Putin vs Obama

Today, 16 February 2015, it is reported that NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said in an interview to Russia’s Kommersant newspaper,

"The decision to arm Ukraine will be taken by NATO members themselves. By the way, arming a legitimate government is different from arming anti-government forces. The 28 member states have their own different weapons systems, they will decide whether or not to provide weapons to Ukraine,” he noted. (my emphasis)

Furthermore that,

“Our intelligence means provide documentary data of Russia’s military presence in eastern Ukraine. We see such information in the reports of independent sources and journalists. Moreover, NGOs provide information about Russian soldiers died in Ukraine”, he said." (nato chief_decision_to_supply_arms_to_ukraine : 16 February 2015) (my emphasis)

Ian Bond

Ian Bond, Director of foreign policy at the Centre for European Reform, has posted a very insightful analysis entitled ,"Russia's war in Ukraine: Is Minsk the end, or just the start?" (February 15, 2015)
 
 His article highlights the following critical and salient points:

1.  There is no doubt who gained most from the deal reached in Minsk on February 12th to end the conflict in Ukraine: Russian President Vladimir Putin.
2.  To monitor the ceasefire and withdrawal of weapons, the OSCE [in Ukraine] will have (at least initially) its current team of 250 unarmed monitors and one drone to cover an area of more than 20,000 square kilometres. By comparison, the UN peacekeeping force on the Israel-Lebanon border, UNIFIL, has 10,000 multinational troops to cover an area of under 1,000 square kilometres ...
3. Putin wants to deprive Ukraine of the benefits of the DCFTA (Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area). Russian proposals to exclude whole categories of EU goods from tariff reductions, in order to keep Russian goods competitive on the Ukrainian market ....
4. Despite Russia’s serious economic woes, President Vladimir Putin has once again exploited Western divisions and disguised his own vulnerability.
5. As a last resort, the EU could block Russia from SWIFT, the international financial transfer system, thereby inflicting considerable damage on Russia’s economy. But short of that drastic step, there are many senior Russians, including Putin himself, with financial interests in the West which have yet to be targeted.
6. Merkel was right to say at the Munich Security Conference on February 7th that a policy of forcibly altering borders in Europe should have no place in the 21st century, and that Russia’s actions in Ukraine had violated international law. It is a pity that the Minsk agreement rewards such behaviour. (my emphasis throughout)

As the old saying goes, "Putin is laughing all the way to the bank"

This 'ceasefire' can already be relegated to the dustbin of history since it now transpires that but ONE hour ago, (current time: 11.15 BST 16 Feb., 2015),

"Russia is trying to push through the UN Security Council a resolution that in essence replace the Minsk agreements, Press AV journalist Andrei Vasilyev has told Ukrainian television’s channel Hromadske.tv." (UNIAN Information Agency : 16.02.2015)

Vitaly Churkin : Russian UN Representative

"According to Vasilyev, Russia is trying to place all responsibility for the peace process only on Ukraine.
The Russian version of the resolution also says that Ukraine should be the first side to withdraw its troops 50 kilometers back from the front line after the ceasefire.
In addition, Moscow also wants to absolve itself of promises made in Minsk and demands the right to send its so-called humanitarian convoys into Ukraine, Vasilyev said." (ibid UNIAN)


Whilst this resolution can easily be blocked by the US or Great Britain, nonetheless it gives Putin's proxies and his Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine the basis of an argument for bombing Debaltseve, in flagrant violation of the current 'ceasefire'.

This is evidenced by the fact that,

"Despite the current cease-fire, Debaltseve still remains in contention as rebels insist the town should automatically revert to their control as it has been encircled by their fighters." (Petr Josek (51 minutes age) : Associated Press : 16.02.2015)

In retrospect, therefore, it can be seen that Putin was simply "going through the motions" by attending the recent Minsk meeting between himself, Hollande, Merkel, and Poroshenko. 

He piously presented the agreed upon resolutions at a press conference immediately afterwards, only to trample all over them once he had reached the comfort, security, and safety, of the Kremlin.

Putin knows that he has de-fanged the EU, given that Angela Merkel and Francois Hollande have been placed in the driving seat of trying to negotiate a 'diplomatic' solution to this war between Ukraine and Russia, whilst his admirer, the 'fragrant' Mogherini, is quietly pushing for the EU sanctions against Russia to be removed.

          Angela Merkel              Francois Hollande            Federica Mogherini

With a very few exceptions, even the remarks of  NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg that,

"The decision to arm Ukraine will be taken by NATO members themselves. By the way, arming a legitimate government is different from arming anti-government forces. ”

will fall on many deaf ears in the EU.

As the hours tick by, and the 'ceasefire' continues to crumble, yet again is the burden of supplying Ukraine with defensive arms falling exclusively on the shoulders of President Obama. But will he, in light of the rapidly deteriorating 'ceasefire' in eastern Ukraine,  implement  Sec. 6 of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act this week?

"The President is authorized to provide defense articles, defense services, and training to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop- operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment, pursuant to the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.), and other relevant provisions of law." (https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/senate-bill/2828/text)

(to be continued)