rights are reliably guaranteed and new opportunities have opened before them.

A readiness to consolidate for the sake of the tasks at hand and for Russia’s sake is this convocation’s distinguishing feature. It is very important now that the next parliamentary convocation continues these traditions, including this strict respect for the rules of parliamentary ethics. Continuity in law-making work is of tremendous importance.

This ensures the legislative base’s quality and also the authoritative reputation of the entire Russian jurisdiction. We should most definitely continue the practice of annual reports on the state of our country’s legislation. These reports are drafted by both chambers of the Federal Assembly together with the regional parliaments. This is a very useful practice, I think, very important work.

I want to stress particularly that the legislative branch is an independent branch of power and no opportunist, short term interests or desire to push some decision through as fast as possible should interfere with its work. There should be no hasty or superficial approach when examining and adopting laws. I particularly emphasise this point. The key task for the new convocation in the law-making process will be to ensure a well-planned and systemic legislative process with deep and substantive discussion of draft laws.

Colleagues, I particularly want to mention your great contribution to developing our political system. You have passed a whole swathe of laws that strengthen Russia’s democratic foundations, make the political system more transparent and effective, and set higher standards for political competition.

We now have ten times more political parties than we did five years ago. But we know very well that the political system’s quality cannot be measured by the number of parties, but by their ability to influence the decision-making process regarding the issues of greatest concern to our people.

The parliamentary parties have considerable advantages, and these opportunities are deservedly earned. But during the upcoming election campaign, you will have to pass the test once again before your voters. The executive order setting the date for the State Duma election has already been signed. The election will take place under the mixed-member system on September 18th.

Let me stress that the State Duma will soon get an influx of deputies elected in single-seat districts, and this will bolster considerably the parliament’s representative functions and ties with the regions. It is very important that your work gives our people added guarantees of their social rights. These rights should be guaranteed by laws that regulate education, healthcare, and the housing and utilities sector.

You have devoted much effort over these last years to precisely these issues, including support for motherhood and childhood. These are complicated issues of course, difficult problems, but their resolution is crucial for our country’s future. All of the different issues are important of course. Security and international affairs are important, but nothing is more important than the economy and the social sector.

We have put together an effective anti-corruption legal base over these last years, toughened requirements to all categories of civil servants, and introduced bans on opening accounts in foreign banks and possessing foreign companies’ assets.

Now we must ensure that all comply strictly with the law no matter what the office they hold. I am sure that we all share a unanimous position on this issue. I note too that the laws you have passed on strategic planning and industrial policy are extremely important, as is the law on priority development areas, for example.

The work on modernising civil law continues, including incentives for business and investment and measures to combat internet piracy. You have also passed the law on parliamentary oversight, which will most certainly raise the prestige and significance of the deputies’ work.

Improving our environmental legislation is an area of much importance today. Protecting nature and the animal and plant world and guaranteeing people’s right to a good natural environment are common tasks for all political parties. I know that during this parliament’s term you have examined draft laws on the preservation and restoration of forests and ensuring forest fire prevention. The new State Duma will have to continue this work just as actively as you have, all the more so as we have declared 2017 the Year of the Environment.

All parliamentary parties have also shown unity on foreign policy issues. I already mentioned this. Yes, there were some attempts to play up differences between parties, but no one succeeded in splitting your unity and splitting the consolidation in our society and between your voters. At the same time, your contacts with colleagues abroad have become more intensive.

Friends, many political parties have already set dates for holding their congresses to announce candidates and present their campaign programmes. Essentially, the election campaign has begun. Ahead of you is some fierce competition, debates with opponents, and a far from easy time for all who will be taking part in these elections.

I hope that you will do everything possible to ensure that this election is honest, open, and takes place in a spirit of mutual respect. It is also my hope that you will hold a battle not of mudslinging against each other, but of ideas, the implementation of which should strengthen our country and raise our people’s living standards. I appeal to you to do this.

It is very important that all political parties realise their responsibility for preserving social stability and strive not just for the best election results, but for voters’ trust in the election’s outcome. I am sure that stability and trust are key factors and foundations for our country’s successful development.

You are all experienced people and have traversed all the difficulties of election campaigns before. But let me say again nonetheless that the most important players now are not the parties and candidates, but the voters, our country’s people. They are most important. It is they who give you the powers to decide their biggest problems so as to make our country an independent and effectively functioning state in which people can live and work in comfort and safety.

I am sure that you understand well the tasks before our country today. You have already demonstrated this through your work as deputies based on the principles of patriotism and service to people. You have succeeded in developing high standards of political and parliamentary culture and applying them in practice in your everyday work. It will be useful for our country and for the voters if this constructive political style becomes the distinguishing feature of this election campaign too.

You all have much work ahead of you. No matter where you will be working in the future, I wish you professional success and satisfaction, and I want to thank you once again for the very important and responsible work you have done in the Russian parliament.

Thank you very much.


Evidence about the connection between the Ukrainian coup and Crimea’s breakaway

By Eric Zuesse
Posted on Fort Russ, February 16, 2015

Little attention is generally paid to the connection between the February 2014 coup in Ukraine, and Crimea’s breakaway from Ukraine. The testimony that will here be cited helps fill this in. An attorney in the federal prosecutor’s office at the time of the coup refers to the longtime national socialist, Andriy Paribiy, as having been the key person behind the coup. In the new regime, Paribiy became appointed to become the chief of national security, and the top person overseeing the war against “ATO” ‘Anti Terrorist Operation’ to exterminate the residents in the formerly Ukrainian area, Donbass, the area which had voted 90% for the overthrown President Viktor Yanukovych, and which consequently rejected this new regime, which Washington violently imposed to replace him.  

Below is a Crimean TV interview with Natalya Poklonskaya, who was a senior criminal prosecutor in Kiev at the time of the February 2014 Maidan demonstrations and overthrow of President Yanukovych, and who resigned her post during the coup and drove back to her childhood home in Crimea, because she objected to what she called “nazis” who, she said, had done the overthrow; she objected to the way that Yanukovych was replaced, and to the unconstitutional and violent nature of it, which she didn’t view as being a democratic action, at all, but instead a “nazi” one.
This interview was telecast shortly after the February 2014 overthrow, but before the March 16th referendum in Crimea on whether to reject the new Government and to rejoin Russia (of which Crimea had been a part during 1783-1954).
Poklonskaya was interviewed in this call-in live TV show so as to inform her fellow Crimeans what she had seen happen during the overthrow, and why she couldn’t, in good conscience, remain as a Ukrainian official in Kiev, and swear loyalty to the new Ukrainian Government there. She had heard the chants of the Maidan protesters and smelled their piles of burning tires, and seen their marches in Kiev with nazi symbols and salutes, and she didn’t want to become any part of that. So, she quit and was now unemployed back home in Crimea at the time of this interview.
The key moments in this interview are shown below, with English subscripts. (Here is the full interview, for anyone who wants to see that:
“He” refers to 

Andriy Paribiy was the co-founder (along with Oleh Tyahnybok) of the Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine, which the CIA had persuaded to change its name to “Freedom” or “Svoboda” in order not to offend Westerners with its origin as a native Ukrainian version of Hitler’s National Socialist Party of Germany. Polonskaya said:
“He was standing on Maidan and delivering orders.” The interviewer asked:
She then asked, rhetorically:
And she answered, also as a question (since she’s a good trial-lawyer):
She was asked her view of the new Ukrainian Government’s declaration that this referendum in Crimea would be illegal:
The referendum took place entirely peacefully, because Russian troops from Crimea’s naval base in Sevastopol Crimea prevented an invasion from Kiev. The results were 96% for reunion with Russia. A 2013 Gallup poll of Crimeans, and also a 2014 Gallup poll of Crimeans after the referndum, both showed overwhelming support for Russia and opposition to the United States; and the 2014 poll also showed that almost all Crimeans thought that the referendum-results had been free and fair and accurately reflected the views of Crimenans. However, the United States Government, and its allies, claim that the overthrow of Yanukovych was legal and that the reunification of Crimea with Russia was not, and also that the ethnic cleansing against the residents in the Donbass region of the former Ukraine is legal and that the military assistance that Russia is providing to enable those residents to defend themselves from being exterminated is not. The United States Government, and its Ukrainian Government, call that extermination-program Ukraine’s “Anti Terrorist Operation,” and the United States is sending Ukraine weapons to carry it out.
When the Crimean people voted to rejoin Russia when they did, they saved themselves from the fate that soon thereafter befell the residents in Donbass


NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander General Philip Breedlove warns about militarization of Crimea, but not about NATO’s expansion and military activities

General Philip Breedlove’s philosophy, along with the U.S. and British government, is that the U.S. and NATO can take any action they want, right up to a country’s borders, and no country is allowed to take a responsive action. Even raising an eyebrow is condemned. In July, there was repeated shelling of border posts and over the border into Russia by Ukrainian government forces . A Russian citizen was killed in a  town on the other side of the border, as well as several injured, but this causes no condemnation, though it is as act of war. [1]

Illogical? Absolutely.  This is American and Western entitlement and arrogance at its worst. Every country of the world must realize the threat of “manifest destiny” which is at the root of American history and values. Independent countries are perceived as an unallowable encroachment on American dominance — territorial, commercial, financial, militarial. “Sea to shining sea” means everywhere — full spectrum dominance.[2]

Americans who find this utterly repugnant, who want respectful and harmonious relations with all nations, must stand up, expose, and condemn these racist, ultra-nationalist, and predatory American values.

We must build something different, and we must do it now.

From NSNBC, November 27, 2014
By Christof Lehmann

General Philip Breedlove, NATO’s Supreme Allied Commander Europe (SACEUR) and commander of the U.S.’ European Command warned against what he described as Russia’s militarization of the Crimean peninsula and provocative Russian military flights through NATO airspace. Breedlove did not mention NATO’s sustained expansion of its presence in eastern Europe, the Baltic and the Black Sea. 

USS Ross, participated in NATO’s Sea Breeze drills hosted by Ukraine in the Black Sea in September and used Turkish ports to circumvent the Montreux Convention.

After meetings with Ukrainian government officials in Kiev, NATO SACEUR Breedlove addressed the press, warning about Moscow’s military buildup which includes cruise missiles as well as surface to air missiles, adding that this upgraded profile projects military power and influence throughout the region. General Breedlove added:

“We are very concerned with the militarization of Crimea. We are concerned that the capabilities in Crimea that are being installed will bring an effect on almost the entire Black Sea”.

Breedlove also expressed concerns about what he described as “the provocative Russian military flights” being flown over NATO countries, but added, that these flights all took place in international airspace.

Not mentioning any legal arguments, Breedlove would rather make use of strategic argumentation, saying:

“The number and the pattern has changed, maybe as much as three times as much as we have seen before. … Also, we see that some of these flights have increased in size, normally before seeing only one or two airplanes and now seeing a group of airplanes”.

Breedlove stressed that there has been observed “an unusual spike” in Russian military flights over the Black Sea as well as over the Baltic and North Sea and over the Atlantic Ocean.

Asked by several reporters, Breedlove consistently dodged questions whether the U.S. administration of President Obama should supply Ukraine with arms and other questions about NATO’s eastwards expansion and its increased presence in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea. Breedlove’s answer, coming most closely to a response to such questions was:

“We continue to look at the requirements here in Ukraine. We continue to advise and offer thoughts on these, and nothing at this time is off the table“. (emphasis added)

The Obama administration has approved of a $118 million non-lethal aid package for Ukraine which reportedly includes body armor, that can be used by offensive forces, night vision devices which can be used by offensive forces, as well as three portable anti-mortar radar systems, which also can be used by offensive forces.

The U.S. administration consistently alleged that Russia is “fomenting an insurgency” in Ukraine’s Donbass region and that Russian forces, including Speznaz (Special Forces) crossed the border and are among the local self-defense forces in the Donbass region.

Not one Russian soldier, however, has been captured, documented to be killed, nor has it otherwise been “documented” with evidence that was made available to independent media for independent verification, that could support these claims. This is particuarly noteworthy in a time and age where almost everybody has cell-phones with both photo and video cameras. Russia vehemently rejects these claims.

To understand the bearing of General Breedlove’s statement it is necessary to understand NATO’s structure.

The vast majority of western Europeans are unaware of of the actual structure of NATO and that all key decisions are made in Washington.

It is a common misconception, especially in western Europe, that NATO is led by its Secretary-General. NATO’s Secretary-General is usually a European, which leads western Europeans to assume that Europe plays a significant role with regard to NATO policy.

The actual command structure of NATO in Europe, however, is led by the SACEUR, which is, and which always has been a U.S. general. The role of the Secretay-General is ceremonial and to some degree diplomatic, with NATO’s diplomatic posturing being determined in and by Washington. The selection of a Secretary-General can, however, help to determine which policies NATO plans to implement over a given period of years.

Breedlove did not mention that NATO has increased its presence in Poland and the Baltic countries; has increased its patrol activities over the Baltic Sea in cooperation with Sweden; has deployed missiles and jest as close to the Russian border as possible, has violated the agreement not to expand NATO beyond East Germany; has chosen Poland as base for the newly established “Rapid Response Force” which is directed against Russia; and has significantly, and in circumvention of the Montreux Convention increased its Navy presence in the Black Sea.

UNA-UNSO Marching in Ukraine.

NATO’s Black Sea vessels are predominantly vessels of the Arleigh Burke Destroyer Class which is capable of launching cruise missiles.

The Russian naval base in Sevatopol has, in other words, come under an increased and direct threat of cruise missile attacks, which would explain that Russia is forced to deploy strategic countermeasures.

It is also noteworthy that NATO’s covert warfare and covert “stay-behind” armies in Europe, a.k.a. GLADIO, are under the supervision and command of NATO’s SACEUR,

It is a well known fact that the Ukrainian UNA-UNSO, which is associated to the overtly NAZI Pravy Sector, and which has been re-dubbed into “special regional military units” also works in liaison and under the command of the at any time functioning NATO SACEUR. That is, for the time being, General Philip Breedlove.

CH/L – nsnbc 27.11.2014


[1] http://www.uacrisis.com/ukrainian-army-shoot-at-russian-territory-again-trying-to-provoke/

[2] from the American patriotic hymn, “America the Beautiful”