Ukraine

http://gulfnews.com/opinions/columnists/obama-s-bravado-on-russia-has-a-hollow-ring-1.1446582


According to his State of the Union address, President Barack Obama has solved the Russia problem. His brief passage on the subject shows he’s either blind to the dangers of the deteriorating relationship between Moscow and the West or merely too quick to take credit for a victory that is not even on the horizon.


Here’s what Obama had to say about the biggest threat to European stability since the fall of the Berlin Wall 25 years ago:


“We’re upholding the principle that bigger nations can’t bully the small — by opposing Russian aggression, supporting Ukraine’s democracy and reassuring our Nato allies. Last year, as we were doing the hard work of imposing sanctions along with our allies, some suggested that Putin’s aggression was a masterful display of strategy and strength. Well, today, it is America that stands strong and united with our allies, while Russia is isolated, with its economy in tatters. That’s how America leads — not with bluster, but with persistent, steady resolve.”


Every one of these sentences is, to put it mildly, a stretch. The US has indeed disapproved of Russian aggression in Ukraine, and loudly enough for everyone to hear. But that doesn’t mean it has supported Ukraine’s democracy. Ukraine has long asked the West for help in tracking down the money and assets amassed by its former corrupt rulers. Last year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and US Treasury even set up a task force to assist that effort. But nothing has been heard since. In the meantime, Vice-President Joe Biden’s son Hunter has been hired as the top lawyer for Burisma, Ukraine’s biggest independent natural gas producer, which is owned by former ecology minister Mykolai Zlochevsky, whom Ukrainian prosecutors seek for corruption-related crimes. The US government has also offered financial help for Ukrainian democracy — $1 billion (Dh3.67 billion) in loan guarantees last year and $1 billion in the first half of this year (and perhaps another billion at some later date). But it’s a tiny fraction of the $15 billion shortfall Ukraine faces this year, and that’s assuming the International Monetary Fund continues disbursing its $17 billion aid package as planned.


Obama’s description of sanctions as “hard work” on the part of the US is laughable. In the first 11 months of 2014, US exports to Russia actually increased to $10.22 billion from $10.18 billion from the same period the previous year. US imports from Russia decreased to $21.97 billion from $25.49 billion, a change of just $3.5 billion. America’s European partners have suffered all the pain. Whether the sanctions have worked is arguable. They certainly angered Russian President Vladimir Putin and made him dole out ever more generous government support to his cronies’ businesses. And sanctions have made it all but impossible for Russian entities to borrow in the West, causing Russia’s external debt to shrink to $599.5 billion from $728.9 billion at the beginning of last year. In the medium term, this might just make Russia more resilient to external shocks. The sanctions certainly have not ripped the Russian economy to “tatters.”


The search for a diplomatic solution, like the economic hardship, has fallen to America’s European allies. Despite US willingness to let Russia get away with its Crimea land grab if it steps back from eastern Ukraine — hardly a strong defence of Ukraine’s territorial integrity — all US diplomatic efforts have failed. “That’s how America leads,” Obama said proudly. It’s more comforting to think he’s faking that pride than to imagine he really doesn’t understand how ineffective the US has been in Ukraine. The US president would have done better not to talk about Russia and Ukraine at all.
 

Deepcover

Closed Account
Oliver Stone on why Russia is a natural ally of the U.S.


September 30, 2014 Igor Dunayevsky, Igor Chernyak, Rossiyskaya Gazeta

The latest documentary from the director Oliver Stone, Untold History of the United States, will soon be shown on Russia’s Channel One. In this candid interview, the maverick US film-maker talks about the significance of the work for a Russian audience and delivers his characteristically controversial views on some of the most pressing political issues of the day, including East-West relations and the Ukraine crisis. A book of the film will also be published.

On his new documentary and book

Peter Kuznik and I have just finished a 12-hour long documentary series, Untold History of the United States. The book came out of the film, not the other way around, which is more usual. I have been accused so many times by my critics of distorting the truth, that we decided to substantiate what we’re saying in the film with the book.


Oliver Stone’s documentaries (as director):
•2003 Comandante
•2004 Looking for Fidel
•2009 South of the Border
•2012 Castro in Winter
•2012 Untold History of the United States
•2014 Mi Amigo Hugo



We’ve sold Untold History in many countries. I am happy that after much effort, we managed to release the book and the television series in Russia. Russians have a completely different point of view on the First and the Second World Wars. Americans don’t understand a lot of the history of these wars, and we deal with that in the book.

We wrote the book and did the TV series for young people, my daughter and sons, so that they can learn this history. I care very much about teaching history to younger people. The book addresses such controversial issues as the First and the Second World War, the Cold War and U.S.-USSR relations.

The crisis in Ukraine is at the end of this long history. I am very interested in the history of these relations between the two countries, and it is a very large and complex issue.

On Russia in the Second World War

If you go back to the Second World War, there were very bloody fights in Ukraine. A lot of Russians died there fighting the Nazis, as well as those Ukrainian troops who allied with the Germans.

But Americans don’t know that and don’t understand that Russia saved the world from Hitler. In my opinion, the Soviet army’s destruction of most of the German military machine saved at least a million American lives. In that war, 300,000-plus Americans were killed. Imagine if we’d had to enter the war earlier; if, for example, the Soviet Union after defeating the Germans at Stalingrad and Kursk had refused to go further alone and left the Allies to fight the rest of the war. This was the fear for Churchill and Roosevelt. The United States could have lost a million more soldiers.

On Gorbachev’s leadership

I liked him, although I know that he was unpopular and was removed from power in 1991. I think that if Mikhail Gorbachev had been allowed to continue, the world would be in a better position now. But the United States wanted to make Russia a capitalist country, sending its experts, the so-called Harvard boys, who advised and freed up the economy. And the result was a gangster economy.

On Putin’s key role

Put Putin on your fridge door
Put Putin on your fridge door

I think, though many feel differently, that Vladimir Putin has played a very important role to stop the slide in Russia. He said no to Yeltsin’s policies, and put in the new state order and the new authoritarianism. I think it gave Russians a sense of certainty and consistency; gave them back their pride. In the Nineties, Russia’s economy shrank to the size of the economy of the Netherlands. Taking back the state from the hands of the gangsters was a very important move for Russia. On that basis, I certainly admire Putin as a strong man.

On Edward Snowden

We are finishing the screenplay of my film now. We hope to start shooting early next year and have it released by the end of 2015. This is my work as a dramatist: to make you understand Snowden. And I’m working on it. I’m not taking a point of view, saying that Snowden is good or bad. Here is the story and I let the people make their own conclusions.

On NATO expansion

I went to see Mr. Gorbachev a few months ago. He disapproves of what the United States has done, calling it a betrayal of Russia and the spirit of agreements made with George Bush Snr. They were nothing on paper, but there was a spirit. That spirit was violated first by Bill Clinton and again by George W Bush and Barack Obama. Since then, 13 states have joined Nato. For Russia this is a nightmare.

NATO was finished after the end of the Cold War; there were no reasons for the western alliance to continue. It was a defensive alliance to protect Western Europe; it has since become an offensive alliance that incorporated Eastern Europe and is putting a missile shield near the border with Russia.

On Ukraine and Crimea

The situation in Ukraine was the last test. It started with an attempt to put NATO into Georgia. Then there was a hidden desire to put Ukraine into the alliance and block access to Sevastopol for Russia, where it has a fleet. Doing so would be the equivalent of emasculation, and Russia could not accept it. I understand why Putin could not give up Crimea.

Western institutions – the European Union, NATO, the IMF – would like to have influence, run and control Ukraine. I do not think that’s great for Russia – that defends the rights of people in the south-east of Ukraine.

View from Crimea: Residents speak out on the switch from Ukraine to Russia
View from Crimea: Residents speak out on the switch from Ukraine to Russia

I understand what the conflict is, but I think many Americans don’t understand the Russian point of view at all. They think that Russia wants to aggrandise itself, that Putin wants to revive the past. In my opinion, Putin has a defensive position, protecting the core geopolitical interests of the Russian state.

And Putin has a right to do so, just as the leader of any other country has. It is the United States that is invasive and pushing constantly at the limits of Russian patience; as it was with Nato’s eastward expansion. It’s a very dangerous situation.

It would be a catastrophe to push Russia past “the point”. The United States will not give up on Ukraine; but for Russia it is a frontier.

On sanctions

Sanctions can be used in order to speed up Russian economy, says Putin
Sanctions can be used in order to speed up Russian economy, says Putin

It’s a shame. We are hurting Russia; hurting ourselves. Russia will find new partners in the East and Eurasia. They just signed new trade agreement with China. Russia will go on with or without sanctions. It’s a shame, but that’s the US style of doing things: they squeeze through the economy; through the media.

You need patience to fight the dragon. I think Putin knows this, he is a very smart man; he already has experience like this. After 9/11, Putin was the first guy to call Bush. Russia had its own problems with the Chechen terrorists, and knew the power of Islamist terrorism. Therefore, in my opinion, Russia is a natural ally of the United States. Oh, it’s a shame. . .
 
Obama's Ukraine policy at crossroads as fighting rages on
Reuters By Warren Strobel, Matt Spetalnick and Lesley Wroughton

By Warren Strobel, Matt Spetalnick and Lesley Wroughton

WASHINGTON/MUNICH (Reuters) - Russian-backed rebels' violent offensive in eastern Ukraine leaves President Barack Obama with perplexing and urgent choices, but aides say he will exercise his typical caution in deciding his next move.

Should Obama provide lethal weaponry to the Western-backed Kiev government to staunch Europe's worst conflict in two decades? Many U.S. lawmakers and some of Obama's own advisors are calling for that step, but it risks igniting a proxy war with Russia and driving a wedge between Washington and western Europe.

Should he impose tougher sanctions on Russia? While sanctions have hurt the Russian economy, they have failed to deter President Vladimir Putin and it is unclear if they will do so in the future.

Or should he throw his full weight behind a revised German-French peace initiative, even though U.S. officials accuse Putin of shredding a prior cease-fire agreement signed in September?

U.S. officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, say the president will weigh his options carefully and will not be rushed into a decision. Obama's administration has faced criticism that it struggles to act decisively and project U.S vision at the height of foreign crises.

"The timetable is fluid. This is too important to make a snap decision," one official said.

Obama meets on Monday at the White House with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who discussed the peace initiative with Putin on Friday and has made clear she opposes providing lethal arms to the Ukraine government.

Merkel, Putin and the leaders of France and Ukraine are due to meet on Wednesday for further peace talks.

With diplomacy in play, Obama seems unlikely to decide whether to authorize weapons for Ukraine right away. The U.S. and German leaders may find some common ground, however, on imposing further sanctions on Russia, which have been Obama's main tool in the nearly year-old crisis.

Yet tough rhetoric from some Obama advisors has raised expectations of a stronger U.S. response.

"The Ukrainian people have a right to defend themselves," Vice-President Joe Biden told a security conference in Munich on Saturday.

If history is a guide, however, Obama will refuse to be swayed by calls for swift action and rely on a small inner circle of advisors in reaching his decisions.

In summer 2012, for example, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Central Intelligence Agency chief David Petraeus and Defense Secretary Leon Panetta all backed a plan for arming Syria's rebels. Obama rejected it.

NO RED LINE

Obama set a "red line" against the Syrian government's use of chemical weapons, and drew fire for not following through with an implied military response after evidence of their use emerged.

Obama has avoided laying down such "red lines" in Ukraine, but the pressure is clearly building up for more decisive action.

John Herbst, the U.S. ambassador to Ukraine from 2003 to 2006, said that Obama’s "cautious instincts have served him and our country reasonably well in the Middle East... but he’s applied that same approach to Ukraine, where it doesn’t make sense."

The difference is, Herbst said, that while Washington has struggled to identify reliable allies in post-revolution Libya or in Syria, it has an "acceptable partner" in the pro-Western Kiev government.

Herbst, now at the Atlantic Council think tank, contributed to a report this month by former top U.S. officials which recommended providing weapons to the Kiev government and $1 billion annually over the next three years to upgrade its defense capabilities.

U.S. officials say Obama has recommendations on his desk outlining the pros and cons of supplying Ukraine with lethal arms, such as anti-tank weapons, small arms and ammunition.

Some of Obama's top advisors, including Ashton Carter, his choice for new defense secretary, increasingly favor such an approach.

But Obama Obama’s national security adviser, Susan Rice, signaled caution.

"RUSSIAN AGGRESSION"

"It’s something that’s under consideration," she said on Friday about arming the Ukraine government. Rice added, though, that such a step would only be taken "in close consultation and in coordination with our partners, whose unity on this issue with us thus far has been a core element of our strength in responding to Russia’s aggression."

When she meets Obama, Merkel, who has led the European Union response to the Ukraine crisis, is expected to voice European worries that arming Ukraine's military will only escalate the bloodshed.

"I understand the debate but I believe that more weapons will not lead to the progress Ukraine needs. I really doubt that," Merkel told the Munich conference on Saturday.

Opponents of arming Kiev say Putin will be able to more than match any escalation; advocates say the Russian leader risks increased casualties and discontent at home if he does so.

Merkel will bring with her a new peace initiative that U.S. officials say includes a roadmap for implementing the previous cease-fire deal, agreed in Minsk, Belarus, in September.

While not all of details of the new initiative are publicly known, the officials said it would widen a proposed buffer zone between the Russian-backed separatists and Ukrainian forces.

Putin, U.S. officials said, has made further demands, including moving the cease-fire lines to reflect the rebels' recent gains. Ukraine, the Europeans and Washington reject that and other Russian terms.

"The truth is I don’t think we know yet ... how successful this United States last year committed more than $118 million in training effort will be," a senior State Department official said of the renewed diplomacy. "There is a sense that there’s still some big issues left to be resolved."

Stephen Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine now at the Brookings Institution, said Obama also could choose "a middle option" and significantly boost military assistance for Kiev, but stop short of supplying lethal weapons.

The and non-lethal equipment to help Ukrainian forces, of which about half has been delivered, said a State Department official who declined to be named.

This included defensive equipment such as night vision devices, body armor, helmets, radios, counter-mortar radars, robots to dispose of explosives, military rations and first aid supplies.

Michael McFaul, who stepped down as U.S. ambassador to Moscow last year, predicted on NBC’s "Meet the Press" that Obama would give Ukraine weapons, but that the East-West crisis over Ukraine will persist for months and even years. "I don’t see this resolving any time soon."

(Additional reporting by Patricia Zengerle, Arshad Mohammed and Andrea Shalal. Editing by Tomasz Janowski)
 
Sasha Grey furious on being used as propaganda.


Sasha Grey: Former Porn Star Furious Over Being Used In Russian Propaganda Against Ukraine

By Pam Wright · 3 hours ago

The Russian social media site VKontakte, which is Russia’s version of Facebook, featured the face of the porn star turned actress alongside a horrific story of a nurse being killed by Ukrainian fighters.

According to The Moscow Times, the article alleged a nurse named “Sasha Serova” was captured by Ukrainian military forces using the likeness of Sasha Grey. The article then claimed her captors filmed themselves “humiliating” her before they chopped her body up with an axe.

The post featuring Sasha Grey received over 3,500 likes on the first day and was reported on by several media outlets.

And yet, “Sasha” is alive and well.

And Furious.

The actress, who has guest-starred on Entourage, took to Twitter to vent her displeasure at being used in the conflict that has claimed more than 5,600 lived since it began in April 2014 and is a big deal to the Sasha Grey.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
After the dissoving of the Soviet Union, and when the two Germanys were to be united, there was a clear agreement: Both sides stay out of the close neighbours - satellites would not be a wrong term - both in the eastern block and in the US area.

If the European Union and the NATO in particular do not stand by their word, no future agreement is worth the paper it gets written on.

The Ukraine is, if not officially, but de facto, russian. And we better accept what we have promised.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
I have a feeling the majority of the people in Ukraine along with the people in most of the past Soviet satellite puppet states would disagree on being Russian.

... disliking does not mean being successfull. I think they either play ball the way the Kreml wants or things can turn bad like in the Ukraine

And as I said, without their consent or I am sure without bothering to ask them, the NATO and the Soviets made a treaty on whom they basically belong to.
 
"If they (the Russians) come in here, Estonia can't do anything... I'm not sure NATO will help us out," Pyotr Sirotkin, a 25-year-old student at Tallinn University, told AFP as he cast his ballot in the capital.

The U.S. has MREs ready to deploy at a moment's notice.
 

Supafly

Retired Mod
Bronze Member
I don't think this is more than wishful thinking on the part of our chancellor, Mrs. Merkel...

Europe
Germany's Goal: Restoring Russia-Annexed Crimea to Ukraine

BERLIN — Germany's goal remains to restore the Crimean Peninsula to Ukraine, German Chancellor Angela Merkel said Monday, a year after Crimea's annexation by Russian forces.

Speaking after talks in Berlin with Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko, Merkel said the March 19, 2014, annexation of the peninsula was a violation of international law that "called the peaceful order in Europe into question."

"It's important despite, or because of, this to work for a peaceful solution and not rest until the full sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine is restored, and of course this includes Crimea," she said.

Merkel said if necessary, the European Union was prepared to bring more sanctions against Russia for its actions in Ukraine.

"We don't want them. But if there's no other way, then they need to be implemented," she said.

Poroshenko said he hoped if Russia and the separatists it backs in eastern Ukraine have not fulfilled their obligations under a cease-fire deal worked out in Minsk last month, "it will be made clear that the sanctions (against Russia) will continue and be strengthened" at a EU summit in Brussels this week.

President Barack Obama and European leaders have wielded sanctions as their main form of retaliation for Russia's actions in Ukraine.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2015/03/16/world/europe/ap-eu-germany-ukraine.html?_r=0

But this can become interesting:

Ukraine president calls on allies to boycott 2018 World Cup in Russia

...

http://www.theguardian.com/football...etro-poroshenko-world-cup-2018-boycott-russia
 
Top