|
|
Post by b6k on Apr 9, 2014 20:19:31 GMT 3
Victoria "F*** the EU'" Nuland's replacement at the State Department, Jen Psaki, lies through her teeth on US plans to broker a new government for Ukraine. Credit to members of the press corps who refuse to accept the official line at face value & make her sweat for her salary: This is an awesome footage. She can not lie her way out of it. I viewed it several times as study material. I know she has a top end staff in propaganda and they briefed her proper. yet she falls apart first take on a poking question! She is no dumb blonde, so her horrific performance must have another explanation. Like, when the truth is obvious, shrug and do not try to lie your way out of it. Or, if you dare, go the Goebbels way: tell such an outrageous lie, that people are shocked. For instance, the USA government thinks the Ukrainian people are too thick to choose their own leaders, so we absolve of the task and do it for them. We do it everyday is other failed countries, and they love us for it. Chill! Next! This was really a bad day at the office for her! I hope she has a nice partner. I am sure she needed much nursing this day.  NB: President ''Yats'' says Ukraine would retaliate if Russia attacks! Indeed chain of laughter. Did you check the videos of what happened as the Russians seized Ukraine's leading battleship at Sevastopol or Simferopol some other such town? --Some officers asked, what are the pension rates by you guys over there at the Russian federation!? and we hand over our guns, do we maintain rank, pay and all? The Russian commanding officer of the assault gaped! stunned! --he had not taken that into consideration in his battle plans! , if you think that was a "bad day in the office" for Jen Psaki, kindly Google her (US State Department) official line on the Snowden question on YouTube. It's 24 minutes long so no need to post it here but seek and ye shall find. The very first reporter to ask a question in the above post that you enjoyed was Matthew Lee of the Associated Press (he was once banned for asking hot questions of Nuland when she held that post). Watch how he tears into Jen in the Snowden post of any American citizen's rights to freedom of speech, assembly (association). It is a classic case of do what I say, not what I do for the USA and Russia in the eyes of US.gov as in her eyes the Russians gave Snowden a "propaganda platform" to say what he has about the NSA et al and their capabilities of snooping on the world...  Having taken the time to check out the various office holders of Spokesperson for the US State Department since Victoria "F*** the EU" Nuland last held that post (she was recently promoted to sengenya the EU, trash Russia, and distribute mandazi to Ukranian cops and protestors <as others on her $5 billion payroll distributed live bullets to the same crowd(s)> with the US balozi to the Ukraine, the same chap captured in the F*** the EU phone call) you will find they are all women. Whether or not this is a Hillary hangover, it is interesting to note that the dames are no less hawkish than Yankee males. If anything they may be more so. One thing of note is that Jen Psaki's deputy (deputy spokesperson of the US State Department, Marie Harf) is openly said to be a former CIA analyst before she took up her current day job. Now if you know anything about "the Company" it's a lot like The Hotel California. "You can checkout anytime you want, but you can never leave"... Victoria "F*** the EU" Nuland, former US State Dept Spokesperson  Jen Psaki, incumbent US State Dept Spokesperson  Marie Harf, Deputy US State Dept Spokesperson, & former CIA analyst & spokesperson
What the heck! Here you go with the link to Jen Psaki's REALLY bad day in the office... |
|
|
|
Post by nowayhaha on Apr 10, 2014 20:50:36 GMT 3
President Vladimir Putin's Letter to Leaders of European Countries. Full Text  Ukraine’s economy in the past several months has been plummeting. Its industrial and construction sectors have also been declining sharply. Its budget deficit is mounting. The condition of its currency system is becoming more and more deplorable. The negative trade balance is accompanied by the flight of capital from the country. Ukraine’s economy is steadfastly heading towards a default, a halt in production and skyrocketing unemployment. Russia and the EU member states are Ukraine’s major trading partners. Proceeding from this, at the Russia-EU Summit at the end of January, we came to an agreement with our European partners to hold consultations on the subject of developing Ukraine’s economy, bearing in mind the interests of Ukraine and our countries while forming integration alliances with Ukraine’s participation. However, all attempts on Russia’s part to begin real consultations failed to produce any results. Instead of consultations, we hear appeals to lower contractual prices on Russian natural gas – prices which are allegedly of a “political” nature. One gets the impression that the European partners want to unilaterally blame Russia for the consequences of Ukraine’s economic crisis. Right from day one of Ukraine’s existence as an independent state, Russia has supported the stability of the Ukrainian economy by supplying it with natural gas at cut-rate prices. In January 2009, with the participation of the then-premier Yulia Tymoshenko, a purchase-and-sale contract on supplying natural gas for the period of 2009-2019 was signed. The contract regulated questions concerning the delivery of and payment for the product, and it also provided guarantees for its uninterrupted transit through the territory of Ukraine. What is more, Russia has been fulfilling the contract according to the letter and spirit of the document. Incidentally, Ukrainian Minister of Fuel and Energy at that time was Yuriy Prodan, who today holds a similar post in Kiev’s government. The total volume of natural gas delivered to Ukraine, as stipulated in the contract during the period of 2009-2014 (first quarter), stands at 147.2 billion cubic meters. Here, I would like to emphasize that the price formula that had been set down in the contract had NOT been altered since that moment. And Ukraine, right up till August 2013, made regular payments for the natural gas in accordance with that formula. However, the fact that after signing that contract, Russia granted Ukraine a whole string of unprecedented privileges and discounts on the price of natural gas, is quite another matter. This applies to the discount stemming from the 2010 Kharkiv Agreement, which was provided as advance payment for the future lease payments for the presence of the (Russian) Black Sea Fleet after 2017. This also refers to discounts on the prices for natural gas purchased by Ukraine’s chemical companies. This also concerns the discount granted in December 2013 for the duration of three months due to the critical state of Ukraine’s economy. Beginning with 2009, the total sum of these discounts stands at 17 billion US dollars. To this, we should add another 18.4 billion US dollars incurred by the Ukrainian side as a minimal take-or-pay fine. In this manner, during the past four years, Russia has been subsidizing Ukraine’s economy by offering slashed natural gas prices worth 35.4 billion US dollars. In addition, in December 2013, Russia granted Ukraine a loan of 3 billion US dollars. These very significant sums were directed towards maintaining the stability and creditability of the Ukrainian economy and preservation of jobs. No other country provided such support except Russia. What about the European partners? Instead of offering Ukraine real support, there is talk about a declaration of intent. There are only promises that are not backed by any real actions. The European Union is using Ukraine’s economy as a source of raw foodstuffs, metal and mineral resources, and at the same time, as a market for selling its highly-processed ready-made commodities (machine engineering and chemicals), thereby creating a deficit in Ukraine’s trade balance amounting to more than 10 billion US dollars. This comes to almost two-thirds of Ukraine’s overall deficit for 2013. To a large extent, the crisis in Ukraine’s economy has been precipitated by the unbalanced trade with the EU member states, and this, in turn has had a sharply negative impact on Ukraine’s fulfillment of its contractual obligations to pay for deliveries of natural gas supplied by Russia. Gazprom neither has intentions except for those stipulated in the 2009 contract nor plans to set any additional conditions. This also concerns the contractual price for natural gas, which is calculated in strict accordance with the agreed formula. However, Russia cannot and should not unilaterally bear the burden of supporting Ukraine’s economy by way of providing discounts and forgiving debts, and in fact, using these subsidies to cover Ukraine’s deficit in its trade with the EU member states. The debt of NAK Naftogaz Ukraine for delivered gas has been growing monthly this year. In November-December 2013 this debt stood at 1.451,5 billion US dollars; in February 2014 it increased by a further 260.3 million and in March by another 526.1 million US dollars. Here I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in March there was still a discount price applied, i.e., 268.5 US dollars per 1,000 cubic meters of gas. And even at that price, Ukraine did not pay a single dollar. In such conditions, in accordance with Articles 5.15, 5.8 and 5.3 of the contract, Gazprom is compelled to switch over to advance payment for gas delivery, and in the event of further violation of the conditions of payment, will completely or partially cease gas deliveries. In other words, only the volume of natural gas will be delivered to Ukraine as was paid for one month in advance of delivery. Undoubtedly, this is an extreme measure. We fully realize that this increases the risk of siphoning off natural gas passing through Ukraine’s territory and heading to European consumers. We also realize that this may make it difficult for Ukraine to accumulate sufficient gas reserves for use in the autumn and winter period. In order to guarantee uninterrupted transit, it will be necessary, in the nearest future, to supply 11.5 billion cubic meters of gas that will be pumped into Ukraine’s underground storage facilities, and this will require a payment of about 5 billion US dollars. However, the fact that our European partners have unilaterally withdrawn from the concerted efforts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, and even from holding consultations with the Russian side, leaves Russia no alternative. There can be only one way out of the situation that has developed. We believe it is vital to hold, without delay, consultations at the level of ministers of economics, finances and energy in order to work out concerted actions to stabilize Ukraine’s economy and to ensure delivery and transit of Russian natural gas in accordance with the terms and conditions set down in the contract. We must lose no time in beginning to coordinate concrete steps. It is towards this end that we appeal to our European partners. It goes without saying that Russia is prepared to participate in the effort to stabilize and restore Ukraine’s economy. However, not in a unilateral way, but on equal conditions with our European partners. It is also essential to take into account the actual investments, contributions and expenditures that Russia has shouldered by itself alone for such a long time in supporting Ukraine. As we see it, only such an approach would be fair and balanced, and only such an approach can lead to success. en.itar-tass.com/russia/727287 |
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Apr 10, 2014 21:29:15 GMT 3
President Vladimir Putin's Letter to Leaders of European Countries. Full Text Ukraine’s economy in the past several months has been plummeting. Its industrial and construction sectors have also been declining sharply. Its budget deficit is mounting. The condition of its currency system is becoming more and more deplorable. The negative trade balance is accompanied by the flight of capital from the country. Ukraine’s economy is steadfastly heading towards a default, a halt in production and skyrocketing unemployment. Russia and the EU member states are Ukraine’s major trading partners. Proceeding from this, at the Russia-EU Summit at the end of January, we came to an agreement with our European partners to hold consultations on the subject of developing Ukraine’s economy, bearing in mind the interests of Ukraine and our countries while forming integration alliances with Ukraine’s participation. However, all attempts on Russia’s part to begin real consultations failed to produce any results. Instead of consultations, we hear appeals to lower contractual prices on Russian natural gas – prices which are allegedly of a “political” nature. One gets the impression that the European partners want to unilaterally blame Russia for the consequences of Ukraine’s economic crisis. Right from day one of Ukraine’s existence as an independent state, Russia has supported the stability of the Ukrainian economy by supplying it with natural gas at cut-rate prices. In January 2009, with the participation of the then-premier Yulia Tymoshenko, a purchase-and-sale contract on supplying natural gas for the period of 2009-2019 was signed. The contract regulated questions concerning the delivery of and payment for the product, and it also provided guarantees for its uninterrupted transit through the territory of Ukraine. What is more, Russia has been fulfilling the contract according to the letter and spirit of the document. Incidentally, Ukrainian Minister of Fuel and Energy at that time was Yuriy Prodan, who today holds a similar post in Kiev’s government. The total volume of natural gas delivered to Ukraine, as stipulated in the contract during the period of 2009-2014 (first quarter), stands at 147.2 billion cubic meters. Here, I would like to emphasize that the price formula that had been set down in the contract had NOT been altered since that moment. And Ukraine, right up till August 2013, made regular payments for the natural gas in accordance with that formula. However, the fact that after signing that contract, Russia granted Ukraine a whole string of unprecedented privileges and discounts on the price of natural gas, is quite another matter. This applies to the discount stemming from the 2010 Kharkiv Agreement, which was provided as advance payment for the future lease payments for the presence of the (Russian) Black Sea Fleet after 2017. This also refers to discounts on the prices for natural gas purchased by Ukraine’s chemical companies. This also concerns the discount granted in December 2013 for the duration of three months due to the critical state of Ukraine’s economy. Beginning with 2009, the total sum of these discounts stands at 17 billion US dollars. To this, we should add another 18.4 billion US dollars incurred by the Ukrainian side as a minimal take-or-pay fine. In this manner, during the past four years, Russia has been subsidizing Ukraine’s economy by offering slashed natural gas prices worth 35.4 billion US dollars. In addition, in December 2013, Russia granted Ukraine a loan of 3 billion US dollars. These very significant sums were directed towards maintaining the stability and creditability of the Ukrainian economy and preservation of jobs. No other country provided such support except Russia. What about the European partners? Instead of offering Ukraine real support, there is talk about a declaration of intent. There are only promises that are not backed by any real actions. The European Union is using Ukraine’s economy as a source of raw foodstuffs, metal and mineral resources, and at the same time, as a market for selling its highly-processed ready-made commodities (machine engineering and chemicals), thereby creating a deficit in Ukraine’s trade balance amounting to more than 10 billion US dollars. This comes to almost two-thirds of Ukraine’s overall deficit for 2013. To a large extent, the crisis in Ukraine’s economy has been precipitated by the unbalanced trade with the EU member states, and this, in turn has had a sharply negative impact on Ukraine’s fulfillment of its contractual obligations to pay for deliveries of natural gas supplied by Russia. Gazprom neither has intentions except for those stipulated in the 2009 contract nor plans to set any additional conditions. This also concerns the contractual price for natural gas, which is calculated in strict accordance with the agreed formula. However, Russia cannot and should not unilaterally bear the burden of supporting Ukraine’s economy by way of providing discounts and forgiving debts, and in fact, using these subsidies to cover Ukraine’s deficit in its trade with the EU member states. The debt of NAK Naftogaz Ukraine for delivered gas has been growing monthly this year. In November-December 2013 this debt stood at 1.451,5 billion US dollars; in February 2014 it increased by a further 260.3 million and in March by another 526.1 million US dollars. Here I would like to draw your attention to the fact that in March there was still a discount price applied, i.e., 268.5 US dollars per 1,000 cubic meters of gas. And even at that price, Ukraine did not pay a single dollar. In such conditions, in accordance with Articles 5.15, 5.8 and 5.3 of the contract, Gazprom is compelled to switch over to advance payment for gas delivery, and in the event of further violation of the conditions of payment, will completely or partially cease gas deliveries. In other words, only the volume of natural gas will be delivered to Ukraine as was paid for one month in advance of delivery. Undoubtedly, this is an extreme measure. We fully realize that this increases the risk of siphoning off natural gas passing through Ukraine’s territory and heading to European consumers. We also realize that this may make it difficult for Ukraine to accumulate sufficient gas reserves for use in the autumn and winter period. In order to guarantee uninterrupted transit, it will be necessary, in the nearest future, to supply 11.5 billion cubic meters of gas that will be pumped into Ukraine’s underground storage facilities, and this will require a payment of about 5 billion US dollars. However, the fact that our European partners have unilaterally withdrawn from the concerted efforts to resolve the Ukrainian crisis, and even from holding consultations with the Russian side, leaves Russia no alternative. There can be only one way out of the situation that has developed. We believe it is vital to hold, without delay, consultations at the level of ministers of economics, finances and energy in order to work out concerted actions to stabilize Ukraine’s economy and to ensure delivery and transit of Russian natural gas in accordance with the terms and conditions set down in the contract. We must lose no time in beginning to coordinate concrete steps. It is towards this end that we appeal to our European partners. It goes without saying that Russia is prepared to participate in the effort to stabilize and restore Ukraine’s economy. However, not in a unilateral way, but on equal conditions with our European partners. It is also essential to take into account the actual investments, contributions and expenditures that Russia has shouldered by itself alone for such a long time in supporting Ukraine. As we see it, only such an approach would be fair and balanced, and only such an approach can lead to success. en.itar-tass.com/russia/727287Factual, concise and to the point. Now this is the Putin I can respect, away from rhetoric and showing level headedness as a leader. He has shown that it doesn't have to be "us VS them" but working together with a mutual goal. The rhetoric has toned down. Over to you EU. |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 14, 2014 20:10:06 GMT 3
Is the ECB 'spooking' on trade war with Russia over the Ukraine? Okay guys, ‘’it is obvious Russia is interfering in Eastern Ukraine’’, where the Kiev-based Putschists have all but lost control. It is clear, said the British foreign secretary William Hague. But he did not produce a single shred of evidence! So veteran journalists cynically giggled and exchanged knowing glances. --They heard it before in the run to the Iraq war. Only Russia is not some third world push over country, that can be bothered by EU flies buzzing about its fart in luxurious Luxembourg. The thing is, these are ministers of foreign affairs. In the EU, ministers of foreign affairs are very far from power. Real power in the EU is projected from the finance departments and central banks. It is when the caucus of finance ministers meet, that one knows stuff is cooking. In fact most of the continental broadcasting today is not covering the caucus of external secretaries i Luxembourg as heavy news. You will notice below, in this associated press report, that the ministers of foreign affairs are not any specific on sanctions. Sanctions is economic warfare, and financial risks, and it is not their brief. So it would be more instructive to look at what the European Central Bank is doing. What is it that is pre-occupying the ECB president, Mario Draghi. How are his nerves? First, the caucus of EU foreign ministers: Now, as the flies belched in Luxembourg, let us see what the money-men, ECB President and his team, those who would handle the real effects of a trade war with Russia, are wringing their hands about in the Eurozone. NB: ATTENTION MAN-K This should be a thriller for you Amigo, because this is experimental policy. --Uncharted waters for such a large [economc] body as the EU. ---I think Denmark and Switzerland are known to have used it sometime ago. But the idea is, I think it is a desperate measure! And of course you remember when ex Fed chair Bernanke first announced quantitative easing, he had insisted it would be a one off measure. Well, it became a series! And that is the legacy he left the girl who replaced him. And here is our own Draghi bent on mimicking him. But Draghi is not answering questions on sanctions against Russia. Has he factored it in? With Eurozone recovery still fragile? That is the key statement we are waiting for from the ECB! And as Draghi continues to dither and eat his nails, I will think he is like the Malaysian pilot flying his now notorious vessel to no-man'sland deep in the Indian ocean! Not even a bubble!  |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 16, 2014 23:14:23 GMT 3
Kramatorsk, Eastern Ukraine. Here it is, the Kiev forces bearing the flag of Ukraine taking position for the much billed anti-terrorist operation.  A few hours later.. the Russian flag flying on top one of the tanks. What happened?   ![]() telegraf.by/img2/newsimportkorespondent/2014-04/ov5ukq_w145h81.jpg[/img]The Ukrainian crisis has smoked Angela Merkel out. Sandwiched between the formidable thrusts of the bear Vladimir Putin and the hawkish forages of Barrack Obama’s foreign policy as dictated by a marauding neo-con agenda, Merkel has shrunk into a crouched obeisance of the US position, and joined the sabre-rattling of NATO. NATO is mobilising for war, just in case. Divisions have been upgraded in Poland with a 27/7 AWACS air surveillance; minions like Holland and Portugal are sending a pair of F16s and combat choppers respectively to beef up Balkan confidence; and frigates are sailing through the Bosphorus lock into the Black Sea, to go stare down the Russian bases in the Krimea. Within one month of crisis in the Ukraine, this is what Europe has come to. A break down in realations between West and East, a re-invention of the cold-war, and likely a re-kick start of the arms race. I think it is a thoroughly mismaged crisis. Well, a little misunderstanding in the crowded skies, and there will be war. Perhaps a Russian jet straying over an American warship prowling in Bulgarian Waters in the black sea, locked and shot by a shaky gunner? A NATO jet beefing up the nerves of scared Baltic Statesmen spilling over the border with Russia and having itself shot down by a shaky gunner, or perhaps a massacre in the East as Kiev conducts its anti terrorism operation aka LINDA NCHI, incites a harsh retort … Who knows! Some small spark, some small accidental spark with fire-balling consequences. NB: CIA Director was in Kiev incognito just before the last weekend! It was a weird tale when it broke, but has since been confirmed. There is a bit of amazed fun and jokes. Apparently a CIA head has a code name, like POTUS’s jet is usually known as Aiforce One. But why would the company choose a code this time around which translates into Ukrainian as ‘’dick-head’’? A sense of humour? ---or Russian disinformation! Whatever the case, brother dick-head issued orders to his hirelings in Kiev that they should go tough on the East, possibly to force Putin’s hand. And so the anti-terrorist operation was launched. With comical scenes like the tanks exchanging sides above, and the hungry boys being fed on hot soup by the terrorists before being bussed home. We wait for the crack teams to arrive. The ones who will run over human blockades and restore order over heaps of dead bodies. ---Then, only then, will it be no longer operation dick head. It will be war in the center of Europe. Meanwhile let us enjoy the peace, the good weather, and the comedy. Tomorrow may be different. |
|
|
|
Post by mank on Apr 17, 2014 0:20:08 GMT 3
.... Strong euro... The bank's policymakers recently raised the idea of cutting the rate to below zero, effectively charging banks that hold excess cash at the ECB. Such measures could be needed, Mr Draghi said, because of a euro that has strengthened by nearly 5.5% against the dollar, and by nearly 10% against the Japanese yen in the last year. The euro is currently worth $1.39. The currency's strength, Mr Draghi said on Saturday, accounted for a half percentage point of the decline in the annual inflation rate. "I have always said that the exchange rate is not a policy target, but it is important for price stability and growth," he added. "What has happened over the last few months is that it has become more and more important for price stability." @bbc NB: ATTENTION MAN-K This should be a thriller for you Amigo, because this is experimental policy. --Uncharted waters for such a large [economc] body as the EU. ---I think Denmark and Switzerland are known to have used it sometime ago. But the idea is, I think it is a desperate measure! And of course you remember when ex Fed chair Bernanke first announced quantitative easing, he had insisted it would be a one off measure. Well, it became a series! And that is the legacy he left the girl who replaced him. And here is our own Draghi bent on mimicking him. But Draghi is not answering questions on sanctions against Russia. Has he factored it in? With Eurozone recovery still fragile? That is the key statement we are waiting for from the ECB! And as Draghi continues to dither and eat his nails, I will think he is like the Malaysian pilot flying his now notorious vessel to no-man'sland deep in the Indian ocean! Not even a bubble! ... Yes amigo .... I think you are going in the right direction with that apparent effort at coining a qualification term for bubbles and the mother of all bubbles. So basically Draghi wants folks to be paid to borrow, ... and they will be paying their banks to keep their euros for a while, right? And the whole idea is that when they are paid to borrow and penalized for saving in the bank they will go out there and spend money like there is no tomorrow, buying all sorts of things and suddenly the Europeans will be back in a healthier inflation range? He'll be surprised ... even though he really should not be! Experience has shown that when central banks flood economies with paper in this manner what happens is that the paper finds its way into capital assets, selectively inflating those assets. I say selectively because the price pressure evades the general markets and goes only to capital assets (stocks and real estate)... the bubble! |
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Apr 17, 2014 16:32:08 GMT 3
[/img] The Ukrainian crisis has smoked Angela Merkel out. Sandwiched between the formidable thrusts of the bear Vladimir Putin and the hawkish forages of Barrack Obama’s foreign policy as dictated by a marauding neo-con agenda, Merkel has shrunk into a crouched obeisance of the US position, and joined the sabre-rattling of NATO. NATO is mobilising for war, just in case. Divisions have been upgraded in Poland with a 27/7 AWACS air surveillance; minions like Holland and Portugal are sending a pair of F16s and combat choppers respectively to beef up Balkan confidence; and frigates are sailing through the Bosphorus lock into the Black Sea, to go stare down the Russian bases in the Krimea. Within one month of crisis in the Ukraine, this is what Europe has come to. A break down in realations between West and East, a re-invention of the cold-war, and likely a re-kick start of the arms race. I think it is a thoroughly mismaged crisis. Well, a little misunderstanding in the crowded skies, and there will be war. Perhaps a Russian jet straying over an American warship prowling in Bulgarian Waters in the black sea, locked and shot by a shaky gunner? A NATO jet beefing up the nerves of scared Baltic Statesmen spilling over the border with Russia and having itself shot down by a shaky gunner, or perhaps a massacre in the East as Kiev conducts its anti terrorism operation aka LINDA NCHI, incites a harsh retort … Who knows!
Some small spark, some small accidental spark with fire-balling consequences.NB: CIA Director was in Kiev incognito just before the last weekend! It was a weird tale when it broke, but has since been confirmed. There is a bit of amazed fun and jokes. Apparently a CIA head has a code name, like POTUS’s jet is usually known as Aiforce One. But why would the company choose a code this time around which translates into Ukrainian as ‘’dick-head’’? A sense of humour? ---or Russian disinformation! Whatever the case, brother dick-head issued orders to his hirelings in Kiev that they should go tough on the East, possibly to force Putin’s hand. And so the anti-terrorist operation was launched. With comical scenes like the tanks exchanging sides above, and the hungry boys being fed on hot soup by the terrorists before being bussed home. We wait for the crack teams to arrive. The ones who will run over human blockades and restore order over heaps of dead bodies. ---Then, only then, will it be no longer operation dick head. It will be war in the center of Europe. Meanwhile let us enjoy the peace, the good weather, and the comedy. Tomorrow may be different. [/quote]
That red highlight. It just may... I am more scared that it may take something as simple as untrained/uncontrolled Ukrainian "fascists"or "right wing" elements deciding to take matters into their own hands and driving eastwards to deal with the Russian spec-ops elements. Now that is guaranteed to ignite something beyond even Putin's control. But maybe that's his plan.
One thing is for certain though, the Ukrainian security forces seem to be falling apart. Some would argue that they are just showing restraint but...
www.upi.com/Top_News/World-News/2014/04/16/Ukraine-submits-proof-of-Russian-covert-actions/8621397666454/ |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Apr 23, 2014 23:27:25 GMT 3
Omundu, the end game in this crisis? the goal posts have moved! The geo-political game is to smash the Russian federation. Secretary Kerry, Brennan the head of the CIA, and now Biden,have just done Kiev. In addition to other high level covert operators. That is a game at the highest level. The survival of Russia as a modern strong state capable of thwarting the will of the USA, is what is at stake. I think Putin reads it correct. This is punishment for joining China in avoiding the dollar in mutual trade, and further pushing for the agenda of BRICS trading outside the dollar.
Putin has threatened the universality of the dollar, and its position as world reserve currency; and with the gas and oil reserves of Russia, her military and territorial expanse under the formidable caliber of Putin, she is packs enough to halt USA designs of the Berzinski doctrine, now and dangerously if not dealt with, in the future. America has to stop him,and dismember Russia.
Putin's end-game, is to prevent this. Obama's end game, is to effect it. And now the two elephants fight, the grass gonna pay!
|
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Apr 25, 2014 17:40:35 GMT 3
Indeed Jakaswanga.It is getting tense. The goal posts have indeed moved but me thinks the Obama administration is clearly applying an updated version of the cold war strategy used in dealing with the Soviets: CONTAINMENT. They are doing this by: - cutting off Putin's economic and political ties to the outside world:sanctions and more if he dares the Eastern Ukraine. - Limiting Putin's ambitions in Russia's own neighborhood:Increasing military presence in Baltic NATO states, Poland etc - Effectively pushing in making Russia a pariah state:evidenced by Kerry and the CIA director's trips in the region and constant media wars. But as you say, Putin may have BRICS in his calculation. perhaps this current crisis is an attempt from the west to stifle his moves (though i am yet to be convinced of that argument)and he may have calculated that Obama is currently facing a battle-economic in two fronts if China is included. Note that Obama is currently in an Asian power tour visiting about five countries but China. It should be interesting to note that all countries he is visiting happen to have territorial disputes with china... Well... Then there is the new found Trans Atlantic Trade pact with Western Europe that has gained momentum after Putin's shenanigans... And Obama's insistence that the smaller NATO countries increase their military spending (obviously a high level business marketing for the American military complex) What i get from the above developments is that the current world order is undergoing a 'major ?' reshuffling with centers of global power rushing to gain/re-gain or reinforce existing alliances/spheres of influence. However, those spheres of influence are unlike the cold war ones which were heavily based on ideology (Communism vs capitalism). They are ECONOMIC. Thats why we may just be witnessing the birth of a cold war part two albeit with a very different look from the previous cold war. Why ? - Obama's foreign policy approach has always refrained from treating countries as absolute enemies. His "cold war two" policy is/will be different from Harry Truman, Eisenhower, Kennedy or Reagan's policy of 'absolute enemy'. Obama tends to separate policy and strategic rivalry from other aspects of international policy where common interests and co-operation might be possible. Thats why i maintain that the world is very different now. We have issues like Nuclear proliferation amongst other common/mutual worries between them/us. - Russia is not USSR. It is not at the head of a vast global alliance currently. Its neighbors are scared of its belligerence because Russia is currently basing it's foreign policy on Nationalist sentiment as opposed to universal principles. This is very different from Soviet era foreign policy and may *emphasis* make it hard for them to gain strong allies. That said, the sabre rattling gets louder: www.dw.de/ukraine-tightens-borders-to-hold-loose-cannons/a-17588616www.dw.de/ukraine-attacks-separatists-in-east/av-17589821www.dw.de/fears-rise-of-war-in-ukraine/av-17591967www.dw.de/moscow-and-kiev-trade-blows/av-17590798www.dw.de/kerry-warns-russia-against-grave-and-expensive-ukraine-mistake/a-17590817 |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 25, 2014 21:11:11 GMT 3
Omundu, the end game in this crisis? the goal posts have moved! The geo-political game is to smash the Russian federation. Secretary Kerry, Brennan the head of the CIA, and now Biden,have just done Kiev. In addition to other high level covert operators. That is a game at the highest level. The survival of Russia as a modern strong state capable of thwarting the will of the USA, is what is at stake. I think Putin reads it correct. This is punishment for joining China in avoiding the dollar in mutual trade, and further pushing for the agenda of BRICS trading outside the dollar. Putin has threatened the universality of the dollar, and its position as world reserve currency; and with the gas and oil reserves of Russia, her military and territorial expanse under the formidable caliber of Putin, she is packs enough to halt USA designs of the Berzinski doctrine, now and dangerously if not dealt with, in the future. America has to stop him,and dismember Russia. Putin's end-game, is to prevent this. Obama's end game, is to effect it. And now the two elephants fight, the grass gonna pay!
Jakaswanga:
Zbigniew Brzensiki, surely one of America's biggest brains, saw this coming from a mile away. And he thinks it can be dealt with. A couple of years ago he wrote a short but astonishingly powerful book: "Strategic Vision - America and The Crisis of Global Power", in which he looks at "global power" from the time of the Roman Empire to now. Crudely put, it is an outline of how the world power should be divided between the USA and China in what he calls a "post-America world". And what about the rest of the world? The Europeans are seen as a perhaps helpful partner but not to be taken too seriously when it comes to the hard crunch ... they are more interested in building "countries comfortable for retirees". Fwack the EU! Africa? The continent gets maybe 20 sentences in the whole book. And so on for the rest of the world.
In the present matter, what we are witnessing is part of what he calls the "post-American scramble", which is discussed at length: the USA can neither rule the world, nor does it care to; and as adjustments are made, there will be chaos all over the world. In the same Part 3 of the book, there is a chapter on "the geopolitically most endangered states". Ukraine makes the list, and the conclusion to the section on Ukraine is:
"Hence time may not be working in favor of a voluntary submission by Kyiv to Moscow, but impatient Russian pressure as well as the West's indifference could generate a potentially explosive situation on the very edge of the European Union".
He admits that Russia will play a significant role, primarily as a nuisance, but he doesn't think there is much there:
"Russia has not displayed the diplomatic finesse of Great Britain, or the commercial acumen of democratically appealing America, or the patient self-control of historically self-confident China".
He is confident they can be sorted out. As he sees it, Russia wants to play Global Big-Boy but is out of its depth: For one, they can make noises about having nuclear weapons, but they are not really in a position to project power on a global scale. Nor do they have anything that the world cares to emulate or even thinks much about: America is about freedom, opportunity, and gung-ho capitalism and the creativity it unleashes; the Europeans are largely useless when it come to any heavy lifting, but people admire their devotion to human rights and let-all-share-in-the-cake approach; and even African countries look to Asia's example of bootstrapping oneself out of the bottom.
What we are seeing now fits in well with
"Russia has tended to engage in bursts of triumphant and rather messianic self-assertion followed by plunges into lethargic morass."
This is followed with explanations that include the "demographic crisis" caused by too much vodka: the men drink too much, don't fwack enough, and die early. All in all, some rather unflattering comments on the Bear.
A Russia-China alliance against the rest of the world? That too is considered. He doesn't think it would work, and he gives his reasons.
The book has quite a bit of discussion on Russia and acknowledges that it will be a major pest but one that can be dealt with. According to the Big Brain, things can be managed so that the world "Beyond 2025" consists of China and the USA in Division I, the Europeans still happy with their permanent place in Division II (Group 1), Russia forced to accept a place in Group 2 of Divison II, and so on ...
|
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Apr 25, 2014 21:12:24 GMT 3
For those not familiar with Kennans containment policy and article 'X', here below; history.state.gov/milestones/1945-1952/kennanI personally think Crimea, and if Putin takes Eastern Ukraine is/will be a phyrric victory for Putin. He has lost a whole lot because he has given NATO/west a perfect excuse to increase its hold in many eastern states. Even western Ukraine is a far gone conclusion. It is worse for him because any civil war or disturbance is just by his borders. They say the markets are a good indication or prediction of trends. Wall street and european stocks are down. Speaks a lot don't it ? |
|
|
|
Post by OtishOtish on Apr 25, 2014 21:40:26 GMT 3
It will be interesting to see where this goes ... between the end of February and the start of this month, Ukraine suddenly discovered the ICC: www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/press%20and%20media/press%20releases/Documents/997/declarationRecognitionJuristiction09-04-2014.pdfwww.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/press%20and%20media/press%20releases/Documents/997/UkraineMFAdocument16-04-2014.pdfZaftig Bensouda is now on the case. She hasn't stated what she plans to investigate, but Ukraine probably has in mind Article 8 bis of the Rome Statute: Article 8 bis: Crime of aggression1. For the purpose of this Statute, “crime of aggression” means the planning, preparation,
initiation or execution, by a person in a position effectively to exercise control over or
to direct the political or military action of a State, of an act of aggression which, by
its character, gravity and scale, constitutes a manifest violation of the Charter of the
United Nations.
2. For the purpose of paragraph 1, “act of aggression” means the use of armed force by a
State against the sovereignty, territorial integrity or political independence of another
State, or in any other manner inconsistent with the Charter of the United Nations.
Any of the following acts, regardless of a declaration of war, shall, in accordance
with United Nations General Assembly resolution 3314 (XXIX) of 14 December 1974,
qualify as an act of aggression:
(a) The invasion or attack by the armed forces of a State of the territory of another
State, or any military occupation, however temporary, resulting from such
invasion or attack, or any annexation by the use of force of the territory of
another State or part thereof;
(b) Bombardment by the armed forces of a State against the territory of another
State or the use of any weapons by a State against the territory of another
State;
(c) The blockade of the ports or coasts of a State by the armed forces of another
State;
(d) An attack by the armed forces of a State on the land, sea or air forces, or
marine and air fleets of another State;
(e) The use of armed forces of one State which are within the territory of another
State with the agreement of the receiving State, in contravention of the
conditions provided for in the agreement or any extension of their presence
in such territory beyond the termination of the agreement;
(f) The action of a State in allowing its territory, which it has placed at the
disposal of another State, to be used by that other State for perpetrating an
act of aggression against a third State;
(g) The sending by or on behalf of a State of armed bands, groups, irregulars or
mercenaries, which carry out acts of armed force against another State of such
gravity as to amount to the acts listed above, or its substantial involvement
therein |
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Jul 18, 2014 1:14:05 GMT 3
Serendipity - when your actions aim for a certain result but you end up getting surprised by a result least expected. That may just be what the separatist commanders got when they aimed their captured Russian BUK missile at a plane expected to flood the news with yet another downed Ukrainian military plane.
"But how hard is it to identify friend from foe in a war situation" you ask. Well, military planes have got technology (a radar of sorts) that can only identify friend and others. The only problem with the system comes when a war involves a rag tag outfit not trained to identify small matters like civilian air routes or no proper chain of command to give orders.
Here we are now, a down civilian plane, over 200 dead and a developing crisis reminiscent of the lockebie bombing. No one knows how it will end. Not even Putin himself.
Rewind back a few from where we left off:
Of elections come and gone
Of peace dialogues offered and rebuffed.
Of merkel and crew threatening with further sanctions.
Of the civil war escalating with separatists getting support from mother russia.
Of captured BUK missiles from the Overun Ukrainian post.
Of several Ukrainian planes shot down.
Of passenger jet shot down.
Of a bragging tweet from a separatist commander.
Of logged phonecalls between the separatists and russian military (I guess the Ukrainian government learnt from the best)
Of the Pentagon confirming that the plane was indeed shot down (something about missile radar logs and heat signatures from satellites)
I ask again: is Putin in control or is the sand slipping between his fingers. Is he able to again wiggle his way out of this (surely unforeseen circumstance by him in my opinion)like houdini ?
Time will tell.
|
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Aug 29, 2014 22:54:11 GMT 3
Serendipity - when your actions aim for a certain result but you end up getting surprised by a result least expected. That may just be what the separatist commanders got when they aimed their captured Russian BUK missile at a plane expected to flood the news with yet another downed Ukrainian military plane. "But how hard is it to identify friend from foe in a war situation" you ask. Well, military planes have got technology (a radar of sorts) that can only identify friend and others. The only problem with the system comes when a war involves a rag tag outfit not trained to identify small matters like civilian air routes or no proper chain of command to give orders. Here we are now, a down civilian plane, over 200 dead and a developing crisis reminiscent of the lockebie bombing. No one knows how it will end. Not even Putin himself. Rewind back a few from where we left off: Of elections come and gone Of peace dialogues offered and rebuffed. Of merkel and crew threatening with further sanctions. Of the civil war escalating with separatists getting support from mother russia. Of captured BUK missiles from the Overun Ukrainian post. Of several Ukrainian planes shot down. Of passenger jet shot down. Of a bragging tweet from a separatist commander. Of logged phonecalls between the separatists and russian military (I guess the Ukrainian government learnt from the best) Of the Pentagon confirming that the plane was indeed shot down (something about missile radar logs and heat signatures from satellites) I ask again: is Putin in control or is the sand slipping between his fingers. Is he able to again wiggle his way out of this (surely unforeseen circumstance by him in my opinion)like houdini ? Time will tell. Omundu, serendipity you talked of? the situation in the east of the ukraine has taken another turn. And I believe it is out of hand. The EU and USA are ready to consider the request of the ''coup govenrment'' to join NATO. Poland already has been sending equipment and troops. The Russian reaction has been to open a front, to open a land corridor to Krimea. Washington has what she wants: a breakdown in relations between EU and Russia --though not completely because Germany is tight lipped still. France has politically imploded (with the resignation of the barely 5 month old Valls government and the outburst of a civil war within the ruling Socialist party in the midst of an economic downturn). What is obvious, is that for some key players here, serendipity is the word  ! |
|
|
|
Post by omundu on Sept 3, 2014 20:10:46 GMT 3
Serendipity - when your actions aim for a certain result but you end up getting surprised by a result least expected. That may just be what the separatist commanders got when they aimed their captured Russian BUK missile at a plane expected to flood the news with yet another downed Ukrainian military plane. "But how hard is it to identify friend from foe in a war situation" you ask. Well, military planes have got technology (a radar of sorts) that can only identify friend and others. The only problem with the system comes when a war involves a rag tag outfit not trained to identify small matters like civilian air routes or no proper chain of command to give orders. Here we are now, a down civilian plane, over 200 dead and a developing crisis reminiscent of the lockebie bombing. No one knows how it will end. Not even Putin himself. Rewind back a few from where we left off: Of elections come and gone Of peace dialogues offered and rebuffed. Of merkel and crew threatening with further sanctions. Of the civil war escalating with separatists getting support from mother russia. Of captured BUK missiles from the Overun Ukrainian post. Of several Ukrainian planes shot down. Of passenger jet shot down. Of a bragging tweet from a separatist commander. Of logged phonecalls between the separatists and russian military (I guess the Ukrainian government learnt from the best) Of the Pentagon confirming that the plane was indeed shot down (something about missile radar logs and heat signatures from satellites) I ask again: is Putin in control or is the sand slipping between his fingers. Is he able to again wiggle his way out of this (surely unforeseen circumstance by him in my opinion)like houdini ? Time will tell. Omundu, serendipity you talked of? the situation in the east of the ukraine has taken another turn. And I believe it is out of hand. The EU and USA are ready to consider the request of the ''coup govenrment'' to join NATO. Poland already has been sending equipment and troops. The Russian reaction has been to open a front, to open a land corridor to Krimea. Washington has what she wants: a breakdown in relations between EU and Russia --though not completely because Germany is tight lipped still. France has politically imploded (with the resignation of the barely 5 month old Valls government and the outburst of a civil war within the ruling Socialist party in the midst of an economic downturn). What is obvious, is that for some key players here, serendipity is the word ! Jakaswanga, it thickens. Nato just announced that it is sending troops from 11 member states into ukraine to train their military on trident missiles. We should all just brace for a long cold one. Its now like watching a tennis match with no end in sight. What I meant by serendipity is the situation is out of putin's or nato's hands. No one knows how it will end though either thought they did at thE beginning. |
|
|
|
Post by jakaswanga on Sept 5, 2014 22:58:47 GMT 3
Jakaswanga, it thickens. Nato just announced that it is sending troops from 11 member states into ukraine to train their military on trident missiles. We should all just brace for a long cold one. Its now like watching a tennis match with no end in sight. What I meant by serendipity is the situation is out of putin's or nato's hands. No one knows how it will end though either thought they did at thE beginning. Omundu, take a look. This force should have the capability to be deployed anywhere in the world in 5 days flat, according to David Cameron, hosting the NATO summit in Newport, Wales, yesterday. STOP PRESS: MINSK, BELARUSSIA, 05-09-14. A ceasefire was reached effective 1600 local time East Ukraine. The terms seem more or less to be the ones dreamt up by Putin in a famous flight on Wednesday to Mongolia. But that is not the story really. The story should come from asking the question WHY PETRO POROSHENKO, who only swore 6 days ago that the terrorists would be evaporated, is now CAPITULATING? Something must have happened in the past week. As a former soldier, I wont say facts were created on the ground that can not be interpreted otherwise, Nay, I will say the Kiev forces suffered an irreversible defeat. Putin in his flight to Ulan Bator, was drafting a honourable way out for Poroshenko. If Poroshenko were stupid enough to be taken in by NATO's pomp in Wales where they served him a seat of honour, he would probably have missed the fight home, because the 20,000 troops of his surrounded in Donbass would have been killed --and his presidency dead on arrival. may be next summer,when the NATO force is ready, he will launch a new strike East to liberate Donbass or Novorussiya. Putin's plan, I suspect, remains retaining enough influence in Ukraine to hinder her ascension to NATO, and selling her gas infrastructure to select American companies, effectively doing a North Sudan on South Sudan pipeline situation. |
|
|
|
Post by b6k on Mar 24, 2015 4:40:49 GMT 3
NowayHaha, This is a key-note speech. And that is an understatement. Putin’s clarity is freshening, Nowayhaha, you did well to give us this: it is a historic document! Jaka, Welcome find below an interesting speech Putin Made in 2007 5 years ago before the Georgian War and Ukraine Crisis but more or less related .Enjoy it . 2007- PUTINS SPEECH EXPOSING NWO Thank you very much dear madam federal chancellor .I am truly grateful to be invited to such a representative conference that has assembled politicians , military officials , entrepreneurs and experts from more than 40 Nations .This conferences structure allows me to avoid excessive politeness and the need to speak in roundabout pleasant but empty diplomatic terms . This conferences format will allow me to say what I really think about international security problems and if my comments seem unduly polemical pointed or inexact to our colleagues then I would ask not to get angry with me. After all, this is only a conference. And I hope that after the first two or three minutes of my speech Mr Teltschik will not turn on the red light over there .(laughter) Therefore .It is well known that international security comprises much more than issues relating to military and political stability. It involves the stability of the global economy, overcoming poverty, economic security and developing a dialogue between civilizations. This universal, indivisible character of security is expressed as the basic principle that “security for one is security for all” As Franklin D. Roosevelt said during the first few days when the Second World War was breaking out “ When peace has been broken anywhere, the peace of all countries everywhere is in danger .“ These words remain topical today. Incidentally, the theme of our conference: Global crisis, Global responsibility: exemplifies this. Only tow decades ago the world was ideologically and economically divided and it was the huge strategic potential of two superpowers that ensured global security. This global stand-off pushed the sharpest economic and social problems to the margins of the international community and the worlds agenda. And, just like any war the Cold War left us with live ammunition figuratively speaking. I’m referring to ideological stereotypes, double standards and other typical aspects of Cold War block thinking. The unipolar world that had been proposed after the Cold War did not take place either.The history of humanity certainly has gone through unipolar periods and seems aspirations to world supremacy and what hasn’t happened in world history? However, what is a unipolar world? However one might embellish this term at the end of the day it refers to one type of situation, namely one centre of authority, one centre of force, one centre of decision-making. It is world in which there is one master , one sovereign and at the end of the day this is pernicious not only for all those within this system ,but also for the sovereign itself because it destroys itself from within . This certainly has nothing in common with democracy , because as you know , democracy is the power of the majority in the light of the interests and opinions of the minority .Incidentally it is being told that , Russia – we are- constantly being taught about democracy. But for some reason those who teach us do not want to learn themselves. I consider that the unipolar model is not only unacceptable but also impossible in today’s world and this is not only because if there was individual leadership in today’s – and precisely in today’s – World, then the military, political and economic resources would not suffice. What is even more important is that the model itself is flawed because at its basis there is and can be no moral foundations for modern civilization. Along with this, what is happening in today’s world and we just started to discuss this is a tentative o intrude precisely this concept into international affairs, the concept of a unipolar world. : The Concept of a unipolar world: And with which results? Unilateral and frequently illegitimate actions have not resolved any problems moreover; they have caused new human tragedies and created new centers of tension. Judge yourselves: Wars as well-as local and regional conflicts have not diminished. Mr Teltschik mentioned this very gently. And no less people perish in these conflicts – even more are dying than before, significantly more, significantly more and more. Today we are witnessing an almost uncontained hyper use of force –military force- in international relations, force that is plunging the world into an abyss of permanent conflicts. As a result we do not have sufficient strength to find a comprehensive solution to any one of these conflicts. Finding a political settlement also becomes impossible. We are seeing a greater and greater disdain for the basic principles of international law. And independent legal norms are, as a matter of fact, coming increasingly closer to ones states legal system. One state and of course , first and foremost the UNITED STATES has overstepped its national borders in every way in the economic , political , cultural and educational policies it imposes in other nations. Well , who likes this ? Who is happy about this? In international relations we increasingly see the desire to resolve a given question according to so called issues of political expediency based on the current political climate and of course this is extremely dangerous which results in the fact that no one feels safe. I want to emphasize this no one feels safe!! Because no one can feel that international law is like a stone wall that will protect them. Of course such a policy stimulates an arms race. The forces dominance inevitably encourages a number of countries to acquire weapons of mass destruction. Moreover , significantly new threats thought they were also well known before , have appeared and today threats such as terrorism have taken on a global character. Im convinced that we have reached that decisive moment when we must seriously think about the architecture of global security .An we must proceed by searching for a reasonable balance between the interests of a participants in the international dialogue. Especially since the international landscape is so varied and changes so quickly –changes in light of the dynamic development Madam Federal Chancellor Merkell already mentioned this. The combined GDP measure in purchasing power parity of countries such as INDIA AND CHINA is already grated than that of the UNITED STATES and a similar calculation with the DGP of the BRIC countries -BRAZIL , RUSSIA , INDIA AND CHINA – surpasses the cumulative GDP of the EU. And according to experts this gap will only increase in the future. There is no reason to doubt that the economic potential of the new centers of global economic growth will inevitably be converted into political influence and will strengthen multipolarity . In connection with this the role of multilateral diplomacy is significantly increasing. The need for principles such as openness, transparency and predictability in politics is uncontested and use of force should be a really exceptional measure , comparable to using the death penalty in the judicial system of certain states. However , today we are witnessing the opposite tendency, namely a situation in which countries that forbid the death penalty even for murders and other , dangerous criminals are airily participating in military operations that ate difficult to consider legitimate. And as a matter of fact, these conflicts are killing people hundreds and thousands of civilians!!! But at the same time the question arises of whether we should be indifferent and aloof to various internal conflicts inside countries, to authoritarian regimes, to tyrants and to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction? As a matter of fact , this was a;so at the centre of the question that our dear colleague Mr Lieberman asked the Federal Chancellor Merkel . If I correctly understood your question, then of course it is a serious one! Can we be indifferent observers in view of what is happening? I will try to answer your question as well: of course not. But do we have the means to counter these threats? Certainly we do. It is sufficient to look at recent history. Didn’t our country have a peaceful transition to democracy? Indeed we witnessed a peaceful transformation of the Soviet regime – a peaceful transformation! And what a regime! With what a number of weapons, including nuclear weapons! Why should we start bombing and shooting now at every available opportunity? Is it the case when without the threat of mutual destructions we do not have enough political culture? Respect for democratic values and for the law ? Im convinced that the only mechanism that can make decisions about using military force as a last resort is the Charter of the United Nations. And in connection with this, either I did not understand what our colleagues, the Italian Defense Minister just said or what he said was inexact . In any case I understood that the use of force can only be legitimate when the decision is taken by NATO, the EU , or the UN. If he really does think so, then we have different points of view. Or I didn’t hear correctly. The use of force can only be considered legitimate if the decision is sanctioned by UN and we do not need to substitute NATO or the EU for the UN. When the UN will truly unite the forces of the international community and can really react to events in various countries, when we will leave behind this disdain for international law, then the situation will be able to change. Otherwise the situation will simply result in a dead end, and the number of serious mistakes will be multiplied .Along with this , it is necessary to make sure that international law have a universal character both in the conception and application of its norms. And one must not forget that democratic political actions necessarily go along with discussion and a laborious decision making process. Dear ladies and gentlemen. The potential danger of the destabilization of international relations is connected with obvious stagnation in the disarmament issue. Russia supports the renewal of dialogue on this important question. It is important to conserve the international legal framework relating to weapons destruction and therefore ensure continuity in the process of reducing nuclear weapons. Together with the UNITED STATES we agreed to reduce our nuclear strategic missile capabilities to up to 1700-2000 nuclear warheads by 31-December-2012, Russia intends to strictly fulfill the obligations it has taken on. We hope that our partners will also act in a transparent way and we will refrain from layin aside a couple of hundred superfluous nuclear warheads for a rainy day. And if today the new American Defence Minister declares that the United States will not hide these superfluous weapons in a warehouse or as one might say under a pillow or under the blanket, then I suggest that we all rise and greet this declaration standing. It would be a very important declaration. Russia strictly adheres to and intends to further adhere to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as well as the multilateral supervision regime for missile technologies. The principles incorporated in these documents are universal ones. In connection with this I would like to recall that in the 1980s the USSR and the United States signed an agreement o destroying a whole range of small and medium range missiles but these documents do not have a universal character. Today many of the countries have these missiles, Including the Democratic Peoples Republic of Korea, the Republic of Korea, India , Iran , Pakistan and Israel. Many countries are working on these systems and plan to incorporate them as part of their weapons and only the United States and Russia bear the responsibility to not create such weapons systems. It is obvious that these conditions we must think about enduring our own security. At the same time, it is impossible to sanction the appearance of new, destabilizing high tech weapons .Needless to say it refers to measures to prevent a new area of confrontation, especially I outer space . Star wars is no longer a fantasy 0 it is a reality. In the middle of the 1980S our American partners were already able to intercept their own satellite. In Russia’s opinion, the militarization of outer space could have unpredictable consequences for the international community, and provoke nothing less than the beginning of a nuclear era. And we have come forward more than once with initiatives designed to prevent the use of weapons in outer space. Today I would like to tell you that we have prepared a project for an agreement on the prevention of deploying weapons in outer space an in the near future it will be sent to our partners as an official proposal. Let’s work on this together. Plans to expand certain elements of the ant-missile defence system to Europe cannot help but disturb us. Who need the next step of what would be ,in this case an inevitable arms race ? I deeply doubt that Europeans themselves do , Missile weapons with a range of about five to eight thousand Kilometers that really pose a threat to Europe do not exist in any of the so called problem countries. And in the near future and prospects, this will not happen and is not even foreseeable. And any hypothetical launch of , for example ,a North Korean rocket to American territory through Western Europe obviously contradicts the laws of ballistics. As we say in Russia it would be like using the right hand to reach the left ear. And here In Germany I cannot help but mention the pitiable condition of the treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. The adapted Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe was signed in 1999. It took into account a new geopolitical reality, namely the elimination of the Warsaw block .Seven ear have passed and only four states have ratified this document including the Russian Federation. NATO countries openly declared that they will not ratify this treaty, including the provisions on flank restrictions (on deploying a certain number of armed forces in the flank zones ), until Russia removed its military bases from Georgia and Moldova. Our army is leaving Georgia, even according to an accelerated schedule. We resolved the problems we had with our Georgian colleagues , as everybody knows. There are still 1500 servicemen in Moldova that are carrying out peace keeping operations and protecting warehouses with ammunition left over from Soviet times. We constantly discuss this issue with Mr Solana and he knows our position. We are ready to further work in this direction. But what is happening at the same time ? Simultaneously the so-called flexible frontline American bases appear in Bulgaria and Romania with upto 5000 me each. It turns out that NATO has put its frontline forces on our borders and we continue to strictly fulfil the treaty obligations and do not react or these actions at all . I thin it is obvious that NATO expansion does not have any relation with the modernization of the Alliance itself or with ensuring security I Europe. On the contrary , it represents a serious provocation that reduces the level of mutual trust. And we have the right to ask : against whom is this expansion intended ? And what happened to the assurances our western partners made after the dissolution of the Warsaw pact? Where are those declarations today? NATO /US/ EU don’t even remember them but I will allow myself to remind this audience what was said. I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr Woerner in Brussels on 17-May-1990 he said the following “the fact that we are ready to place a NATO army outside of the Germany territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee” where are these guarantees The stones and concrete blocks of the Berlin Wall have long been distributed as souvenirs but we should not forget that the fall of the Berlin Wall was possible thanks to a historic choice –one that was also made by our people , the people of Russia- a choice in favor of democracy , freedom, openness and a sincere partnership with all the members of the big European family. And now the are trying to impose new dividing lines and walls on us – these walls may be virtual but they are nevertheless dividing, ones that cut through our continent. And is it possible that we will once again require may years and decades as well as several generations of politicians, to dissemble and dismantle these new walls ? Dear ladies and gentlemen. We are unequivocally in favor of strengthening the regime of non-proliferation. The present international legal principles allow us to develop technologies to manufacture nuclear fuel for peaceful purposes .And many countries with all good reasons want to create their own nuclear energy as a basis for their energy independence. But we also understand that these technologies can be quickly transformed into nuclear weapons. This creates serious international tensions. The situation surrounding the Iranian nuclear programme acts as a clear example. And if the international community does not find a reasonable solution for resolving this conflict of interests, the world will continue to suffer similar destabilizing crises because there are more threshold countries than simply Iran. We both Know this. We are going to constantly fight against the threat of the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Last year Russia put forward the initiative to establish international centres for the enrichment of uranium .We are only hoping on the possibility that such centres not only be created in Russia but also in other countries where there is a legitimate basis for using civil nuclear energy . Countries that want to develop their nuclear energy could guarantee that they will receive fuel through direct participation in these centres. And the centres would of course operate under strict IAEA supervision. The latest initiatives put forward by American President George W. Bush are in conformity with the Russian proposals . I consider that USA and RUSSIA are objectively and equally interested in strengthening the regime of the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and their deployment .It is precisely our countries with leading nuclear and missile capabilities that must act as leaders in developing new stricter non –proliferation measures .Russia is ready for such work. We are engaged in consultations worth our American friends. In general we should talk about establishing a whole system of political incentives and economic stimuli whereby it would not be in states interests to establish their own capabilities in the nuclear fuel cycle but they would still have the opportunity to develop unclear energy and strengthen their energy capabilities In connection with this I shall talk about international energy cooperation n more detail. Madam Federal Chancellor also spoke about this briefly She mentioned, touched on this theme. In the energy sector Russia intends to create uniform market principles and transparent conditions for all . It is obvious that energy prices must be determined by the market instead of being the subject of political speculation, economic pressure or blackmail. We are open to cooperation Foreign companies participate in all our major energy projects, According to different estimates , up to 26& of the oil extraction in Russia –and please think about this figure – up to 26 % of the oil extraction in Russia is done by foreign capital. Try to find me a similar example where Russian business participates extensively in Key economic sectors in western countries .Such examples do not exist .There are no such examples I would also recall the parity of foreign investment in Russia and those Russia makes abroad. The parity is about fifteen to one. And here you have an obvious example of the openness and stabily of the Russian economy . Economic security is the sector in which all must adhere to uniform principles. We are ready to compete fairly. For that reason more and more opportunities are appearing in the Russian economy .Experts and our western partners are objectively evaluating these changes. As such , Russia’s OECD sovereign credit rating improved and Russia passed from the fourth to the third group. And today in Munich I would like to use this occasion to thank our German colleagues for their help in the above decision. Further as you know the process of Russia joining the WTO has reached its final stages .I would point out that during long difficult talks we heard words about freedom of speech , free trade and equal possibilities more than once but, for some reason , exclusively in reference to Russian market .And there is still one more important theme that directly affects global security. Today many talk about the struggle against poverty. What is actually happening in this sphere ? On the one hand , financial resources are allocated for programmes to help the Worlds poorest countries and a times substantial financial resources . But to be honest and many here also know this-linked with the development of that same donor country’s companies and on the other hand developed countries simultaneously keep their agricultural subsidies and limit some countries access to high-tech products . And lets say things as they are one hand distributes charitable help and the other hand not only preserves economic backwardness but also reaps the profits thereof .The increasing social tension in depressed regions inevitably results In the growth of Radicalism, extremism , feeds terrorism and local conflicts. And if all this happens in , shall we say, where there is increasingly the sense that the world at large is unfair then there is the risk of global destabilization . It is obvious that the worlds leading countries should see this threat and that they should therefore build a more democratic fairer system of global economic relations, a system that would give everyone the chance and possibility to develop Dear ladies and Gentlemen speaking at the conference on Security policy, it is imposible not to mention the activities of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). As is well known this organization was created to examine all I shall emphasize this all aspects of security : military political economic , humanitarian and especially , the relations between these spheres what do we happening today we see that this balance is clearly destroyed .People are trying to transform the OSCE into a vulgar instrument designed to promote the foreign policy interests of one or a group of countries .And this task is also being accomplished by the OSCES bureaucratic apparatus which is absolutely not connected with the state founders in any way . Decision making procedures and the involvement of so called non governmental organizations are tailored for this task. These organizations are formally independent but they are purposefully financed and therefore under control. According to the founding documents in the humanitarian sphere the OSCE is designed to assist country members in observing international human rights norms at their request. This is an important task. We support this. But this does not mean interfering in the internal affairs of other countries, and especially not imposing a regime that determines how these states should live and develop. It is obvious that such interferences do promote the development of democratic states at all. On the contrary it makes them dependent and as a consequence, politically and economically unstable. We expect that the OSCE be guided by its primary tasks and build relations with sovereign states based on respect trust and transparency. Dear ladies and gentlemen In conclusion I would like to note the following. We very often – and personally, I very often –hear appeals by our partners, including our European partners, to the effect that Russia should play an increasingly active role in World affairs . In connection wit this I would allow myself to make one small remark. It is hardly necessary to incite us to do so . Russia is a country with a history that spans more that a thousand years and has practically always used the privilege to carry out an independent foreign policy. We are not going to change this tradition today. At the same time, are well aware of how the world has changed and we have a realistic sense of our own opportunities and potential. And of course we would like to interact with also independent and responsible partners with whom we could work together in constructing a fair and democratic world order that would ensure security and prosperity not only for a select few but for all. Thank you for your attention. Nowayhaha, had shared Putin's 2007 speech that's alluded to in OO's new Putin thread last year.... |
|
!