Ukrainian PM has stated "We do not want a war, but we WILL STAND AND FIGHT!"
Ukrainian PM has stated "We do not want a war, but we WILL STAND AND FIGHT!"
Article on the PRC's alleged take on the issue;
China to Russia: You're putting us in a tight spot http://l.yimg.com/a/i/us/nws/p/csm_logo_115.jpg By Peter Ford 7 hours ago
China's instinct is to stand by its strategic partner, but Russia's intervention in Ukraine's Crimea appears to violate China's principle of strict state sovereignty.
http://l.yimg.com/os/en-US/video/vid...065fb76fce2763TouchVision
SPIN THE SATELLITE
These are testing times for Chinese diplomats.
As they plot Beijing’s course through the international uproar over Russia’s intervention in Ukraine, they are torn between conflicting instincts.
On the one hand is a strong reluctance to stand with the West against Moscow – a strategic partner which never openly criticizes China. But on the other is the cardinal principle of Chinese foreign policy – non-interference in the internal affairs of other countries.
RECOMMENDED: How much do you know about China? Take our quiz.
Beijing is not exactly fudging it: Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said plainly last Sunday, when the first reports of Russian armed intervention in Crimea were coming in, that “we respect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine.”
But neither has China condemned Russia’s actions; officials here equivocate when they are invited to join the Western chorus of outrage.
Crimea on Verge of Succeeding to Russia Play video
http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/NY...6bec7bbdd95b3b
“China is uneasy,” says Bonnie Glaser, an Asia specialist at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington. “They cannot endorse Russia’s actions but they don’t want more tensions with Moscow, so they are not emphasizing their differences.”
It is easy to see why China is so insistent on the principle of non-interference: the government is worried about foreigners meddling in China’s own border provinces, such as Tibet and Xinjiang, where Beijing is unsure of local peoples’ loyalties.
Chinese leaders are especially displeased by the referendum that the Crimean parliament has called for March 16 to choose whether the autonomous region should break away from Ukraine and join Russia.
“That would be like Taiwan’s destiny being decided only by Taiwanese,” says Jin Canrong, a professor of international studies at Renmin University in Beijing. That would be anathema to Beijing, which insists that Taiwan – a self-governing island – is an integral part of China.
“China insists that Crimea’s fate should be decided by all Ukrainians,” explains Prof. Jin. “We will not support a Russian occupation of Crimea.”
Ukrainian PM: Started process of diplomacy Play video
http://l1.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/zS...8f98a91cf6eeb3
“China’s foremost priorities, the first things they think about when it comes to interference, are Tibet, Xinjiang, and Taiwan,” adds Ms. Glaser. “The idea of a part of China deciding whether it wanted to be separate is seen as very dangerous.”
“China always looks at these situations through the lens of how they could impact their own security down the road,” she says.
That concern trumps the hard-line anti-Western rhetoric that some Chinese newspapers have adopted. Global Times, a nationalist tabloid owned by the ruling Communist Party, argued in an editorial this week that “backing Russia is in China’s interests” and that “we shouldn’t disappoint Russia when it finds itself in a time of need” because Moscow “has been resisting the eastward trend of western forces in Ukraine.”
Though this does not seem to reflect government thinking, China has been ambiguous about its attitude to the interim government in Kiev. Asked on Monday whether Beijing recognized the new government, Mr. Qin said guardedly that “judgment needs to be made based on the laws of Ukraine.”
In a telephone conversation with Russian president Vladimir Putin, Chinese president Xi Jinping said that “China believes that Russia can coordinate with other parties to push for the political settlement of the issue,” according to an account of the conversation published by the state-run news agency Xinhua. “China supports proposals and mediation efforts of the international community,” Xi was quoted as saying.
Greenspan 'pessimistic' on Ukraine outcome Play video
http://l3.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/d0...46f779da12036e
China and Russia, two neighboring giants, have their differences but are usually on the same side in diplomatic battles at the UN Security Council, where both are permanent members, along with the United States, Britain, and France, giving them veto powers.
Russia has used its veto six times since 2007. On five of these occasions, Beijing has cast its own veto alongside Moscow. Tellingly, the only time that China broke with Russia came after Russian troops invaded Georgia in 2008.
“China cannot embrace the Russian position but it doesn’t particularly want to side with the West either,” says Glaser. “So they are sitting on the fence.”
Prof. Jin puts a more positive spin on his government’s predicament. “Because of Taiwan, China would very much hate to see the division of a nation,” he explains, “but on the other hand China needs stable relations with Russia. We will try to balance these two considerations.”
Testing diplomatic times indeed.
'Russia' won't back off, because this is a case of the Gangster Putin being right for the wrong reasons, which will get him removed if he DOES back down. The Unconstitutional 'President' of Ukraine, Arseny Yatsenyuk, is a Gangster too, an 'ex-KGB' guy and the right-hand man of Semyon Moilgelevich, one of the biggest Mafiosos in the world few have even heard off. I don't know how this scenario is going to play out, but the national security of Russia AND of Ukraine is going to go down the toilet either way. Damn, nobody even noticed that during all this 'Crisis', Gazprom-Russian Government controlled-worked out a new energy deal with the new Ukrainian Regime, did they? Look that up.
This is all smoke and mirrors folks. We're being played as usual. I'd be on the Russian side of this issue if I didn't know that all sides are a bunch of assholes; the Neo-Nazi Gangsters in Kiev and the Neo-Soviet Gangsters in Moscow, and the assholes in Washington, Berlin, and Brussels too. God have mercy on them all.
Some important historical background;
Brussels’ Eastern Frontier: Pruth, Dnjepr, or Don?
Hannes HOFBAUER | 18.02.2014 | 00:00 http://www.strategic-culture.org/ima.../18/s22314.jpg When Germany’s chancellor Angela Merkel asks the public to give space for more negotiations between the Ukrainian president and the opposition leaders before deciding on possible sanctions, everybody understands well that she thinks about sanctions against President Viktor Yanukovych and his surroundings and not against the militant right in the streets of Kyiv. How could it be otherwise? The well-known foundation of her party, the Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung, made a political figure out of the Germany-situated boxer Vitali Klitschko, thereby supporting his rise as a prominent leader of the opposition. And her former foreign minister, Guido Westerwelle, stood clear in the manifestation front against the elected parliament and presidency together with Oleh Tyahnybok from the far right «Swoboda». This alliance is not a new one. Let us have a look at the long historic ties between representatives of the Western core countries and Ukrainian rightists and/or secessionists. We do not want to go back as far into history to stress the year 1772, when Vienna as the centre of the «Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation» took control over parts of the vanishing Polish State subordinating the multi-ethnic (mainly Polish and Ukrainian) population into Habsburg Galicia. Nor do we want to focus on the cultural intervention under the Polish king Sigismund III., who laid the path for orthodox Christians to unify with Latin Christianity by the «Union of Brest» in the year 1594/95. In the second half of the 18th century this grabbing for orthodox souls was renewed under the flag of the Viennese ruler Maria Theresa. The implementation of Greco-Catholic bishops and dioceses brought millions of Ukrainians under the religious jurisdiction of Rome, without pushing them towards the Latin liturgy. The historic split between the Ukrainian West and East/South is rooted in this fact. Today’s opposition on the Majdan square identifies itself with much more dangerous historic figures. And Berlin, Vienna, and Brussels, not to speak of Warsaw, back them. The far right is dominating the streets in the Ukrainian capital. They openly celebrate fascist heroes of the 1930ies and 1940ies. And the West applauds. Some may call it an irony, that the official Germany and the official European Union take every opportunity to discredit and fight so-called right-wing populists at home and at the same time support the Ukrainian coalition of the three oppositional groups and the radical blocks within the manifestations. We do not consider this as an irony, but as a strategic alliance with historical roots. Since generations anti-Russian Ukrainians have been instrumentalized by Western politics, without reaching their own national goals, however. Just have a look at Oleh Tyahnybok’s «Swoboda», who supported the orange Viktor Yushchenko and his presidential campaigns since 2001. Both – and many others of the oppositional movement – understand themselves and their fight in the tradition of Stepan Bandera, one of the main figures of the «Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists» (OUN). Bandera was freed from prison in September 1939, when the Wehrmacht overran Poland. Under Polish jurisdiction he had been sentenced to death – later to livelong prison – for murdering the Polish Minister of interior, Bronislaw Pieracki, in 1934. After German expansion into Polish Galicia, which had been incorporated into the Soviet Union according to the Hitler-Stalin-Pact in 1939, Bandera got logistic support from Berlin, and his OUN formed the fore-front against the Red Army. In this function they massacred Hundreds of Jews and Communists on the 30th of June 1941 in Lvov under the shelter of the Wehrmacht. Stepan Bandera and his «Organisation of Ukrainian Nationalists» (OUN), which was – by the way – founded in Vienna in February 1929, nowadays are present all over the Western parts of Ukraine, mainly those, which had belonged to the Austro-Hungarian Empire between 1772 and 1918. Monuments of Bandera can be found in more than 25 cities, such as Lviv, Ternopil, Ivano-Frankivsk and many others. Eight towns honour him with honorary citizen titles, and many streets are named after him. On the 22nd of January 2010, the «Day of the Unity of Ukraine», President Viktor Yushchenko awarded Bandera the title «Hero of Ukraine». At the end, Bandera himself turned out to be a tragic «hero». His project of an independent Ukrainian state failed. Berlin opposed his idea. The vision of a Nazi-»Grossraum» did not contain an independent statehood. Bandera fell in Germany’s disgrace and was put to prison in 1942. Only when the front moved westward, Hitler again remembered Bandera’s anti-Russian and anti-Soviet (not to speak of his anti-Polish) qualities and freed him in September 1944. Bandera for the second time collaborated with the Nazis. The «Ukrainian Insurgent Army», founded in October 1942 by the radical part of the OUN-B, fulfilled their duty against Moscow far beyond the end of World War II, when the Soviet Union took rule over the whole Ukraine. After Nazi-Germany surrendered, Bandera’s fighters oozed behind the lines of the Red Army and started a decade of dirty war. London and Washington helped them by air-dropping fighters against the Reds. Bandera himself fled to Munich, where he lived under a wrong name – apparently backed by German authorities – till a KGB-agent killed him in front of his apartment in October 1959. From the «All-Ukrainian Union Swoboda» to Yushchenko and the streets of Kyiv, Stepan Bandera is the historic model for their vision of the Ukrainian future. An often used slogan in the period of the 1990s regarding the Eastern European transformation of the post-Soviet states as a «return to Europe» implies an unwanted truth: After the Soviet period Ukraine has returned to the situation before 1945. In this backward sense the perception of Bandera as a hero is a logic consequence. «Swoboda», the radical right of the Ukrainian parliamentary spectrum and one of the dominating forces in the streets of Kyiv, carries the banner of this heritage. Founded in 1991 under the name «Social-National Party of Ukraine», it earned its first spores during the fight for churches. In 1992 and 1993 Western Ukrainian Greco-Catholics, who had been illegal during Soviet times, tried to take over churches from the Moscow patriarchy, thereby attacking and even killing orthodox priests. The Social-Nationalists were on the fore-front in this bloody fight, ideologically backed by the Viennese foundation «Pro Oriente». This catholic organization officially promotes good relations between all Christian churches, well understood under the umbrella of the Roman pope, proselytist offers included. Atheists (and communists) are forbidden to take «Swoboda»-membership, as the homepage of the party openly declares. Its perception of history defines the years between 1918 and 1991 «as a time of occupation by Bolshevist Russia», although the Western provinces of today’s Ukraine were under Polish rule in the inter-war-period. The ideological position is undoubtedly right, anti-Russian, anti-orthodox and anti-Communist. History does not repeat itself. What nevertheless seems to be a repetition is the functionalization of radical anti-Russian, right-wing movements for Western geopolitical and economic interests. Since the Ukrainian President Yanukovych refused to sign the so-called Association Agreement with the European Union on the Vilnius summit in November 2013, Brussels puts new pressure on Kyiv; and therefore uses old alliances. The exploitation of radical right-wing local elements for Western interests can also be seen in other cases in contemporary history. Just remember the breaking apart of Yugoslavia in the 1990s, when Berlin and Brussels – later with the help of Washington – dynamized inner conflicts to civil war and foreign intervention. Without any shame fundamentalist Islamists in Bosnia and descendants of fascists in Croatia were used to blast the multinational Yugoslavia into pieces. The American special emissary for the Balkans at the time, Richard Holbrooke, justified these alliances in his memoirs «To end a War», naming his partners «our chain dogs». They were necessary to get rid of the enemy, to get rid of Serbian’s Slobodan Milosevic, he argued und continued to answer critics: «This is not the time for hyposensitivity», but later on we should «try to control them». The current Ukrainian scenario looks spooky similar. The West is well aware of using fascists, who would not be tolerated in his own sphere, to manage a regime-change in Kyiv… Only afterwards Berlin, Brussels and Washington will try to get rid of their rightist «chain dogs». If this should fail, Europe could arrange with fascism. It would not be for the first time. Yanukovych seems to be conceded a last chance by Brussels to give up political leadership in exchange for the recognition of his and his oligarchic family’s property by the European Union. This offer somehow already constitutes the first step to discredit the opposition. For the moment no oppositional leader is ready to accept this deal.
And Here's an article on an 'Ukrainian' piece of shit who went to fight with the Jihadis in Chechnya;
Notorious Ukrainian nationalist on international wanted list over Chechnya killings
Published time: March 07, 2014 10:21
Edited time: March 07, 2014 11:22 Get short URL
http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/23/40/a...-murder.si.jpg Aleksandr Muzychko (Still from YouTube video/TVRivne1)
Share on tumblr
Trends
Ukraine turmoil Tags
Army, Chechnya, Crime, Hate crimes, History, Military, Russia, Scandal, Ukraine, War
Russia’s Investigative Committee initiated a criminal case against notorious Ukrainian nationalist, Aleksandr Muzychko. The Ukrainian is accused of torturing and murdering at least 20 captured Russian soldiers as he fought alongside the Chechen militants.
Also known as Sashko Bilyi, the man took active part in the First Chechen War in 1994-1995, when he headed a group of Ukrainian nationalists fighting against Russian troops.
“Today a court in the city of Essentuki, Stavropol region, issued a decree on indictment of Aleksandr Muzychko as a defendant, and an international arrest warrant has also been issued,” stated Vladimir Markin, the spokesman for Russia’s Investigative Committee.
Muzychko is charged with forming and supervising an armed gang organized for the purpose of attacking Russian citizens, Markin said.
“Muzychko brutally tortured captive servicemen of the Russian federal forces, killing them afterwards. Over the stated period (1994-1995) Muzychko personally tortured and then killed at least 20 prisoner servicemen, demanding the information he needed,” Markin said.
During interrogations he used to break officers’ fingers, poked their eyes out using various instruments, used pliers to tear out peoples’ teeth and nails, cut throats of some of the victims, gunning down the others.
“Through his actions he expressed hatred towards Russian servicemen,” Markin said.
http://rt.com/files/news/23/40/a0/00/muzzzz-1.jpgAleksandr Muzychko
Information about Muzychko’s deeds in Chechnya were obtained from a captured Ukrainian nationalist fighting against Russian troops during the Second Chechen War.
The witness used to be a member of UNA-UNSO (Ukraine National Assembly – Ukraine National Self-Defense), an ultra-nationalist organization and he fought Russian troops in Chechnya from 1994 to 2000.
The man joined UNA-UNSO in 1991 and got acquainted with Aleksandr Muzychko at a training camp near the city of Ivano-Frankovsk in western Ukraine, where militants were training in shooting and hand to hand combat. The witness specialized in sniping.
Muzychko was one of the leaders there, being an instructor in fighting tactics. He also was responsible for propaganda and indoctrination among the recruits.
The training started in spring 1993 and lasted for 18 months. In December 1994 the best trained Ukrainian nationalists were sent to Chechnya. First they gathered in Kiev, to be taken to Georgia on a military jumbo jet. Shortly before the New Year they reached Grozny, the capital of Chechnya, and fought against Russian troops storming the Chechen capital. As UNA-UNSO leader in Chechnya, Muzychko was in command of a number of subversive groups, Markin reported.
“In January 1995 the witness saw Muzychko torturing and killing Russian officers,” Markin said, adding that the witness identified Aleksandr Muzychko from a photograph as the person he served with in Chechnya.
The testimonial evidence exposing the facts of torture and mass murder perpetrated by Aleksandr Muzychko came up during investigation of the battle of a large detachment of Chechen militants headed by warlord Shamil Basaev, and Arab mercenary, Khattab, and Russian paratroopers from 76th Pskov Division. The combat took place in 2000 near the Chechen village of Ulus-Kert. A squadron of 90 paratroopers fought with approximately 2,000 militants, killing about 700 of them. The squadron lost 85 servicemen that day.
Aleksandr Muzychko has come under the spotlight of the Russian authorities after a series of scandals in Ukraine.
The Ukrainian radical nationalist leader went on with the rampage against regional authorities, lashing out at a local prosecutor and threatening local authorities with an AK-47.
That part in bold.... I guess the new deal negotiations didn't work out, so it'll probably be 'light's out' on Ukraine courtesy of Gazprom... People, it's always about the goddamned money, always;
Ukraine misses gas payment deadline, risks halt on supplies - Gazprom
Published time: March 07, 2014 14:24
Edited time: March 07, 2014 14:57 Get short URL
http://cdn.rt.com/files/news/23/46/a...nt-cuts.si.jpg AFP Photo/Viktor Drachev
Share on tumblr
Trends
Ukraine turmoil Tags
Gas, Russia, Ukraine
Ukraine has missed its payment deadline for gas supplies. As its debt is increasing, Gazprom does not rule out it may cut gas supplies to the country, the Russian energy giant’s head Aleksey Miller has said.
“Today, March 7, is the deadline for making a payment for the February gas supplies to Ukraine,” Miller told journalists on Friday, adding that Gazprom has not received payment on account.
“Given the discount for the first quarter the outstanding debt has increased to $1.89 billion,” Miller added.
“Factually it means that Ukraine has stopped paying for gas. This contravenes the contract terms and international trade practice. But we can’t deliver gas for free”.
If Ukraine doesn’t pay its bills it risks plunging into a crisis similar to the one in 2009, Miller warned.
During the transit crisis five years ago supplies of Russian gas to Europe were cut off for 20 days because of the tension between Russia and Ukraine.
Earlier this week President Putin said that starting from April 1 Gazprom would no longer offer Ukraine the lower price agreed in December. The aid package to Kiev included $15 billion in bonds purchases and a 33 percent gas discount, that reduced the price to $268.50 per 1,000 cubic meters down from $400.
Currently Ukraine buys more than 50 percent of its gas from Russia, but aims to become energy independent by 2020. Before the protest kicked off in Ukraine, the country signed a $10 billion shale gas exploration deal with Chevron.
More escalation...
FWIW, Obama has just designated the Ukraine crisis "an unusual & extraordinary threat to the national security & foreign policy of the US"
https://twitter.com/ZekeJMiller/stat...54259663134720
4:41 AM - 6 Mar 2014
Obama Signs Order Declaring Ukraine Crisis an ‘Extraordinary Threat’ to National Security
by Noah Rothman | 7:55 am, March 6th, 2014
On Thursday morning, President Barack Obama signed an executive order which designated the ongoing crisis in Ukraine prompted by a Russian military invasion of the Crimean Peninsula “an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security and foreign policy of the United States.”
The order allows the administration to impose visa restrictions on Russians and Crimeans which are identified as threats to Ukraine’s security or territorial integrity. The order also paves the way for the imposition of sanctions on individuals the government determines are responsible for “undermining democratic processes or institutions in Ukraine.”
On Thursday, the Crimean parliament voted to separate from Ukraine and join Russia as a new territory in the Russian Federation. They mandated that a referendum on either greater autonomy or union with Russia will be put to the public in 10 days. Both the government in Kiev and the European Union declared that this kind of regional referendum would be unconstitutional.
http://www.mediaite.com/online/obama...onal-security/
50 U.S. Code § 1701 - Unusual and extraordinary threat; declaration of national emergency; exercise of Presidential authorities
(a) Any authority granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may be exercised to deal with any unusual and extraordinary threat, which has its source in whole or substantial part outside the United States, to the national security, foreign policy, or economy of the United States, if the President declares a national emergency with respect to such threat.
(b) The authorities granted to the President by section 1702 of this title may only be exercised to deal with an unusual and extraordinary threat with respect to which a national emergency has been declared for purposes of this chapter and may not be exercised for any other purpose. Any exercise of such authorities to deal with any new threat shall be based on a new declaration of national emergency which must be with respect to such threat.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/50/1701
Garry Kasparov @Kasparov63 32m
Russian parliament drafted new law today. If no treaty possible because no legit govt, can annex part of that state as Russian region!
Sunset @_darkhours 5h
Kiev is taking all wrong steps "@KeXXit
ITAR-TASS: Public institutions of Ukraine ordered to remove the Russian version of their sites
http://translate.google.com/translat...9332&sandbox=1
Ukrainian state authorities ordered to remove Russian versions of their official websites
International Panorama
March 7, 19:47 UTC +4
KIEV, March 7. / ITAR-TASS /. Administration appointed by the Verkhovna Rada
Acting President of Ukraine Oleksandr Turchynov ordered the bodies of state power
to remove Ukrainian Russian-language versions of their official websites, ITAR-TASS
reported a source in the Cabinet of Ministers.
"Until March 10 to all state executive, legislative and judicial authorities of Ukraine
ordered to block access to the Russian version of its official website," - he said.
According to a source at the moment Russian versions eliminated on internet
resources 14 key ministries: the Ministry of Health, Ministry of Foreign Affairs,
Ministry of Defense, Ministry of Finance, Ministry of Industry, Ministry of Social
Policy and others, as well as portals to the Supreme Court and Supreme Economic
Court of Ukraine.
"In addition, the Russian language has disappeared from the official web pages of
central executive bodies with special status: the SBU, the Antimonopoly Committee,
etc.," - he added.
GrahamWPhillips @BritinUkraine 9m
Video just in of Russian military vehicles on the move near #Kerch -
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9m0seZ2zLY&feature=player_embedded …
#Crimea #Ukraine #Russia
Armed Men In Crimea Confiscate Journalists' Equipment, Accuse Them Of Being 'Spies'
Associated Press
http://static.businessinsider.com/im...-400/image.jpg
Russian soldiers guard a pier where two Ukrainian naval ships are moored, in Sevastopol, Ukraine, on Wednesday, March 5, 2014.
SIMFEROPOL, Ukraine (AP) — Armed men in Crimea’s capital city have confiscated equipment from Associated Press employees and contractors working there.
AP’s Global Media Services, a division of the news cooperative that provides services to broadcasters, said a crew was setting up a satellite uplink for a live camera position above a Simferopol restaurant Thursday. They were approached by unarmed men who asked them to turn off their broadcast lights and prevented them from leaving the building.
Two other men then came and took photos of AP’s equipment, including protective jackets, and accused the crew of being spies.
Later, armed men showed up and ordered the crew to put their hands against the wall while they cut cables and took the equipment away. Some of the equipment has been recovered, but much is still missing. The contractors and employees were kept at the building for about two hours before being released unharmed.
AP condemned the mishandling of its personnel and the taking of its equipment. Although the armed men weren’t identified, AP planned to vigorously protest the incident to the Crimean government.
“Any suggestion that these individuals were anything but journalists is ludicrous. They were professionals doing a job on a story that has generated keen interest among news audiences worldwide,” said John Daniszewski, AP senior managing editor for international news in New York.
Copyright (2014) Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Follow Business Insider Australia on Facebook and Twitter
US warns citizens against non-essential travel to Ukraine, particularly Crimea Peninsula, citing Russian occupation - @NBCNews
The U.S. State Department on Friday warned U.S. citizens against non-essential travel to Ukraine, “particularly the Crimea Peninsula,” because of the Russian occupation.
In an update to previous warnings, the department noted the instability in the country after former President Viktor Yanukovych was forced out by protesters who set up roadblocks and occupied government buildings in several cities.
It also noted that Russian troops now controlled Crimea and said supporters of Russia had staged protests in eastern cities.
The department said the U.S. Embassy in Kiev was still open but had limited ability to respond to emergencies for U.S. citizens in other parts of Ukraine. On Thursday, the department said family members of U.S. government
personnel in Ukraine could leave the country. Peace Corps volunteers left on Feb. 25.
The department urged U.S. citizens traveling in Ukraine to enroll in its Smart Traveler program to receive updates on security there.
http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/ukr...-travel-n47451
U.S. fighter jets circle Baltics as Putin reignites fear of Russia
Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania get military support from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, as Vladimir Putin pours troops into Ukraine’s Crimea.
http://www.thestar.com/content/dam/t...arge.promo.jpg
Mindaugas Kulbis / The Associated Press
Demonstrators gather outside the Russian Embassy in Vilnius, Lithuania, on March 3 to protest against Russian intervention in Ukraine.
By: Milda Seputyte Aaron Eglitis Bloomberg, Published on Thu Mar 06 2014
VILNIUS, LITHUANIA—Centuries of Soviet and czarist oppression taught the three Baltic states to bar their doors whenever the Kremlin issued marching orders. Now they also scramble NATO jets.
Russian President Vladimir Putin’s decision to hold snap military drills in the Baltic Sea last week, just as he was pouring troops into Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula, sent shock waves through Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania. The countries demanded — and got — military support from the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.
The United States deployed six warplanes to Lithuania Thursday to bolster defences in the Baltics for the first time since they joined the alliance in 2004. The move expanded the squadron to 10. Another dozen are to arrive in Poland on March 10, that country’s Defence Ministry said.
About 150,000 soldiers took part in Putin’s drills, including 3,500 from the Baltic Fleet in Kaliningrad, Russia’s exclave between Poland and Lithuania.
“Russia today is dangerous,” Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite told reporters at an emergency meeting of European Union leaders in Brussels. “After Ukraine will be Moldova, and after Moldova will be different countries. They are trying to rewrite the borders after the Second World War in Europe.”
Angst over Russian expansionism is spreading across the former Soviet Union.
Moldova, which borders Ukraine and Romania, has its own secessionist region, Transnistria, where Russian troops are stationed. The former Soviet state is very “anxious” about Putin’s brinkmanship, Prime Minister Iurie Leanca said in an interview in New York.
Leanca said he called on President Barack Obama during a meeting this week to provide “strong U.S. leadership” to contain Putin.
The fear is particularly acute in Lithuania, which declared independence from the Soviet Union in 1990, the first republic to do so.
Putin, who has called the Soviet breakup the following year the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the century, accused Lithuania and Poland on March 4 of training the “extremists” who ousted Kremlin-backed Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovich in an “unconstitutional” coup. Russian state television aired footage of a Lithuanian farm where it said the rebels stayed.
Those “groundless insinuations” are attempts “to justify aggression and to incite hatred against Lithuanians,” Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius said on his Twitter account.
Ukrainian opposition icon Yulia Tymoshenko, recently freed after a two-year jail term, on Thursday slammed a decision by Crimean lawmakers to vote on whether to join Russia as illegitimate and unconstitutional. Duration: 01:17
Like Ukraine, the Baltics, home to more than 6 million people, have a large Russian minority. About a quarter of the population in Latvia and Estonia consider themselves Russian. In Lithuania, it’s about 6 per cent.
“The Crimea scenario resembles the occupation of the Baltic states by the USSR in 1940,” Latvian Foreign Minister Edgards Rinkevics said on his Twitter account. “History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce.”
Trying to build up their defences against Russia, the Baltic countries rushed toward integration with the West, joining the EU and NATO in 2004. While Estonia and Latvia have already adopted the euro, Lithuania is on track to join the monetary union next year.
“Propaganda against Lithuania sends the message that Russia does not accept Lithuania’s activeness in Ukraine,” said Kristi Raik, an analyst at the Finnish Institute of International Affairs in Helsinki. The implied warning: “Moscow has ways to punish Lithuania” if it doesn’t stop supporting anti-Russian movements in eastern Europe, Raik said.
Lithuanian officials say Russia’s Gazprom, the sole gas supplier in the Baltic states, charges the country at least 25 per cent more than other consumers in Europe, where it has a quarter of the market. Lithuania is suing the state-run company for more than 4 billion litai ($1.6 billion), the amount the government says it overpaid.
“Our experience with our big neighbour is definitely complicated,” Grybauskaite, the Lithuanian president, said in an interview on Nov. 18. “With smaller countries, it’s either total obedience or you’re an enemy. There’s no desire to recognize others as equals, but rather various means are used to pressure other countries, economically and politically.”
Understanding the Crimea Crisis
March 7, 2014
http://20committee.com/2014/03/07/un...crimea-crisis/
As I write, the Ukrainian region of Crimea is being absorbed by Russia, more or less
openly. This represents a blatant challenge to the post-1991 European order, make
no mistake, and so far Vladimir Putin is winning. After a sudden increase in Russian
military personnel on the sensitive peninsula, more than 6,000 troops, mostly
Special Operations Forces (SOF), Moscow has pulled out all the stops in waging
what I have termed Special War: provocations, espionage, black and white
propaganda, and the use of deniable SOF, often under false flag.
None of this is new to the Russians, indeed it’s second-nature to the Kremlin, and
Crimea today can best be viewed as one huge operation by Moscow’s powerful
military intelligence, the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU), which controls not just
defense espionage matters but SOF too, what the Russians term SPETSNAZ.
The outcome in Crimea is no longer in doubt. The referendum on its status, whose
vote tally is preordained, is scheduled for March 16; that President Obama and many
Western leaders have noted this is illegal is all the more reason Moscow will do it.
Western powers are spending much time and effort trying to undo the fait accompli
in Crimea, to no effect now save posturing. What needs to be done is deterring the
Kremlin’s next move, which is sure to come.
It is widely assumed that Putin’s next aggression will arrive in Eastern Ukraine,
where there are large pockets of ethnic Russians, and where Moscow’s intelligence
services have been playing their customary provocative games, laying the
groundwork for full-scale Special War. Regrettably, I suspect the chances of a
more-or-less overt Russian military move into Eastern Ukraine, to “protect” ethnic
kin from “fascists,” are rising as Putin smells Western dithering in the face of his
Crimean coup. Such an act will mean a full-scale war for Ukraine, which will soon
involve NATO indirectly at least. Putin has the ability to seize much of Eastern
Ukraine without much chance of defeat, but he may win himself a protracted conflict
for which Russia is unready.
That said, there is no room for confident pleasantries yet of the sort we are seeing in
the Western media: that the Kremlin is really losing, that Russia is on the ropes,
that Putin is sowing the seeds of his eventual defeat. There is no doubt that Putin is
lashing out in part due to Russia’s many weaknesses: economic, social,
demographic, and political. Putin’s nostalgia for the Soviet Union – really, a deep
longing for again having unquestioned Great Power status – is well known, but it
needs to be recognized that over Crimea and Ukraine, Putin is acting simply in the
manner of traditional Russian leaders: touchy about borders, at turns nakedly
aggressive, desiring to have weak neighbors it can manipulate, worried about
defending his land and people against myriad aggressors (some of them quite
imaginary).
Russia’s neighbors all know this pattern of conduct well, and are planning accordingly.
Poland announced major defense reforms emphasizing territorial defense
(i.e. defense against resurgent Russia) last fall,and now Sweden is following suit:
there will be others.
To the surprise of no one actually acquainted with post-Cold War Europe, the
collective response of European powers to the Crimean crisis has been
underwhelming, to be kind. There has been no united front against Kremlin
aggression as there is no common vision of what needs defending among members
of the European Union (EU). While Eastern members properly feel an urgency about
Russian moves, members further West seem less inclined to inconvenience
themselves and their comfortable lives.
The response in Germany, the most powerful EU country economically and
politically, has been particularly repulsive where, thanks to underfunding and a lack
of seriousness about defense matters, the Bundeswehr is incapable of offering much
in terms of deterrence anyway, and the Kremlin’s buying off of much of Germany’s
political elite has done the rest.
Given German misdeeds in Poland and other Eastern European countries between
1939 and 1945, that are now threatened by Moscow, Berlin’s lackadaiscal response
reveals moral, not just political, failings.
As the EU has been revealed to be a dilettante’s talk-shop outside economics, better
suited to debates about cheese regulations than serious matters of statecraft, the
burden must fall on NATO which, thanks to gross underinvestment in defense by
nearly all European members, means that falls on the United States. There is no
doubt that, in extremis, the United States would honor its Article 5 obligations and
go to war to defend any NATO country directly threatened by Russian invasion. But
what of countries threatened more indirectly by Special War Ã* la russe - by
subversion, terrorism, and violence by “self-defense militias” that the Kremlin
swears it has nothing to do with?
And what happens in a few years when the American military, already tired by a
dozen years of failed wars in the Middle East and increasingly hollowed out by
massive defense spending cuts, lacks sufficient power to deter Russia quickly and
convincingly? These are the stuff of Eastern European NATO nightmares, and
properly so.
Perhaps most unsettling is the manner in which Western observers fail to note what
actually motivates Putin and his country. Let there be no mistake, Moscow’s nakedly
nationalist chest-beating is widely popular among average Russians; its opponents
represent a distinctly minority view that natives will cheerfully explain is foreign-
controlled anyway. We hear much happy-talk about the “irrationality” of Kremlin
conduct, that such aggression has no place in our current, advanced age, and that it
all makes no economic sense anyway.
Historians are aware that remarkably similar language was employed by Western
pundits and statesmen in the late 1930s to explain away the increasingly aggressive
behavior, including cheerful disregard for international norms, by another leader of
a resurgent yet recently defeated power.
Russia was indeed a defeated power after 1991, and it nurses a deep sense of
humiliation at the hands of the West and especially the United States. I have more
than a little sympathy for this viewpoint, and there can no doubt that, in the 1990s,
Washington, DC, paid far too little attention to Moscow’s views on much of anything,
and we are now paying the price for that, repaid with onerous interest to the
Kremlin. U.S. and NATO actions in the Balkans, at the expense of Russia’s
troublesome old friend Serbia, have come back to haunt, and Moscow’s
representatives now cannot contain their glee pointing out that, if NATO could
unilaterally redraw the internationally recognized borders of Serbia in 1999, why
cannot Russia to the same to Ukraine now?
If the brief Georgia war of 2008 was payback for Kosovo – and it certainly was –
what is playing out now over Ukraine is merely the next stage of Moscow’s revenge,
for much higher stakes.
Revenge is a category not much discussed in college International Relations classes,
but it is a prime motivator for Putin and his country now. Humiliating the United
States and NATO is a major strategic aim for the Kremlin, and from their viewpoint
an entirely rational – not to mention entirely delicious - one. While the Kremlin will
not risk a major war with the West, which they know would be a disaster of vast
proportions, they are quite happy to come close enough to show NATO and America
to be the decadent weaklings that Putin and millions of Russians are quite confident
that we are.
To state the obvious, the risk of serious miscalculation, another historic Russian
speciality in foreign affairs, is grave now.
But do not expect the Kremlin to back off yet, Putin and his retinue are enjoying this
too much to stop now. Moscow has wanted to redraw the internal borders of the
USSR, which do not reflect ethnic realities well, ever since 1991, and in this
revanchist game Ukraine is the biggest prize of all. Simply put, Barack Obama is the
first American president Moscow has felt they could pull this off against. This is
painful to say, not least because this author – like many foreign policy watchers –
was optimistic at the start that President Obama could undo the massive harm done
to America’s international reputation by George W. Bush.
Yet Moscow has taken a different view of all this from the outset, seeing weakness
where others saw lawyerly consideration and American-style optimism.
This has been plain to see for some time. While Western Europe was celebrating
Obama as something vaguely divine – his pre-victory speech at Berlin’s
Brandenburg Gate and the award of the Nobel Peace Prize for having done nothing
save not being President Bush, are fated to go down as two of the strangest
happenings in modern foreign affairs – Russia was much less impressed.
When Obama was first elected, Moscow pundits, including respected, level-headed
ones, spoke as if America had lost its collective mind. Putin’s contempt for Obama
has never been well disguised, and has only become more obvious with time, and
many average Russians feel the same. Russian, like many Slavic languages, revels
in countless put-downs implying weakness and effeminacy, and if you spend any
time among Russians, even highly educated ones, you will hear the full range of
them of them used to describe President Obama – lately, often with a laugh.
This was probably inevitable: how else did anyone expect the “former” KGB officer
and judo master to look at the law professor and community organizer? Yet policies
matter more, and over the last five years, Obama’s policies have gradually opened
the door to a stronger, more assertive Russia in the world, above all the disaster
over Syria which, as my colleague Tom Nichols and I noted several times last year,
represented an opening beyond the Middle East that Putin was sure to take
advantage of, and so he has.
All is far from lost. In his last year in office, President Jimmy Carter, shaken by
Kremlin aggression, above all in Afghanistan, woke up to reality and took decisive
action, raising defense spending and getting tough with the USSR in something like
Special War, thereby setting the stage for victory in the Cold War a decade later,
something which too few pundits have been willing to credit President Carter.
Something similar can be done now, and ought to be. Deterrence, particularly in the
realm of Special War, is the language that Putin speaks and understands well. This,
plus bolstering NATO’s conventional defenses in the East, is entirely within our
power and needs to be done urgently to forestall more Russian bad behavior.
Yet there are reasons to doubt this will happen soon enough, not least due to the
basic dysfunction of this White House in foreign policy. This is not news, yet matters
greatly now. Simply put, President Obama has surrounded himself with people who
are not up to the challenge presented by the Kremlin over Ukraine and beyond.
I’ve named some of them before, and don’t need to do so again. Most seriously,
the consolidation of foreign policy decision-making in a few hands in this
White House is without modern precedent and cancerous.
It’s hardly a secret inside the Beltway that both the Departments of State and
Defense, the former not exactly being a right-wing bastion, have been marginalized
under Obama to a dangerous extent. In the recent scandal of Obama appointing
campaign donors to ambassadorships when they seemed not to even know where
the country in question was, I could not help but note that this really makes no
difference, since all important foreign policy decisions are being made by a few,
often young, staffers in the White House, outside the normal State Department
chain.
A related factor here surely is that the United States has groomed a whole
generation of foreign policy wonks-in-training who lack any real understanding of
how the world actually works. These impressive-on-paper people – let it be noted
they are legion in both parties – the under-45′s who are always graduates of the
right schools and first-rate players of The Game in Washington, DC (which really
comes down to cultivating the right mentors who will guide you to the proper
think-tank until your party returns to power), are no match for the stone-cold killers
of the Kremlin, led by the Chekist-in-Chief Putin.
They have grown up in a world where unipolar American power has never been
challenged, and while they can utter pleasant, Davos-ready platitudes about the
whole range of bien pensant issues – global warming, emerging trends in micro-
finance, gender matters on the Subcontinent, et al – they have quite literally
nothing to say when old-school conventional threats emerge and enemies – yes,
enemies: not rivals or merely misunderstood would-be partners – emerge from the
darkness with conquest and killing on their minds.
In the present-day West, it’s commonplace to have a laugh at Vladimir Putin’s
weirdly macho (and more than a little homoerotic) posturings, and I’ve done it too –
how not, among the panoply of martial arts, bears, and countless shirtless
adventures before the cameras? Yet in Russia they love this stuff, without a laugh-
track. They are not yet as post-modern as we are, and they find reassurance in an
old-school leader who talks about – and more importantly demonstrates – strength
in a dangerous world. The first decade of the post-Soviet era was an economic,
political, and social catastrophe for Russia, and Putin, whatever his faults, has been
a pleasant change in the eyes of most Russians, which is why they back him through
thick and thin.
The Putin era will end someday, probably with Russia more isolated from the world
than ever, but that coda may be some difficult decades off.
In the meantime, Western leaders must find the strength to resist Russian
aggression through deterrence. Credibility must come first, as without it all our
nuclear warheads, conventional forces, and economic leverage mean little and will
not impress. NATO can deter Putin’s misdeeds, far beyond Ukraine, but that will
require reinvestment in collective defense, not just cheap talk and expensive
conferences.
European NATO members have become accustomed to American leadership and
gap-filling at all times, but they need to confront the reality that they must do more,
and soon. Across the West, we need leaders who understand the stakes now and
how to prevent war through strength and cunning. As is always the case in war, cold
or hot, we need to become a little bit like our enemy to deter him. If our leaders
cannot do that, get new leaders – and soon, as this game is real and the stakes are
high.
[The author's comments are his alone and certainly not representative of any of his
employers, past or present.]
Русская армия переходит в Крыму: Russian army goes into Crimea
Vice Reporter In Crimea Challenges Russian Soldiers: 'Are You Going To Shoot Me?'
Paul Szoldra0Mar 9, 2014, 04.19 AM
Vice News reporter Simon Ostrovsky has been covering the ongoing crisis in Crimea with interesting and insightful dispatches being released over the past week, but it's how he handles people who don't want him to film that has us particularly impressed.
Throughout the video, Ostrovsky has encounters with people hostile to journalists - pro-Russian civilians standing outside a Ukraine military base, soldiers - and just about every time, they tell him to shut off his camera or attempt to physically cover it.
"Get rid of that camera!" says one woman while pushing away the camera. "This is a provocation!"
Perhaps his most testy encounter comes at a Ukrainian naval base when a Russian soldier (although he won't admit that) tells him, "No photo, no video."
"Why can't we film, just because you don't want us to?," Ostrovsky defiantly asks. He continues, asking him who he is and what authority he has to tell him to stop filming. "Show me a document," he says.
The entire exchange is pretty risky for any journalist, especially considering what has happened to others in recent days. On Friday, AP reporters were branded as "spies" and had their equipment confiscated in Crimea's capital city.
Here's what happened next:
https://static-ssl.businessinsider.c...39.33%20pm.png
Vice News/screenshot
Now watch the full video:
Ukraine Liveblog Day 20: A Military Standoff
Editor March 9, 2014
http://www.interpretermag.com/wp-con...2-3479-btr.jpg
A convoy of BTR's leave their base in Lviv | zaxid.net
Yesterday, Russian troops advanced north of Crimea, taking new territory and digging in along the southern border of the mainland. A wall of troops, APCs, and landmines, now lay between mainland Ukraine the the Crimean peninsula. More Russian troops have flooded Crimea, and there are signs of even more deployments on the peninsula. The Ukrainian military is also mobilizing in response to the crisis.
Yesterday’s liveblog can be found here. For an overview and analysis of this developing story see see our latest podcast.
Please help The Interpreter to continue providing this valuable information service by making a donation towards our costs.
Below, we will be making regular updates throughout the day:
1446 GMT: Russian President Vladimir Putin has spoken with German Chancellor Angela Merkel and British Prime Minister David Cameron, and he stands behind the legitimacy of the Crimean parliament:In a statement, the Kremlin said Mr Putin “underlined in particular that the steps taken by Crimea’s legitimate authorities are based on international law and aimed at guaranteeing the legitimate interests of the peninsula’s population”.Meanwhile, the Russian news agency has more on efforts to bring the Ukrainian forces in Crimea under control:
The Kremlin also said that Mr Putin discussed the lack of action by Kiev “to limit the rampant behaviour of ultra-nationalists and radical forces in the capital and in many regions”.
It said the three leaders “exchanged points of view on what the international community could do to normalise” the situation in Ukraine.
John Schindler @20committee Follow RIA Novosti: Crimean govt tells Ukrainian soldiers - Switch to our side, you'll get higher pay, free apartments...Wonder who's paying?
John Schindler @20committee Follow "Crimea has exhausted possibilities 4 securing a fitting status within Ukraine," must "return home - to Russia": Konstantynov/RIA Novosti
9:47 AM - 9 Mar 2014
John Schindler @20committee Follow "Our further remaining in...[UKR] is fraught for Crimeans with the danger of not just humiliation...but literally physical extermination."
1439 GMT: The Russians are not alone. Vice News reports that veterans from the Serbian war, who have experience fighting in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo, are now in Crimea in order to support the Russian efforts to annex Crimea. Vice News also talks to the commander of a Ukrainian air defense base that was attacked two nights ago:
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiShI3HCcAEGLSi.png
Palin Mocked in 2008 for Warning Putin May Invade Ukraine if Obama Elected
http://cdn.breitbart.com/mediaserver...nt-Reuters.png
by Tony Lee 28 Feb 2014 9323 post a comment
During the 2008 presidential campaign, Republican vice presidential nominee Sarah Palin warned that if Senator Barack Obama were elected president, his "indecision" and "moral equivalence" may encourage Russia's Vladimir Putin to invade Ukraine.
Palin said then:After the Russian Army invaded the nation of Georgia, Senator Obama's reaction was one of indecision and moral equivalence, the kind of response that would only encourage Russia's Putin to invade Ukraine next.For those comments, she was mocked by the high-brow Foreign Policy magazine and its editor Blake Hounshell, who now is one of the editors of Politico magazine.
In light of recent events in Ukraine and concerns that Russia is getting its troops ready to cross the border into the neighboring nation, nobody seems to be laughing at or dismissing those comments now.
Hounshell wrote then that Palin's comments were "strange" and "this is an extremely far-fetched scenario."
"And given how Russia has been able to unsettle Ukraine's pro-Western government without firing a shot, I don't see why violence would be necessary to bring Kiev to heel," Hounshell dismissively wrote.
Palin made her remarks on the stump after Obama's running mate Joe Biden warned Obama supporters to "gird your loins" if Obama is elected because international leaders may test or try to take advantage of him.
Full Video Here: http://landing.newsinc.com/shared/vi...e&VID=25670379
The Crimea is Russia's Springboard into the Mediterranean
03.09.2014 · If Moscow annexed the Crimea, it can upgrade the Black Sea fleet and consolidate his power in the region. Kiev remains in the face of this scenario only a consolation: closer relations with NATO.
From Thomas Gutschker
http://media1.faz.net/ppmedia/aktuel...arzen-meer.jpg
USA and NATO just only sit and watch how Russia is correcting borders. How it is bringing back to Russia what belongs to it.
USA has absolutely no chance to go it into war with Russia and to win. So it steps back and watch.
There is no battle group afloat to survive a Russian attack, there is no weapon from USA to be send to West-Ukraine or other NATO-vassal to fight and win against Russia. This are the reasons why there are no action from NATO or USA like against Serbia to separate Kosovo-Metochia from the rest of Serbia.
On Sunday in a week, the inhabitants of the Crimea decide whether they want to belong to Russia again. "Vote for a reunification of the Crimea with Russia as a subject of the Russian Federation?" -. That is the question at issue Who denies it, can alternatively express to remain the peninsula in Ukraine, as a largely autonomous republic. But the decision is no longer open, the Crimean parliament voted on Thursday for connection to Russia. In Moscow hastily worked on a change in the law that allows it to absorb a part of the territory of a foreign State without its consent - so the obvious violation of international law is to be legitimized.
Russian President Putin says that a new in Europe, and it is not to see what it could dissuade him yet. The fact that short-term threat of war to the Crimea, is unlikely. The Ukrainian armed forces are up to the Russian in any way. Currently is not even clear what army are parts ever loyal to the transitional government in Kiev. The NATO countries bordering the Black Sea - in particular Turkey - keep out of the conflict.
NATO sees annexation to
The Americans have a guided missile destroyer moved into the Black Sea, for a long been planned maneuver with the NATO partners Romania and Bulgaria. In the eastern Mediterranean there is still a U.S. aircraft carrier strike group. But as long as the can not retract into the Black Sea, the Russians can feel on the safe side: NATO looks to the annexation, as it has done in 2008 at the war in Georgia. It's not about enforcing the law or to rush a partner state for help, it comes to realpolitik. For the Crimea no one is willing to risk a war in the West.
Nevertheless, the Russian annexation of the peninsula will have strategic consequences immediately for residents on the Black Sea, indirectly, for those in the eastern Mediterranean. Russia provides the base from which to increase its power projection in the region again - after two decades of decline and infirmity of its Black Sea Fleet. It also increases its control over the important energy corridor between the producing countries on the Caspian Sea and the potential customer in Europe. After the EU has dreamed of a few years of it, they could make in this way independent from the supplier Russia, this goal now moves further into the distance.
http://media1.faz.net/ppmedia/aktuel...dent-putin.jpg
© AP It is impossible to tell what could dissuade him from the annexation of the Crimea: Russian President Putin
At first glance, one might think that the military is not much will change. Finally, the Black Sea Fleet was previously stationed in Sevastopol already at the southern tip of the Crimea, too, the Russians have several airfields and radar installations on the peninsula. This is all subject to a contract in 1997, in which Russia and Ukraine had agreed on the allocation and deployment of the formerly Soviet fleet. The upper limits of the agreement still reflect their original size, resist: 388 ships, 161 aircraft, 25,000 soldiers. Russia would thus have had every opportunity to project its power from the Crimea over the eastern Mediterranean and the Suez Canal to the Arabian Peninsula and the shores of the Indian Ocean.
But deceive the numbers alone. Most of the ancient Black Sea Fleet has long been retired. What remains are about thirty warships, mostly from the sixties and seventies. The flagship "Moskva" ran 1979 off the stack. The Navy has traditionally been the stepchild of the Russian armed forces. If funds are distributed, the Strategic Missile Forces always come first - they guarantee their nuclear warheads to superpower status - then the Army and Air Force. But that's only part of the explanation. The other: The Naval Treaty of 1997 does not allow for modernization; Russia may only have ships of the classes listed there. Speak Even in NATO circles professionals therefore of a "gag contract".
Moscow will save a lot of money
Due to the limitations in the Sevastopol port Novorossiysk has been massively expanded in recent years in the southwest corner of the Russian Black Sea coast. Putin approved a presidential decree nearly half a billion dollars by 2012 to expand the harbor to a military member. Have already begun the construction of a deep-water terminals. According to current plans six new submarines will be deployed for the Black Sea Fleet in Novorossiysk, six frigates and one of two helicopter carrier Mistral class that Russia obtains from France. The ship named "Sevastopol" will be handed over in three years.
It is quite possible that Russia - freed from the constraints of the Naval Treaty - even Sevastopol rearms again. It is one of the best natural harbors in the world, with many protected bays and deep water. The infrastructure for maintenance and repairs is considered excellent. The Ukrainian navy in Sevastopol also has its main base is, on the other hand need to find a new place to live.
Moscow will also save a lot of money. The Treaty of 1997 provided for an annual rental of almost a hundred million dollars for Sevastopol. As the stationing agreement was later extended, Kiev negotiated additionally a thirty percent discount on Russian gas supplies. In Moscow nationalists and some strategists thought this business for too expensive. They figured ago that Russia would waive four billion dollars a year. The counter-argument was that the Kremlin invest in a prosperous relationship with Ukraine. This hope vanished at the latest with the overthrow of President Yanukovych - post haste Moscow announced the discount.
Consequences for pipeline projects
Russia has used the Black Sea Fleet in recent years for its regional interests. She turned 2008, the tiny Georgian Navy, sat from landing troops and established a naval blockade off the coast. Individual ships took part in the international anti-piracy part in the Horn of Africa. In the course of the civil war in Syria, an association was with up to ten warships stationed in Tartus, the only naval base of Russians outside their territory.
Also this base has been expanded in recent years. It has become a real power in the struggle for Syria, but is supposed to be supply station for warships in the Mediterranean and on the way to the Indian Ocean. Moscow is determined to expand its presence there - as a counterweight to NATO. The Alliance has permanently stationed since 2011 a guided missile destroyer in the Mediterranean, as part of its missile defense. The Russians will mark the helicopter carrier "Sevastopol" their sphere of influence.
When Russia annexed the Crimea, which also has implications for the pipeline projects in the Black Sea region. There collide fundamentally different interests. Russia supplies Europe today mostly via gas lines that run through Ukraine - Moscow wants to end this dependence. This is done on the one hand, the project Nord Stream in the Baltic Sea, on the other hand, South Stream in the Black Sea. Originally, the South Stream gas line should run on a direct route from the Russian Dschubga to Varna in Bulgaria, but then Ukraine would have had a say and may require transmission charges again.
Because this path leads right through the Exclusive Economic Zone of the country, they deserve every state in the 200-mile sector from its coast. Therefore Russia forged a deal with Turkey in 2011, the new route runs through its economic zone. Heard the Crimea again only to Russia, also its economic zone expands, while the Ukraine remains only a small sector. In principle, it is then even possible to lead South Stream as it always wanted Yanukovych: on the Crimea. This would reduce costs dramatically, because the line could be installed in less deep water, additional pump stations on land would increase their capacity. It is uncertain whether, run by Gazprom pipeline consortium to reconsider the routing again. The plans are at an advanced stage, the tubes have already been ordered and are to be laid in the fall on.
What is certain is that done another pipeline project with the Russian annexation of the Crimea. It's called White Stream and should deliver on the Caspian Sea and Georgia to Romania and Ukraine natural gas from Turkmenistan. In Kiev mainly Yulia Tymoshenko has made strong for it, when she was prime minister - to break through the complete dependence on Russian supplies. The pipeline should go to the Crimea on land: on Ukrainian soil. It is clear that Russia continues to expand its dominance in the Black Sea with the occupation of the Crimea. However, there is also a downside for Moscow. As long as Russian troops were on Ukrainian soil, Kiev could not be a member of NATO.
Because the Alliance traditionally takes only States that do not have foreign forces on its territory. While this is not in the North Atlantic Treaty, but is an iron principle, not to import conflicts. In April 2008, the Alliance Kiev had applied for membership in principle in view. Shortly afterwards, the prime minister, Tymoshenko announced the agreement on the Black Sea Fleet will expire in 2017. But when Viktor Yanukovych returned to the presidency in 2010, he extended the deployment of up to 2042. Thus the approach of Kiev to NATO seemed a distant memory. Now the game begins anew. Tymoshenko's party has already introduced a bill into Parliament which provides for closer ties with NATO. It would be a consolation prize for the loss of the Crimea.
McCain: ‘It’s Tragic’ There’s No U.S. Military Option In Ukraine
By Ben Armbrusterhttp://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/...rd_blue_16.png on March 7, 2014 at 2:28 pm
http://thinkprogress.org/wp-content/...-2-638x429.jpg
CREDIT: AP
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) on Friday lamented the lack of a military option for the United States in Ukraine against Russia and criticized President Obama for thinking the Cold War is over.
During a segment on MSNBC, McCain said that the Obama administration does’t understand Russian President Vladimir Putin. “They have been near delusional in thinking that the Cold War was over,” McCain said referring to Obama officials. “Maybe the president thinks the Cold War is over but Vladimir Putin doesn’t and that’s what this is all about.”
Later in the interview, when host Andrea Mitchell asked if there is a military option for the U.S. in Ukraine, the Arizona Republican sounded despondent. “I’d love to tell you that there is Andrea, but frankly I do not see it,” he said, adding, “I wish that there were. … I do not see a military option and it’s tragic.”
Watch the clip:
McCain has been leading the partisan attack on Obama in recent days, claiming that the Russian incursion into Ukraine is the result of Obama’s supposed “feckless” foreign policy.
Yet back in 2008, when Russia invaded neighboring Georgia, McCain criticized any “partisan sniping” on the issue. “There’s no time for that,” he said at the time. “The time now is for America to — the United States of America to act united on behalf of the people of the country of Georgia, and not do a lot of partisan sniping.”
RT @UkraineConflict: Pravda: #Crimean Ministry of Defence Media Center reports Russian troops are trying to enter Novofedorivtsi airfield: http://www.pravda.com.ua/news/2014/03/9/7018231/ …
RT @UkraineConflict: Ukrainian troop convoy on the move - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DpkLV...ature=youtu.be …
WolfgangH @Wolfgang_H 2m
#Krim #Ukraine: Ukrainian airbase at #Novofedorivka, which was stormed earlier today, is now under Russian control. via interpreter
2051 GMT: Ukrainskaya Pravda is now reporting that the Ukrainian airbase at Novofedorivka, which was stormed earlier today, is now under Russian control. The paper cites a statement by Vladislav Seleznev, the head of the defence ministry’s Crimean media centre. According to Seleznev, the base was seized after around 80 Russian soldiers, accompanied by 40-50 unknowns in civilian clothing, took over the airfield and established gun positions along the runway, rendering the airfield unusable. We do not yet know what has happened to the Ukrainian troops stationed on site.
http://www.interpretermag.com/ukrain...tary-standoff/
Alert: Russia ‘Welcomes’ the US Destroyer Truxtun, by Moving Bastion Anti-Ship Missile
http://defense-update.com/20140309_r...es-crimea.html Unconfirmed news reports claim the Russian Navy is deploying land-based ‘Bastion’ anti-ship missile systems as a response to the recent U.S. move entering two naval vessels to the Black Sea. The two American Arleigh Burke class destroyer USS Truxtun (DDG-103) crossed the Bosphorus Strait Friday, headed into the Black Sea, as tensions simmer over Ukraine’s Crimea region.
In other news...
Gregor Peter @L0gg0l 4m
The "China Martyrs Brigades Leader" claims responsibility for crashing #MH370, credibility not known yep
Livestream of the Bel'bek military base in Sevastopol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zoLi25S-Kv8#t=473247
John Schindler@20committee14 mins
Trans: "WH dropped ball, not IC" / RT @BlogsofWarIntel DNI Clapper: Ukraine intel 'not a failure by any stretch' http://goo.gl/fWh0Vu
RT @A_Osborn: We spotted big Russian convoy of over 100 military vehicles, APCs, Howitzers, trucks, outside Sevastopol.
Andy Bebut@abebut·5 mins
In #crimea #Ukraine unknown people are confiscating citizens' passports by force with promise to return them at the referendum
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiX-J52CAAA_etA.jpg
Lindsey Hilsum @lindseyhilsum 10m
Recruits lined up in a car park in an administrative building
to swear allegiance to new #Crimean army. pic.twitter.com/EKdB1WQmyc
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiYAz8aIMAA8iCi.jpg
Lindsey Hilsum @lindseyhilsum 10m
Swearing allegiance - a recruit for the new #Crimean army reads his oath. pic.twitter.com/Pjs1aqUP2d
http://pbs.twimg.com/media/BiYBEBhIcAEwys0.jpg
UKRAINE OFFICER IN CHARGE OF CRIMEA UNIT DEFECTS TO RUSSIAN FORCES
OFFICER CONVINCES "SEVERAL" SOLDIERS TO DEFECT TO RUSSIAN FORCES – MINISTRY
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2014-03-10/ukra…..ldiers-him
BATTLE TANKS ARE BEING MOVED IN...
Jeremy Pigott @jhpigott 33m
@20committee alleged vid frm today. 5min mrk RostovDon RU tanks.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5B3PcG07gXM#t=90
Former Vice President Dick Cheney said there is "no question" that Russian President Vladimir Putin believes President Barack Obama is weak, and that the United States should not take military options off the table in its response to Russia's military intervention in Ukraine.
"I worry when we begin to address the crisis, the first thing we do is take options off the table,” Cheney said on CBS' "Face The Nation" Sunday. “There are military options that don’t involve putting groups on the ground in Crimea.” http://news.yahoo.com/cheney-putin-o...iacontentstory