Civil War in Ukraine: Western Empire vs Russia

[Redrock12]

Good analysis, JFK. I think the Treaty of Westphalia had the key principles for the interests of all involved to be served in the interest of peace and stability. And I agree that Putin is trying to reestablish such principles.

Agreed. Excellent comparative analysis with the Treaty of Westphalia.

 

[SeekinTruth]

More good info from saker's blog:

http://thesaker.is/ukraine-sitrep-may-15th-2015-by-raskolnikova/

Good translated analysis:
http://thesaker.is/the-usa-wants-from-russia-the-impossible/

Latest SouthFront Videos:
http://thesaker.is/14-05-2015-ukraine-crisis-news-latest-news-of-ukraine-donbass-russia-kiev-zaporizha-usa/

http://thesaker.is/15-05-2015-ukraine-crisis-news-war-in-ukraine-donetsk-kiev-europe-russia/

 

[SeekinTruth]

Good SITREP:
http://thesaker.is/ukraine-sitrep-may-16th-by-duff/

 

[griffin]

Something about the confrontation in Ukraine changed in the last week. After US Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, the US changed its stance remarkably.

The events of the past few days, as reported by The Saker, Fort Russ and even the Western media, suggest that Putin presented the US with a choice - either back off in Ukraine or face war in Europe.

We don't know what was said, of course, but I'm willing to guess that Putin put his foot down, made it crystal clear to Kerry that any successful aggression by Kiev against Novorussian armed forces would lead to intervention by Russia, and that escalation by US forces would result in a (very brief) hot war.

The US doesn't have significant armed forces in Europe. The big bases it has there are just potential targets, at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, Aviano in Italy, and Rheinmain in Germany. Given that, the real question for the US then would be, is it really ready to start WWIII for Ukraine? My guess is that it isn't.

 

[Altair]

Something about the confrontation in Ukraine changed in the last week. After US Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, the US changed its stance remarkably.

The events of the past few days, as reported by The Saker, Fort Russ and even the Western media, suggest that Putin presented the US with a choice - either back off in Ukraine or face war in Europe.

We don't know what was said, of course, but I'm willing to guess that Putin put his foot down, made it crystal clear to Kerry that any successful aggression by Kiev against Novorussian armed forces would lead to intervention by Russia, and that escalation by US forces would result in a (very brief) hot war.

The US doesn't have significant armed forces in Europe. The big bases it has there are just potential targets, at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, Aviano in Italy, and Rheinmain in Germany. Given that, the real question for the US then would be, is it really ready to start WWIII for Ukraine? My guess is that it isn't.

I hope you're right. For me it seems that US already shifted their focus to another region in Europe - Makedonia due to no progress in the Eastern Ukraine and where they have more influence strategically.

 

[Anthony]

Something about the confrontation in Ukraine changed in the last week. After US Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, the US changed its stance remarkably.

The events of the past few days, as reported by The Saker, Fort Russ and even the Western media, suggest that Putin presented the US with a choice - either back off in Ukraine or face war in Europe.

We don't know what was said, of course, but I'm willing to guess that Putin put his foot down, made it crystal clear to Kerry that any successful aggression by Kiev against Novorussian armed forces would lead to intervention by Russia, and that escalation by US forces would result in a (very brief) hot war.

The US doesn't have significant armed forces in Europe. The big bases it has there are just potential targets, at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, Aviano in Italy, and Rheinmain in Germany. Given that, the real question for the US then would be, is it really ready to start WWIII for Ukraine? My guess is that it isn't.

This comes a few days after Kerry's visit.

https://www.stratfor.com/situation-report/us-bill-would-provide-300-million-military-aid-ukraine

U.S.: Bill Would Provide $300 Million In Military Aid To Ukraine

The U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee completed and approved the draft National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2016, allocating $300 million in military assistance to Ukraine, Tass reported May 15. The draft also designates $600 million to train Syrian rebels. It is expected to meet opposition in Congress.

http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2015/05/15/us-senators-plan-provide-300-mln-military-aid-ukraine.html

The US Senate Armed Services Committee on Thursday completed the markup of National Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 2016 that starts on October 1.

The bill envisages $612 billion funding for the Department of Defense and the national security programs of the Department of Energy. It authorizes providing $300 million funding for military assistance to Ukraine and $600 million for training Syria’s opposition.

The committee said in a press release that the US will "assist Ukrainian security forces in defending against further aggression, including authorizing counter-battery radars and lethal assistance such as anti-tank weapons."

"The bill authorizes the President to provide lethal assistance to Ukraine," the statement reads.

In late April, the US House Armed Services Committee passed a bill envisaging $200 million for providing Ukraine with weapons and training its army.

 

[thorbiorn]

Something about the confrontation in Ukraine changed in the last week. After US Secretary of State John Kerry met with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Sochi, the US changed its stance remarkably.

The events of the past few days, as reported by The Saker, Fort Russ and even the Western media, suggest that Putin presented the US with a choice - either back off in Ukraine or face war in Europe.

We don't know what was said, of course, but I'm willing to guess that Putin put his foot down, made it crystal clear to Kerry that any successful aggression by Kiev against Novorussian armed forces would lead to intervention by Russia, and that escalation by US forces would result in a (very brief) hot war.

The US doesn't have significant armed forces in Europe. The big bases it has there are just potential targets, at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, Aviano in Italy, and Rheinmain in Germany. Given that, the real question for the US then would be, is it really ready to start WWIII for Ukraine? My guess is that it isn't.

I hope you're right. For me it seems that US already shifted their focus to another region in Europe - Makedonia due to no progress in the Eastern Ukraine and where they have more influence strategically.

If it is true that they are withdrawing, are we then witnessing a replay of history, not in all details, but a repetition of the pattern? Retreat of the West from the East? And what will then happen in Ukraine? If the area of Ukraine has to recover, then what about the conflicts among the people, what about the Banderites?

Today after watching a Russian documentary "Reflection. Film 4. Bandera. War without rules." actually "Отражение. Фильм 4. Бандеровцы. Война без правил." I learned that after the battle with the Nazi forces, during WW 2, there followed a conflict with the Bandera supporters in Western Ukraine, well I kind of knew that, but the size of it!? At the end of the film they give numbers. The Sovjet forces arrested 200.000 Banderites, of these 55.000 were liquidated, and during the time of war with the Banderites, which lasted until the early 1950ies 50.000 Red Army soldiers died and 60.000 civilians were liquidated by the Banderites, that is 165.000 people! The link to the exact place in the film where the numbers appear is: http://my.mail.ru/mail/artem.korukin/video/7544/596.html

There are other scenes in the film that are interesting. For instance, one will find sequences in the film, taken in 1941-42 of the tearing down of Lenin statues etc. Well we have seen that too after the Maidan event in Kiev.

Also, when Hitlers army came to Western Ukraine, they were lauded as liberators, but after a lot of apparenlty mutual celebrations their "freedom" was withdrawn after only 17 days and put under central Nazi! After that some, many?, of the Ukrainian nationalists joined the Nazis in some function, and others the resistance against the German led forces.

Compare that to the time around the Maidan and before: all the celebration, the wishes for EU membership etc. What Ukraine has now is IMF liberalisation and privatisation schemes, many foreign ministers and officials in power, promises of an election to join NATO but no actions, talks about EU but not much action, a very corrupt governement that exerts a lot of pressure on its people and a conflict that has cost a great number of dead, wounded and mutilated people.

The documentary is from 2010 and the title "Reflection", is helpful, although one can ask if reflecting on the history and learning from it, is able to save people from suffering. It seems some learning has to be done the hard way. What awaits the Western US led forces and the countries that supported them is to be seen.

 

[griffin]

If it is true that they are withdrawing, are we then witnessing a replay of history, not in all details, but a repetition of the pattern? Retreat of the West from the East? And what will then happen in Ukraine? If the area of Ukraine has to recover, then what about the conflicts among the people, what about the Banderites?

"History doesn't repeat itself, but it does rhyme." - Mark Twain

Despite what Poroshenko has recently said about honoring the Minsk 2 agreement, and all of the other absurd diplomatic kabuki theatre suggesting that Ukraine will be forced somehow to abandon its war against Novorussia, it remains hard to believe that there won't be another round of extremely violent armed conflict in Ukraine.

The cancer of fascism has gained a foothold in Kiev, and like cancer it has metastatized with Polish neo-Nazi berserkers, and Ukrainian Banderite thugs from Lvov, into other regions of the country. As WWII and its aftermath showed, and you have astutely noticed, fascism must be excised like cancer.

 

[Niall]

The events of the past few days, as reported by The Saker, Fort Russ and even the Western media, suggest that Putin presented the US with a choice - either back off in Ukraine or face war in Europe.

I doubt Putin made any such ultimatum. The US may be waning but it's still the undisputed global military superpower.

We don't know what was said, of course, but I'm willing to guess that Putin put his foot down, made it crystal clear to Kerry that any successful aggression by Kiev against Novorussian armed forces would lead to intervention by Russia, and that escalation by US forces would result in a (very brief) hot war.

I thought that overt Russian intervention would have made it game, set and match for NATO? That the idea was to draw exactly that reaction from Russia? But now it's something Putin can threaten Kerry with?

The US doesn't have significant armed forces in Europe. The big bases it has there are just potential targets, at Camp Bondsteel in Kosovo, Aviano in Italy, and Rheinmain in Germany. Given that, the real question for the US then would be, is it really ready to start WWIII for Ukraine? My guess is that it isn't.

Exactly, the resources the US and 'friends' are throwing at this are nominal, nowhere near enough for any kind of full-scale war.

The Saker, Fort Russ et al are still analyzing this from that starting assumption: that WW3 - involving explicit, overt confrontation between the US and Russia - is inevitable, or even on the cards at all.

We're not in that era anymore. It's 'managed conflict', drone warfare and proxy armies, from here on out. They will only 'go massive' (carpet-bomb the place) if they are certain that the enemy target has no means of effective response.

I don't think they will ever risk retaliation from Russia. Likewise, Russia has a good idea of the limits it can push in terms of foreign intervention. Georgia 2008 was probably as 'hot' as it will get, at least until some kind of global game-changer that pre-occupies the Western media.

THIS is more like the kind of either/or Russia can give the US, for now:

Russia stops transit of NATO military cargo to Afghanistan

Russian PM Dmitry Medvedev has revoked a decree that allowed delivery of NATO military equipment to Afghanistan through Russian territory.

According to the official document, signed by Medvedev and published on Monday, all previous decisions on NATO cargo transit to Afghanistan have now been revoked. This includes an act allowing delivery of military hardware and equipment via rail, motor vehicles, or through Russian airspace.

 

[SeekinTruth]

The denial of NATO cargo transit is big. It's going to be interesting to see what happens next.

Another SITREP:
http://thesaker.is/ukraine-sitrep-may-18th-by-duff/

 

[Jeremy F Kreuz]

The denial of NATO cargo transit is big. It's going to be interesting to see what happens next.

indeed - see also: America's new Russian trap in Afghanistan - http://fortruss.blogspot.ru/2015/05/americas-new-russian-trap-in-afghanistan.html

 

[Joe]

The Saker, Fort Russ et al are still analyzing this from that starting assumption: that WW3 - involving explicit, overt confrontation between the US and Russia - is inevitable, or even on the cards at all.

Exactly. It's not on the cards and, IMO, never was. US snuggling up to Iran, which started a couple of years ago, is an attempt to replace Russian gas to Europe with Iranian gas. It's all "politics" and "business" in this "war" and only covert proxy fighting. Ignore the Saker and others who hystericize about WW3.

 

[Yozilla]

It's all about "keeping the tension". i guess, so from that angle WW3 fans are doing good job. If bosses are aware of comet cluster, which they are to "cover" with all that ICBM rockets&co - they must have general populace conditioned for that purpose, i suppose. It is interestin' to observe ramped up nuclear rattling of late: Trident issue, Saudis wanna purchase bad ole nukes from Pakistan - and it's all LEAKED
Lucky are we to know about that!

y

 

[whitecoast]

It's all about "keeping the tension". i guess, so from that angle WW3 fans are doing good job. If bosses are aware of comet cluster, which they are to "cover" with all that ICBM rockets&co - they must have general populace conditioned for that purpose, i suppose. It is interestin' to observe ramped up nuclear rattling of late: Trident issue, Saudis wanna purchase bad ole nukes from Pakistan - and it's all LEAKED
Lucky are we to know about that!

y

To disguise celestial intentions? I truly don't know. They really should rename it the New World Disorder, since I cannot see a positive end to all this managed chaos and pot-stirring... :unsure:

 

[Voyageur]

On a diplomatic note, it seems the ex Prime Minister of Canada, Jean Chretien, met with Putin April 30th in Novo-Ogaryovo, just outside Moscow.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jean-chretien-invited-putin-to-send-emissary-to-ex-leaders-meeting-next-month-1.3079374

So here are a few snips of this article:

Former prime minister Jean Chrétien tried at a meeting last month to persuade Russian President Vladimir Putin to send a representative to a meeting of former world leaders where the crisis in Ukraine will be on the agenda.

Chrétien is co-chair of the InterAction Council, a global group of ex-presidents and prime ministers. The council's next meeting will take place in Newport, Wales the first week of June and the ongoing crisis in Russia-Ukraine is up for discussion.

Now "ex-presidents and prime ministers" includes some real scoundrels:

...40 former heads of state or government, including former U.S. president Bill Clinton and former British prime minister John Major.

Which leaves out mentioning others, such as Blair and his gang.

Government tight-lipped about meeting

The April 30 meeting between Chrétien and Putin took place at a residence of the Russian president in the Novo-Ogaryovo estate near Moscow.
A representative at the Russian Embassy in Ottawa said the meeting was a positive one.

"During the meeting Mr. Chrétien and Mr. Putin exchanged views on international issues. The meeting was held in a very warm atmosphere and constructive manner," said Kirill Kalinin, second secretary at the Russian Embassy.

The Canadian government refuses to answer any questions about the meeting or whether anyone from the Conservative government has spoken with Chrétien.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office last week repeated a statement made immediately after the April meeting.

"Mr. Chrétien was clearly not representing the government of Canada at this meeting. Our government's position on the Putin regime is clear," said spokeswoman Catherine Loubier. The Harper government has said repeatedly its message to Putin is to get out of Ukraine.

Other topics on the council's June agenda include the economy and the Middle East.

Given Kerry's recent travels to Moscow, perhaps, Harper too is feeling the heat and using the Canadian contingent of ex prime ministers to extend backroom diplomacy. He of course could never say so directly - being the jerk that he is.

Anyway, there seems a great many moves behind the scenes these days outside the press.

Interesting times.