Massive Russian Military Movement

Status
Not open for further replies.

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Avoiding facts? MSM uncertain who is behind deadly Odessa blaze

Very carefully worded commentary on the tragedy in Odessa came from the mainstream Western media, as if they were trying to avoid assigning the blame to those who actually set the building on fire. Their coverage of the event was heavily reliant on statements from Kiev that blamed the violence on pro-autonomy activists, as well as witness accounts given by the nationalist Right Sector members.
"At some stage yesterday – and it still unclear exactly how this started – but there were rival pro-Russian and pro-Ukrainian protests here. It led to fierce street clashes, which culminated in a huge fire in a building last night," reported Sky News.

"Violence is escalating in Ukraine. Police in normally calm Odessa say a clash between pro-Russians and government supporters led to a fire that killed at least 31 people," said a report by Fox News.
Asked by the Washington Post who had thrown Molotov cocktails, a pro-Ukrainian activist Diana Berg admitted "Our people — but now they are helping them to escape the building."

The BBC website merely quoted the regional office of Ukraine's Interior Ministry, writing that "it did not give details of how the blaze started," stressing that "the exact sequence of events is still unclear."

Reuters news agency reported that "a pro-Kiev march was ambushed, petrol bombs, stones, explosive devices were thrown, police soon lost control and the building was later set on fire."

CNN covered the incident by stating that it was "unclear exactly what may have caused it [the fire]." Later, however, the channel acknowledged the fire was started byKiev supporters throwing Molotov cocktails at the building.

The New York Times goes with the headline: 'Ukraine Presses Pro-Russia Militants After Fighting Spreads to a Port City.' The words "pro-Russian militants" could create the impression that those were not just ordinary people and anti-Kiev demonstrators trapped inside a burning building, but militants. And that kind of wording can almost justify the act of killing, notes RT's Gayane Chichakyan.

The Guardian quotes a member of extreme-right nationalist group Right Sector as saying "The aim is to completely clear Odessa [of pro-Russians]"¦ They are all paid Russian separatists."
 

SajeevJino

Long walk
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 21, 2012
Messages
6,017
Likes
3,364
Country flag
.

[tweet]462990347216637952[/tweet]


All #Odesa police heads & management have been fired, PM #Yatsenyuk. TV Channel 5 |EMPR News
:thumb:

[tweet]462982383525187585>[/tweet]

BE AWARE! Pro-Russian Twitter account @EuromaidanRP spreading lies against real account @EuromaidanPR
:lawl:
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Agenten von CIA & FBI beraten Kiew
Agents of CIA & FBI advise Kiev

Translated from German:
The Ukrainian transitional government in Kiev will be dozens of specialists from the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency and the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation advice. The learned Bild am Sonntag from German security circles.

The officials should help on behalf of the U.S. government Kiev in ending the rebellion in the east of the country and establish a functioning security structure.
Source: CIA & FBI: Agenten beraten Übergangsregierung in Kiew - Politik Ausland - Bild.de
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
The group gathered at about 14:00 in Cathedral Square. Some were veteran supporters of Kiev's Maidan protest movement - the Maidan Self Defence Forces - and/or part of the right-wing Pravy Sektor (Rights Sector). Some were just ordinary members of the public.
Some of the marchers' rivals were wearing orange and black stripes on their clothing - the so-called Ribbon of St George, one of the most recognised symbols of military valour in Russia.
Sergey spoke of a "see-saw battle" of about 15 minutes, before the "pro-separatists" started to withdraw.

Over the next few hours the clashes fragmented but a key development appeared to be a move by pro-Ukrainians against a pro-Russian tent city in a square called Kulikovo Polye.

Sergey said: "People started streaming toward the station, taking Zhukovskoho Street and then taking Pushkinska Street. They chanted 'Long live Ukraine!' and 'Odessa is Ukrainian!'."

He said the tents in the pro-Russian camp were burning when he arrived and those there had moved to the entrance of Trade Unions House.

"Eventually, they were driven in," he said.
One survivor told Russia Today: "We couldn't go down, we were seeing people from other floors being brought down and then those rioters down there attacked them like a pack of wolves."

Some people got to ledges and were helped by ambulance ladders. Some fell.

One American journalist described the scene as "a lynching, pure and simple", with some people shouting "die" as people fell.
Source: BBC News - How did Odessa's fire happen?
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
[TWEET]463010968822239232[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463022666971348992[/TWEET]
[TWEET]462962602138939392[/TWEET]
[TWEET]462978910201053184[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463018659409981440[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463036432463171584[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463039959084331008[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463042429982367745[/TWEET]
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Washington's chief task is to separate Russia and Ukraine – experts

Washington makes no secret of the fact that it spent billions of dollars over the last 20 years to develop democracy in Ukraine. The result of these investments can be clearly seen in the streets of Ukrainian cities. The reason is that US political strategists underestimated the political and historical situation in post-Soviet states, General Director of the Russian Council on Foreign Affairs Andrey Kortunov believes.

"The US project, as it was conceived 20 years ago, is unlikely to be implemented now. Because the world has changed, and also that project was detached from reality from the very beginning, not only in Ukraine but in many other states of the former Soviet Union. At that time it was considered possible to build a US-style democracy easily and quickly enough and then to tie down those countries to NATO. Naturally, that project did not get a chance. I don't believe that now it will ever work anywhere, either in Ukraine or any other countries. Moreover, I have an impression that politicians in Washington already realize that no world-wide distribution of liberal democracy is possible in the foreseeable future."

The expert believes that US politicians will take advantage of the crisis in Ukraine to further restrict Russia. In addition, this is a fair motive to con the European partners out of more money for military and technological reinforcement of NATO.

Most experts believe that the split in Ukraine was triggered by this assistance. Washington's chief task was to separate Russia and Ukraine, Director of the Political Research Centre of the Finance University Pavel Salin believes. In his opinion, Kiev cannot expect any serious financial aid.

"If we speak about the Ukrainian economy, Americans will never give money to support it. This is their principle and they will not make an exception for Ukraine. Americans do not invest money in the economies of those countries where they exert an influence if there is no material gain for them. They prefer to directly buy the elites. For this reason, if we mention current elites, both Turchynov and Yatseyuk are absolutely pro-American politicians. Moreover, before 2010 Americans prepared Yatsenyuk for the presidential role when it became clear that Yushchenko had exhausted his potential and was good for nothing as a politician. Americans are pragmatic guys. Their attitude to politicians is based on a rational platform. They make a stake on a politician only as long as he has a more or less normal rating. Later, when a politician becomes spent material, like Yushchenko, they tell him bye-bye. At best, he can hope for some cushy job."

Pavel Salin believes that Washington will try to find some new political figure that will suit both the western and south-eastern Ukraine. But blood has been spilled on both sides, the point of no return has been passed.

The results of Washington's monumental efforts can well be seen in Ukrainian cities. American political scientists underestimated the special aspects of the Ukrainian scheme of society, Director of the Institute of Political Analysis and International Research Sergey Tolstov believes. "Unlike in the 1990s, when projects to a great extent had an educational nature, in recent years they were increasingly more task-oriented and on the whole were meant to pave the way for mass political protests during Viktor Yanukovych's presidency. Also erratic on the part of the US Administration was ignoring the public mood in the country which today is expressed in the shape of protest against the so-called rough hegemony of separate groups, including social and cultural groups oriented to political parties of a national-democratic and nationalistic description."

In Sergey Tolstov's opinion, the US financial aid has resulted in the confrontation of the regions. Instead of a civil society, the Ukrainian people have got full legal nihilism and full paralysis of power.
Read more: Washington's chief task is to separate Russia and Ukraine – experts - News - World - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert opinion, podcasts, Video
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Critical Analysis
Ukraine Crisis Accelerating the Restructuring of the World

By Pierre Charasse, La Jornada (Mexico)
Voltaire Network
Sunday, May 4, 2014

The Ukrainian crisis has not radically changed the international situation but it has precipitated ongoing developments. Western propaganda, which has never been stronger, especially hides the reality of Western decline to the populations of NATO, but has no further effect on political reality. Inexorably, Russia and China, assisted by the other BRICS [Brazil, Russia, India, China] , occupy their rightful place in international relations.

The Ukrainian crisis has highlighted the magnitude of Western public opinion manipulation by major media, TV channels like CNN, Foxnews, Euronews and many others as well as the entire printed press powered by Western news agencies. The manner in which the Western public is misinformed is impressive, yet it is easy to have access to a wealth of information on all sides. It is very worrying to see how many citizens of the world are being lured into a russophobia never seen even in the worst moments of the Cold War. The image that enters the collective unconscious through the powerful Western media machine is that Russians are "barbaric and backward" compared to the Western "civilized" world. The very important speech that Vladimir Putin delivered on March 18, after the referendum in Crimea, was literally boycotted by Western media, as they alotted a large place to Western reactions, all negative of course. However, in his speech Putin explained that the crisis in Ukraine was not triggered by Russia and he presented, with great rationality, Russia's position and the legitimate strategic interests of his country in the post- ideological conflict.

Humiliated by its treatment by the West since 1989, Russia woke up with Putin and began to reconnect with a great power policy by trying to reconstruct the lines of the traditional historical strength of Tsarist Russia and the Soviet Union. Geography often controls strategy. Having lost much of its "historical territories", in the words of Putin and his Russian and non-Russian population, Russia has set a great national and patriotic project for recovering its superpower status of "global" actor by first securing the safety of its land and sea borders. This is exactly what the West wants to prevent in its unipolar worldview. Good chess player that he is, Putin is several moves ahead thanks to a deep knowledge of history, the real world and the aspirations of a large part of the population of the territories formerly controlled by the Soviet Union. He knows the European Union to perfection, its divisions and weaknesses, the real military capability of NATO and the state of Western public opinion reluctant to see an increase in military spending in times of economic recession. Unlike the European Commission, whose project coincides with that of the United States to strengthen the Euro-Atlantic political-economic-military bloc, European citizens in their majority do not seek more eastward enlargement of the EU, neither with Ukraine nor with Georgia, nor with any other country of the former Soviet Union.

With its posturing and its threats of sanctions, the EU, slavishly aligned with Washington, shows that it is powerless to "punish" Russia seriously. Its actual weight is not up to its ambitions always proclaimed to shape the world in its image. The very responsive and malicious Russian government applies "gradual ripostes," deriding Western punitive measures. Putin, haughty, even allows himself the luxury of announcing that he will open an account at the Rossiya Bank of New York to deposit his salary! He has not yet mentioned limiting the supply of gas to Ukraine and Western Europe but everyone knows he has this card in hand, which has already forced the Europeans to think about a complete reorganization of their energy supply, which will take years to materialize.

Western Errors and divisions put Russia in a position of strength. Putin enjoys exceptional popularity in his country and in the Russian communities in neighboring countries, and we can be sure that his intelligence services have penetrated deeply into countries formerly controlled by the Soviet Union, abundantly supplying first-hand information on internal power balances. Its diplomatic apparatus gives strong arguments to remove the monopoly of interpretation of international law from the "West", particularly on the thorny issue of self-determination. As might be expected, Putin does not hesitate to cite the precedent of Kosovo to vilify the double standards of the West, its inconsistencies, and the destabilizing role it played in the Balkans.

While Western media propaganda had been in full swing after the referendum of March 16 in Crimea, Western shouts have suddenly dropped a tone and the G7, at its summit in The Hague on the sidelines of the conference on nuclear safety, has not threatened to exclude Russia from the G8, as it had trumpeted a few days earlier, but simply announced that it "would not participate in the Sochi summit ." This allowed it the opportunity to reactivate at any time this privileged forum for dialogue with Russia, established in 1994 at its express request. First retreat of the G7. Obama in turn hastened to announce that there would be no military intervention by NATO to help Ukraine, but only a promise of cooperation to rebuild the military potential of Ukraine, composed largely of obsolete Soviet equipment. Second retreat. It will take years to put a Ukrainian army worthy of the name on its feet, and one wonders who will pay considering the plight of the country's finances. In addition, we do not know exactly what is the status of the Ukrainian Armed Forces after Moscow's inviting, with some success, it seems, the Ukrainian military, heirs of the Red Army, to join the Russian army while maintaining individual rank. The Ukrainian fleet is already fully under Russian control. Finally, another spectacular reversal on the part of the United States: there would have been very advanced secret conversations between Moscow and Washington to adopt a new constitution in Ukraine, to install a coalition government whose neo-Nazi extremists would be excluded in Kiev on the occasion of the May 25 elections and, especially to impose a neutral status on Ukraine, its "Finlandisation" (recommended by Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski), which prohibits its entry into NATO, but allows economic agreements with both the EU and with the Eurasian customs Union (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan). If such an agreement is reached, the EU will be faced with a fait accompli and will have to resign itself to pay the bill of the Russian-US head-to-head. With such guarantees Moscow could consider its safety requirements are met. It will have regained its footing in its former sphere of influence with Washington's agreement and will refrain from fomenting separatism in other Ukrainian provinces or in Transnistria (Moldova province populated by Russians ) while reaffirming its strong respect for European borders. The Kremlin will at the same time have offered an honorable exit to Obama. A master stroke for Putin.

Geopolitical consequences of the Ukrainian crisis

The G7 had not calculated that, by taking steps to isolate Russia, besides the fact that it will have applied to itself a "sado-masochistic punishment" in the words of Hubert Vedrine, former French Minister of Foreign Affairs, it, in spite of itself, precipitated a process, already well under way, of deep restructuring of the world for the benefit of a non-Western group led by China and Russia under the aegis of BRICS. In response to the G7 communiqué of March 24, the foreign ministers of BRICS have expressed their rejection of any measures to isolate Russia and they immediately took the opportunity to denounce the U.S. practices of espionage against their leaders and for good measure they demanded that the United States ratify the new distribution of voting rights at the IMF and the World Bank as a first step towards a "more equitable world order". The G7 did not expect such a quick and virulent reply from BRICS. This episode may suggest that the G20, of which G7 and BRICS are the two main pillars, could traverse a serious crisis before the next summit in Brisbane (Australia) on November 15 and 16, especially if the G7 continues to marginalize and punish Russia. It is just about certain there will be a majority in the G20 to condemn the sanctions on Russia, which will in fact have the effect of isolating the G7. In their statement to the press, the ministers of BRICS felt that to decide who is a member of the group and what is its purpose is up to all its members "on an equal footing" and none of its members "may unilaterally determine its nature and its character." The Ministers call to resolve the current crisis in the context of the United Nations "with calm, high road vision, by renouncing hostile language, penalties and sanctions against". A snub to the G7 and the EU! The G7, which alone put itself in a bind, is warned that it will need to make significant concessions if it wants to continue to have some influence in the G20.

Moreover, two important events are to occur in the coming weeks.

First, Vladimir Putin will pay an official visit to China in May. The two giants are about to sign a major energy deal that will substantially affect the global energy market, both strategically and financially. Transactions will no longer be in dollars, but in the national currencies of the two countries. Turning to China, Russia will have no problem selling its gas production in case Western Europe decides to switch supplier. And in the same rapprochement, China and Russia could sign an industrial partnership agreement for the production of the Sukhoi 25 fighter, a highly symbolic development.

Elsewhere, during the BRICS summit in Brazil in July, the Development Bank of the group, whose creation was announced in 2012, could take shape and offer an alternative to financing by the IMF and the World Bank, ever reluctant to change their operating financing rules to give more weight to emerging economies and their currencies beside the dollar.

Finally there is an important aspect of the relationship between Russia and NATO which is sparsely commented in the media but is very revealing of the state of dependence in which the "West" finds itself as it withdraws its troops from Afghanistan. Since 2002, Russia agreed to cooperate with Western countries to facilitate the logistics of troops in the Afghan theater. At the request of NATO, Moscow authorized the transit of non-lethal equipment for the ISAF (International Security Assistance Force) by air or land between Dushanbe (Tajikistan), Uzbekistan and Estonia, via a multimodal platform at Oulianovk in Siberia. This is nothing less than conveying all supplies for thousands of men operating in Afghanistan, among which are tons of beer, wine, pies, burgers, fresh lettuce , all transported by Russian civilian aircraft, since Western forces do not have sufficient air assets to support military deployment of this magnitude. The NATO-Russia October 2012 agreement extends cooperation to the installation of a Russian airbase in Afghanistan with 40 helicopters where Afghan personnel are trained in the anti-drug fight which the West has abandoned. Russia has continued to refuse to allow transit through its territory of heavy equipment, which poses a serious problem for NATO at the time of withdrawal of his troops. Indeed they cannot travel via Kabul-Karachi land because of attacks on convoys by the Taliban. The Way North (Russia) being impossible, heavy equipment is flown from Kabul to the United Arab Emirates, then shipped to European ports, which quadruples the cost of withdrawal. For the Russian government, NATO intervention in Afghanistan has been a failure, but its precipitate withdrawal before the end of 2014 will increase chaos and affect the security of Russia and may cause a resurgence of terrorism.

Russia also has important agreements with the West in the field of armaments. The most important is probably the one signed with France for the manufacture in its arsenals of two helicopter carriers for $ 1.3 billion euros. If the contract is canceled under the sanctions, France must repay amounts already paid as well as more contractual penalties and will lose thousands of jobs. The worst is probably the loss of market confidence in the French armament industry as noted by the Russian Ministry of Defence.

Let's not forget that without the intervention of Russia, Western countries would have never been able to reach an agreement with Iran on nuclear non-proliferation, or with Syria on chemical disarmament. These are facts about which the Western media are silent. The reality is that because of its arrogance, its lack of knowledge of history, its clumsiness, the Western bloc has precipitated the systemic deconstruction of the unipolar world order and offers on a platter to Russia and China, supported by India, Brazil, South Africa and many other countries, a "window of opportunity" to strengthen unity of an alternative block. The evolution was moving forward, but slowly and gradually (nobody wants to give a kick in the anthill and suddenly destabilize the global system), but all of a sudden everything is going faster and interdependence is changing the rules of the game.

Regarding the Brisbane G20, it will be interesting to see how Mexico positions itself, after the G7 summits in Brussels in June and BRICS in Brazil in July. The situation is very fluid and will evolve quickly, which will require great diplomatic flexibility. If the G7 persists in his intention to marginalize or exclude Russia, the G20 could disintegrate. Mexico, caught in the nets of TLCAN and the future TPP, must choose between sinking with the Titanic of the West or adopting an independent line, more in harmony with its interests as a regional power with global ambitions, by drawing nearer to BRICS.
Source: Ukraine Crisis Accelerating the Restructuring of the World | Critical Analysis |Axisoflogic.com
 

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,101
Country flag
No Russians among Slavyansk self-defense forces – NYT reporters



The eastern Ukrainian city of Slavyansk on April 14, 2014. (AFP Photo / Anatoly Stepanov)
Self-defense forces in the anti-Kiev stronghold of Slavyansk are Ukrainians, not Russians, who distrust the new regime and the Western powers that support it, New York Times reporters have discovered. The forces also said they are not being paid to fight.

Two New York Times reporters have spent a week in the city of Slavyansk in eastern Ukraine, talking to members of the self-defense forces. The journalists visited self-defense checkpoints and observed the forces as they battled Ukrainian troops amid a military assault on the city on Friday.

The resistance fighters of the 12th Company, part of the People's Self-Defense of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, deny claims made by Kiev and its Western sponsors that Russia or private tycoons are paying them to fight.

"This is not a job," one of the activists, Dmitry told the NYT reporters. "It is a service."
The activists explained that they purchased some of their weaponry from corrupt Ukrainian soldiers, while taking others from seized police buildings or confiscating them from captured Ukrainian armored vehicles.

"Much of their stock was identical to the weapons seen in the hands of Ukrainian soldiers and Interior Ministry Special Forces troops at government positions outside the city," the NYT reporters said in an article published on Saturday.

Kramatorsk, in eastern Ukraine, April 20, 2014. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)

The head of Slavyansk self-defense, Yury, also chuckled at claims made by Kiev authorities and the West that Russians are fighting side by side with them.

"We have no Muscovites here," Yury told the journalists. "I have experience enough."

Many of the Company's 119 members, who range in age from their 20s to their 50s, have served in the Soviet or Ukrainian infantry, airborne, special forces, or air-defense units, the reporters said. Yury, in his mid 50s, noted that his experience includes four years as a Soviet small-unit commander in Kandahar, Afghanistan in the 1980s.

"There was no clear Russian link in the 12th Company's arsenal," the reporters said.
While visiting checkpoints for more than a week, the NYT reporters said they saw much support for the self-defense forces from local residents, who primary provided the activists with food.

"To the guys in Kiev, we are separatists and terrorists," Yury said. "But to the people here, we are defenders and protectors."

The people of eastern Ukraine, who show "passionate distrust" of the coup-appointed authorities, felt threatened after Kiev proposed to strip the Russian language – which most of the region's population speaks – of its official status in February.

"That was the turning point," said Maksim, one of the Slavyansk activists.

For Ukrainians in the east, many of whom have close ties with Russia and families across the border, the move was a "cultural assault."

"All spoke of disgust with the interim authorities in Kiev," the NYT reporters noted in their article.
Source: http://rt.com/news/156736-no-russians-ukraine-activists/
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Ukraine Crisis: The Strategic Importance of Slavyansk

RUSI Analysis, 1 May 2014
By Dr Igor Sutyagin, Research Fellow, Russian Studies; Professor Michael Clarke, Director General; Dr Jonathan Eyal, International Director and International Studies Director



The most recent Ukrainian military operation against Russian separatists in Slavyansk could have a major strategic effect on the power struggle between Moscow and Kiev. The city has been the focus of a game of deterrence and brinkmanship that both leaderships feel compelled to play. The Ukrainian operation may propel Moscow to the very brink of overt intervention.

The Ukrainian military operation that began this morning (2 May) in Slavyansk seems to have been directed against a lesser problem for the Kiev government than anything that has happened recently in Donetsk, Luhansk or Kharkiv. But there are hard strategic reasons why this small city has become the new focus of the Ukrainian crisis over recent days. It is at the centre of an escalating game of deterrence that both Kiev and Moscow are playing against each other.

In the event of a conventional Russian military invasion of the territories of eastern Ukraine it is highly unlikely that Kiev's troops could do more than buy a certain amount of time. In any direct military confrontation Ukrainian forces would lose. That does not mean, however, that the government in Kiev is without any military cards to play.

Kiev knows that it has a strategic reserve of Kalashnikov assault rifles and other light weapons stored in Ukraine as a mobilisation reserve dating back to Soviet times. It has hinted quietly but strongly in back channels between Ukrainian and Russian military establishments that it might be prepared to open this strategic reserve of weapons to an eastern Ukrainian population prepared to resist any Russian military incursions. Since the stockpile consists of up to five million weapons, the prospect would be a nightmare for Russian military planners if they realistically prepared to move into eastern areas of Ukraine. The prospect of civil war and an anti-Russian insurgency on an unprecedented scale with unpredictable consequences represents a real – if extremely dangerous – bargaining chip for Kiev.

The stark fact is that at least half the strategic stockpile of light weapons on Ukrainian territory is concentrated near Slavyansk.

This explains many of the manoeuvres around this small and otherwise unimportant city. On 24 April Ukrainian authorities re-launched their 'counter-terrorist operation' against Russian separatists who had occupied key areas to restore Kiev's control over Slavyansk. In a coordinated response Russian forces edged closer to the Ukrainian border in such a way as to threaten a territorial incursion to support the separatists. This Russian move was dangerous but had the desired effect when the Ukrainian counter-terrorist operation was immediately halted by Kiev. It was an interesting standoff between two sides threatening each other with their adversary's worst fears. Today, Kiev has upped the ante in the standoff and will test Russian resolve to prevent the Ukrainian government from regaining control of the city and its light weapons stockpile.

Cutting off Kiev's Strategic Weapons Reserve

Such a standoff has illuminated a number of strategic factors. The multiple seizures of government buildings in eastern Ukraine, not just in Slavyansk but also in Konstantinovka in Donetsk Oblast are aimed to make it impossible for Ukrainian forces to fully control the territory and, in effect, to cut it off from its strategic stockpile of light arms which are the essence of Kiev's present deterrent posture.

Whereas symbolic government buildings in other cities might be occupied by Russian separatists for political and symbolic reasons, in Slavyansk the separatists effectively control the whole city and the immediate surrounding area. They have physical control over the strategic weapons reserve.

Certainly, there is evidence of instructions to Russian military personnel prior to their infiltration into Ukraine that the multiple seizures of government buildings and areas across a wide region of eastern Ukraine were explicitly to prevent any concentration among the opposing Ukrainian forces.

Moscow Fears the Worst

Secondly, whether or not military leaders in Moscow are effectively deterred by Kiev's warnings of an extensive insurgency, their manoeuvres around Slavyansk indicate that they have not excluded the option of a ground invasion of parts of eastern Ukraine. Slavyansk evidently matters to them in some significant way that goes far beyond the city's industrial, geographical or political importance.

It is possible, of course, that Moscow fears the export of armed insurgency onto Russian soil as revenge for the Crimean annexation. More outlandishly, it is also plausible that the Russians are concerned that weapon stocks in Slavyansk might be used for 'ethnic cleansing' or even genocidal purposes against Russian minorities in a Ukrainian civil war.

However far-fetched, such a motivation cannot be ruled out in Moscow where the characterisation of the Kiev government is that it is dominated by the 'Right Sector' composed of fascists and violent nationalists.

Russian Special Forces Already in Slavyansk

Thirdly, the presence of 'Spetsnaz' forces among the separatists in eastern Ukraine and around Slavyansk is completely consistent with the operational and combat doctrines of Spetsnaz units. One of the 'special tasks' of Spetsnaz forces – unlike their main task of reconnaissance per se – is the 'liquidation' or 'neutralisation' of strategically significant stores of armaments in areas where they may operate.

There is also evidence that instructors of the Special Reconnaissance Department of the Ryazan Airborne Troops Academy are also present among the separatists in Slavyansk. These elements would offer efficient coordination between the actions of separatists and Russian troops on the other side of the border.

Intervention Through Peacekeeping

Finally, there has been a notable increase in the public discussion by Russian diplomatic representatives around the world that Russia would have a legal right to send peacekeeping units into Ukraine should the situation in Slavyansk and other cities deteriorate further (such statements have been made by the Russian Minister of Foreign Affairs Sergey Lavrov , Russia's permanent representative to the UN Vitaliy Churkin, as well as some Russian senators). The Geneva Agreement concluded by the US and Russia offers a useful mechanism for doing so: a Russian contingent could be presented as Moscow's 'contribution' to an OSCE observer mission, which is explicitly called for in the Geneva Agreement.

On 24 April, in the Rostov Oblast, three columns of Russian troops including tanks, Armoured Personnel Carriers and troop transports ,as well as twelve helicopter gunships accompanying one of the columns, were seen bearing recognised 'peacekeeping forces' markings on their vehicles. These columns have been spotted on the M4 highway near Kamensk-Shakhtinskiy and Shakhty and between Kamensk, and Krasniy Sulin.

It should be noted that the Geneva Agreement of 17 April contained considerable loopholes which did not define any restriction on the number either of observers to guarantee a peace process or the structure of any formations to support them. Regardless of what explanation Russia may offer, the real outcome of any military intervention will be to boost the forces which are already defending Slavyansk against Ukrainian government troops.

Slavyansk may be a small city that has never been on the political radar of Western planners until very recently. It now seems to be the focus for a game of deterrence and brinkmanship that Kiev and Moscow feel compelled to play and in which, despite evident Russian military planning, neither is likely to be in full control of all the elements at work on the ground. And the further use of military options remain very much part of Russia's strategic thinking. Today, Kiev has upped the ante in the standoff and will test Russian resolve to prevent the Ukrainian government from regaining control of the city and its light weapons stockpile.

*Updated 2 May
Source: Ukraine Crisis Accelerating the Restructuring of the World | Critical Analysis |Axisoflogic.com
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
No Russians among Slavyansk self-defense forces – NYT reporters



The eastern Ukrainian city of Slavyansk on April 14, 2014. (AFP Photo / Anatoly Stepanov)





Kramatorsk, in eastern Ukraine, April 20, 2014. (Reuters / Gleb Garanich)





Source: http://rt.com/news/156736-no-russians-ukraine-activists/
Why is NYT saying this? Did they get bought off by Russia? Or is this a ploy by the US government to change public opinion so as not to lose face after having spoken too much too soon, considering Russia is indeed serious?

I think I have already posted this article here.

One man's freedom fighter is another man's terrorist.

When they carry Assault Rifles and MANPADS they Known as Terrorists
Everyone is entitled to his opinion.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Ukraine crisis is really about oil, and US is aggressor - historian

As the world's attention is focused on the crisis in Ukraine, one historian says the issue is not only political but economic. The Voice of Russia talks with historian Robert Freeman, author of The Best One-Hour History 6 book series which includes World War I and The Vietnam War. He has traveled extensively in both the developed and developing world. He is also the founder of the national non-profit "One Dollar For Life" which helps American students build schools in the developing world from their contributions of one dollar. He writes in his recent article "Ukraine is About Oil. So Was World War I."

You wrote a very interesting article about what's happening in Ukraine and how oil is part of this. For those who don't know, give us an update and just what is at stake, not just on political theater here. But what is at stake in Ukrainian crisis?

What's really at stake and what's really driving it is the control for oil. It's the same logic that drove the US to invade Iraq in 2003. And what we now know were completely false circumstances. But the Persian Gulf contains 60 percent of the world's oil. The US's strategy is to control the oil in order to control its industrial competitors that includes both Europe and China. If you see the Persian Gulf, there is a battle between two different religious sects of Islam that unlike the Protestants verses the Catholics, they had big wars of religion in 500-600 A.D. That's going on now today in the Persian Gulf – the Sunnis on one side backed by the US and Saudi Arabia. The Iranians represent the Shiite sect of Islam and they are enemies since the US overthrew the democratically elected president of Iran Mohammad Mosaddegh in 1953. So this is a basic setup –Iran versus Saudi Arabia in the Persian Gulf. Iran's primary ally in the Middle-East is Syria, because this is also a Shiite nation. The US has been trying to overthrow al-Assad, the president of Syria for the last three years. By funding the Islamic-based, al-Qaeda linked rebels Syria's primary military patron is Russia. So, the sequence of domino is that by taking Ukraine away from Russia, we weaken Russia. Weakening Russia, weakens Syria. Weakening Syria, weakens Iran and this gives to the US the greater chance to gain control of Persian Gulf oil.

What about the issue of gas reserves in Ukraine. They have quite a natural gas reserve, one of the largest in the world.

This is a large national natural gas reserve in this part, what is at stake also. Who is going to control that natural gas is a very good substitute for oil and it's routinely used, for example, in the US at the electricity generating plants to switch back and forth between oil and natural gas in heavier fired. More importantly, in fact, if you talk to specifics of Ukraine and fuel is that Ukraine is a transit point through which Soviet or Russian natural gas supplies are delivered to Europe and one of the biggest issue here if Europe sides with US trying to take Ukraine away trying to make Ukraine independent from Russia. Then, whether or not those transit points are allowed, will become a very, very critically economic factor. in the escalation here.

So, the story behind the story is that this is a very important part of the world, for major nations that obviously depend on natural resources for fuel.

Very much so, that's nothing new. There was the same thing during the World War I in the Balkans about 200 miles away from where we are talking about right here. And there was the same thing - who was going to control the oil, because in industrial civilization who controls the oil, controls the oxygen. Oil is the oxygen of industrial civilization. And in World War I, the Germans were moving into the Arab Empire that included Iraq at that time, what we call modern-days Iraq. And if the Germans had succeeded in doing that would have put a choke hold on England, who operated and globally deployed Navy on the bases of oil. And so World War I was fundamentally about who was going to control Middle-Eastern oil. The danger, we have in the present case is very similar to what was during the World War I and this is an uncontrollable escalation. Nobody understood at that time in June 1914, when a Serbian teenager killed the guy, who was going to be the next head of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire.

Do you see this domino effect happening this time around?

I think a more important analysis would be – go back and look at the historical aggression which the West has carried out against Russia and why the Russians are very, very paranoid at this point. You can actually go back to Napoleon invading Russia in 1812 and burning Moscow to the ground. Then you can look at the German invasion in Russia in World War I which destroyed the czar and brought us Communism into the world state system, then you can go back and look at Hitler's invasion of Russia in World War II in 1941 and the battle of Stalingrad, the biggest battle in the history of the world before or since. So the Russians see a very long, very deep, very sustained aggression by the West against them in order to reduce them to vassal state status. And they have nuclear weapons and I'm very worried and I suspect it is not beyond the pale that if it comes to a matter of their existence and their independence, the nuclear weapons will come into the play.

What about the issue of diplomacy here? We have John Kerry talking to Sergey Lavrov but also president Obama hosting the interim Ukraine PM. Is there a confusing message here?

I don't know that this is confusing, I don't think that the Russians have any illusion of what is going on. There is no doubt that the US was behind the coup d'état of the democratically elected government of Ukraine. You can listen to the tapes of Victoria Nuland, the Assistant Secretary of State for East European Affairs talking with the US ambassador in the Ukraine (these were made public a few weeks ago) discussing how the coup was going to go down. And it goes down exactly the way it is. I think that diplomacy that you see in the conventional media is very much Kabuki theater for the Americans, but the Russians have no illusions about what is going on here. It is an aggression by the US to take Ukraine out of the orbit of Russia in a similar way that the US has done the same with Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Poland, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Czech Republic, Romania. In each of those cases the US has installed offensive missiles right on the boarder of Russia.

You believe that this conflict is really about the natural resources, the oil and the gas in this region, right?

I believe it very much is. Go back to just 10-12 years ago oil cost about $25 a barrel, today it is over $100 a barrel. The significance of that is this: those countries which are energy inefficient, and the US is the most energy inefficient country in the world, are fundamentally damaged because it means that they would have to retrofit their entire industrial infrastructure. I'm talking billions of miles of roads, all the US economy becomes grossly inefficient. So if we cannot control the oil the US economy will be ridden off.

Well, there is another aspect to this story and that is about media coverage of this conflict from the western side. How do you see the coverage? Is it in depth? Is it giving any historical context?

It is not in depth at all. I had mentioned just a small part of the history and I very much doubt that anybody in any conventional consumer Western media knows any of that history and in fact won't even remember the history as recently as 2003 when the media "laundered" this story by the Bush Administration that the Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Now we know that that was all a lie.

You see no representation at all in the media that in fact it is the US that is the aggressor in this case, it is the US that staged the coup d'état of Yanukovich, the democratically elected president of Ukraine. It is now the US that saying that the Russians have to respect the democratic government of Ukraine, neo-Nazi thugs that we installed less than a month ago. So no, I don't see that there is any representation of historical facts or context by the media.

But in the Internet anyone can find anything they want, but do you think giving the way in which especially commercial media is covering a crisis like this that only hits on the highlights of a situation as opposed to really going in depth as you just did?

That is not going to change. We have to go back to the early 1980s to understand why. In 1980 there were something like 50 or 60 different independent media outlets in the US, you could get a diverse sampling of stories from the way that the different media chose to cover a situation. In the 1990s the Clinton Administration deregulated the media industry with the result that there has been massive consolidation and we essentially got five very large media companies and they control about 85-90 percent of all the media in the US: TV, radio, newspapers, magazines. Those entities receive their licenses especially their broadcast licenses from the government.

Robert, you are also the founder of national non-profit called One Dollar For Life. Give us an idea, what that means and how you are bringing American students out of their comfort zone helping other students overseas?

It is simplicity in the extreme. We invite high school students to donate $1 through a fundraiser in their school then we combine all those funds from different schools and we build schools in the developing world. Every dollar a student gives goes to a developing world project. In the last 6 years we have built schools, medical clinics, computer labs, literacy cooperatives, irrigation systems in eight different countries: Nepal, Indonesia, Haiti, Nicaragua, Yucatan, Kenia, Malawi and South Africa. There are two parts to it: it is doing good for the world out there but more importantly it is showing young people in America that they can really actually have a big impact on the world if they do a smallest bit, but each of them does it and for $1 they can literally change the world. That is the idea. There is 16 million high school students in America. If each of them gave just $1 we could build more than 1,000 schools every year in the developing world.

Thank you!
Read more: Ukraine crisis is really about oil, and US is aggressor - historian - News - VoR Interviews - The Voice of Russia: News, Breaking news, Politics, Economics, Business, Russia, International current events, Expert opinion, podcasts, Video
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Territorial Evolution of Ukraine


Source: Voice of Russia


Source: Telegraph, UK
[HR][/HR]
Language Map of Ukraine


As this Ukrainian-language map illustrates, Ukrainian and Russian share overlap with Surzhyk (Yellow – West: Russian: 3.1%, Surzhyk: 2.5%, Ukrainian: 94.4%; Yellow – center Russian: 24.2%; Surzhyk: 14.6%; Ukrainian: 61.2%; Bright green – east-center: Russian: 46.4% Surzhyk: 21.7% Ukrainian: 31.9%; Teal – east Russian: 86.8% Surzhyk: 9.6% Ukrainian: 3.7%; Teal – south Russian: 82.3%; Surzhyk: 12.4%; Ukrainian: 5.2%). Wikimedia
Source: Guardian, UK/Wikimedia


Source: Washington Post/Wikimedia Commons
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Allegations of a cover-up about the actual death toll in Odessa

[TWEET]463064788172804097[/TWEET]
[TWEET]463060046423678976[/TWEET]
@Akim, can you please translate what the man is saying?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
[TWEET]463054757364768768[/TWEET]

[TWEET]463051738963275776[/TWEET]
Colorado Beetle has the same colours as the St. George's Ribbon, the symbol of pro-Russian Ukrainians.
 

pmaitra

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 10, 2009
Messages
33,262
Likes
19,600
Many say Kiev supporters heard that shots had been fired at a square called Kulikovo Polye, or Kulikovo field, and ran there to find out what had happened. Others say they went there to torch the tent city that pro-Russian supporters had built in protest against Kiev.

Tents were burnt and some pro-Russian supporters decided to hide in the nearest building, the news website said. That was the stately, white five-story trade union building.

"Who let them in and why? I just don't know. That is not a question for me," said one Odessa native.

It is not clear who first started throwing petrol bombs.

At least one town official suggested the fire may have started on the third floor, which would suggest that the cause of the blaze was something other than a petrol bomb thrown from outside. That could not be independently confirmed.

"The fire engines came very late. The fire was raging. Those who had not been overcome by smoke, just started jumping out of windows. It is a tall building so you can imagine what happened," said an eyewitness.

Some talk of a "third force" a reference to what Kiev calls pro-Russian "saboteurs" accused of fomenting unrest in Ukraine to stop it travelling a pro-Western path and keep it firmly within the Kremlin's embrace.

Moscow denies playing any role in the uprisings in Ukraine and has said Kiev and its Western backers were responsible for the deaths in Odessa.
Source: http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/...lebrations-ended-in-odessa-deaths/499383.html
 

happy

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 12, 2013
Messages
3,370
Likes
1,456
It's next bullshit made by russian propaganda.
In fact is pure nonsense.

What more - @pmaitra - can you admite NOW that there is no single polish army concentration near estern poland borders?
I was talking maany times that this info is fake and bullshit but you @pmaitra and user @happy was posting so many strange post taken from russian sites about polish army concentration near ukrinian borders. I was talking that it was totall fake and fairy tails.
You just said that you doont know what is true you just post "infos".

Can You now adimte that sucht infos was faken and compleltly false?

What more -the same story is in case quoted aboce "news". It;s the same story.
Since you have mentioned me, I can't make much sense of your post. Can you explain the bold parts ??
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Cadian

Regular Member
Joined
May 5, 2014
Messages
824
Likes
795

Razor

STABLE GENIUS
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 7, 2011
Messages
7,701
Likes
9,101
Country flag
Greetings to all members of DFI!

I'd like to share some info about situation in Ukraine form the russian internet here.

First of all, footage from Odessa where Nazi teams are finshing off survivors from the building caught on fire.
[video]http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=e5b_1399216344[/video]

Bullying wounded in flames, same place.
Русский и украинцы после одесского пожара
We have seen too many videos (and posted some of them) of pro-federalist/pro-Russians being abused and even killed by the fascist banderas and the pravy sektor.
The people in S & E. Ukraine need to wake up, take arms and drive out these terrorists from Kiev.

PS: Welcome to the forum. Start an intro thread in the Members section. We need some Russian members. :wave:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest Replies

Global Defence

New threads

Articles

Top