Putin and the emerging truth ... The Valdai Club meeting

"The Russian News and Information Agency RIA Novosti, in association with The Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, the journals Russia Profile and Russia in Global Politics, and the newspaper The Moscow News, has, for many years, hosted the Valdai International Discussion Club meeting.
The 10 year-old Valdai Club aims to create an international expert forum where key international Russia specialists can receive authoritative, reliable information about the growth and development of our country and its society from leading members of the Russian elite."

The Valdai Club can be viewed as Putin's attemp at setting up the Russian equivalent of the Council on Foreign Relations, or the Royal Institute of International Affairs, or the Bilderberg Club, or any of the renowned political discussion clubs/societies that can be found in the west.

At its most recent meeting (24 October 2014) in Sochi, Putin rather dropped a bombshell on the international community in response to a question asked by Piotr Dutkiewicz about Crimea . Putin responed in part as follows:

"Yanukovych called me and said he would like us to meet to talk it over. I agreed. Eventually we agreed to meet in Rostov because it was closer and he did not want to go too far. I was ready to fly to Rostov. However, it turned out he could not go even there. They were beginning to use force against him already, holding him at gunpoint. They were not quite sure where to go.

I will not conceal it; we helped him move to Crimea, where he stayed for a few days. That was when Crimea was still part of Ukraine. However, the situation in Kiev was developing very rapidly and violently, we know what happened, though the broad public may not know – people were killed, they were burned alive there. They came into the office of the Party of Regions, seized the technical workers and killed them, burned them alive in the basement. Under those circumstances, there was no way he could return to Kiev. Everybody forgot about the agreements with the opposition signed by foreign ministers and about our telephone conversations. Yes, I will tell you frankly that he asked us to help him get Russia, which we did. That was all." (my emphasis)

Why, only now, is Putin releasing the following facts:

• Yanukovich was allegedly being held at gunpoint in Kiev
• Yanukovich was helped by him to escape to Crimea
• a massacre allegedly occurred at the office of the Party of Regions in Kiev at which people were burned alive
• Putin knows for certain that this happened
• the broad public may not know about this massacre

More importantly, how could this alleged massacre at the offices of the Party of Regions have been kept secret for so long? Why did the Putin propaganda machine itself keep silent about this massacre? Surely this knowledge about a massacre would have been a huge political coup for Putin, so why the silence? Yet his propaganda machine invented a story about a baby being crucified that was proved to be false.

If this was not bad enough, let's look at what Putin had to say about the US and its allies.

"In a situation where you had domination by one country [ the US] and its allies [the EU], or its satellites rather, the search for global solutions often turned into an attempt to impose their own universal recipes. This group’s ambitions grew so big that they started presenting the policies they put together in their corridors of power as the view of the entire international community. But this is not the case.

The very notion of ‘national sovereignty’ became a relative value for most countries. In essence, what was being proposed was the formula: the greater the loyalty towards the world’s sole power centre, the greater this or that ruling regime’s legitimacy." (my emphasis)

What is rather chilling about Putin saying that, "The very notion of ‘national sovereignty’ became a relative value for most countries", is that he has executed this perverse belief  himself by simply taking over Crimea and actively helping in the creation of contrived 'Russian enclaves' in eastern Ukraine, over the dead bodies of thousands of Ukrainian and Russian people.

But we have been here before with Putin.

"Putin has shown by his actions against the Russian people in 1999, and now (2014) in Ukraine, that he can cock a snook at the West because the West does not want to precipitate a fighting war with the current Russian leader. So Putin surrounds Ukraine with a readied army and blatantly foments and stokes dangerous unrest, especially in Eastern Ukraine. After all, if he could cynically kill Russian men, women, and children to bolster his image, why not dismember Ukraine to do exactly the same, irrespective of the consequences?"

Why are so many western and EU politicians, academics and apologists  for Putin, especially so many neo-Nazi and right-wing European organizations, so willing to shut their mouth, eyes, and ears to the evil that Putin is unleashing upon Ukraine? (cf. also Anton Shekovtsov and Alina Polyakova)

But the really crucial question is,"Will the Russian public now hear about Putin 'saving' Yanukovich and, more importantly, how will all of this square with Putin not telling them about that alleged massacre in Kiev, when Yanukovich supportes were allegedly 'burnt' to death?

Let us for a moment cast our minds back to what Zhirinovsky said.

"America is everywhere, the West is everywhere, Nato is everywhere. Everything is organised against Russia," the veteran Russian nationalist MP Vladimir Zhirinovsky railed during a talk show on Channel One, Russia's most popular TV station."

Today (26 October 2014) we have elections in Ukraine. Let us see what happens before we continue ....

(to be continued)

Putin, the Russian media, and conspiracies

According to David Hoffman (Jan 30 2000), Putin's brief as a KGB agent in Dresden during the last half of the 1980's was,

"to [look] for East Germans who had a plausible reason to travel abroad, such as professors, journalists, scientists, and technicians, for whom there were 'acceptable' legends, or cover stories ..... that they could use to link up with other spies permanently stationed in the West. According to German intelligence specialists who described Putin's task, the goal was stealing western technology or NATO secrets ..."

Acting Russian President Putin speaks to the media (Jan 13 2000) at St. Petersburg University

Putin is thus steeped in using 'cover' stories as a tool of  'deception' to conceal his real goals.

But how do you create a public cover story that you can:

1. actively control as a tool of deception,
2. actively change as circumstances dictate,
3. actively steer in the direction of your ultimate goal,
4. actively re-inforce in the minds of the public upon whom your status and power rests,
5. actively re-inforce in the minds of your adversaries?

In the case of Ukraine; as the events since the invasion of Crimea and the ongoing war in eastern Ukraine have unfolded, Putin has had to:

1. transform his cover story about simply protecting the language and cultural rights of those Russians living in Crimea and eastern Ukraine, as evidenced in particular by his focussing on his Minsk Protocol.
2. ramp up his his 'cover story' to white heat in the minds of the Russian people and the global public by pouring untold millions into his local and global (RT) propaganda machines,
3. sow the seeds of dissention amongst his EU and US adversaries in particular,
4. ensure that the Russian people are 'protected' from gaining access to western versions of his actions by e.g. controlling their access to western media and, most important of all,
5. sow the seeds of western 'conspiracies' against Russia

"America is everywhere, the West is everywhere, Nato is everywhere. Everything is organised against Russia," ( 25 September 2014) the veteran Russian nationalist MP Vladimir Zhirinovsky railed during a talk show on Channel One, Russia's most popular TV station."

Strangely enough, the president of Belarus, Lukashenko, has carried Putin's argument about Novorossiya , which Putin himself used to invade and annex Crimea, to its logical conclusion.

Let us now try to imagine that this argument of Lukashenko is aired on prime-time Russian TV. How will the Russian people react? Will, for example, Khodorkovsky, still agree with the annexation of Crimea by Putin?

M.B. Khordorkovsky

As Gary Kasparov  argues, "When commenting on the scandalous statements made by Alexey Navalny and Mikhail Khodorkovsky that they would not return Crimea to Ukraine, Kasparov emphasized that the conclusion an external observer could reach after this consists of the fact that there is no essential alternative to Putin in Russia." (Glavred)

Alexey Navalny

What is dis-heartening about Kasparov's statement is that there really does seem to be no alternative to Putin. Furthermore, the Russian people are been fed on a diet of  'conspiracy' theories that blames the West for everything that is going wrong in Russia. Even the pulpits are in lock-step with Putin.

(to be continued)

Putin in Milan, and the falling price of oil

On 16th October, ABC News reported that,

"Russian President Vladimir Putin's diplomatic blitz on Ukraine got off to a rocky start Thursday when he kept German Chancellor Angela Merkel waiting for a meeting then showed up in the middle of a dinner with European and Asian leaders."

That initial meeting between Putin and Merkel was cancelled, but then it transpires that the two had a meeting deep into the night over the crisis in Ukraine.

Putin and Merkel in Milan on Thursday 16 October 2014

Merkel had earlier that day met with Poroshenko.

Merkel and Poroshenko in Italy

The next day (Friday 17 October) Putin met with Poroshenko for a breakfast meeting, and they were " joined by some EU leaders, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Prime Minister David Cameron of Britain, French President Francois Hollande and Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi."

Putin, Poroshenko, and others meeting in Milan

But all was for naught. The general consensus is that at this meeting,"[a] political solution to the conflict in Ukraine has not yet been found... President of the European Council Herman Van Rompuy commented on the talks and urged both Russia and Ukraine to follow through on the peace agreement reached in Minsk, Belarus at the beginning of September.", as reported by Putin's propaganda machine, RT.

Yet again Putin's supporters at that meeting i.e. Merkel, Renzi and Van Rompuy are, like Putin, pushing his agenda that has come to be known as the Minsk Agreement. As I stated on 18th September,

"Key points of this Minsk memorandum include:

• To pull heavy weaponry 15km by each side from the line of contact, creating a 30km security zone
• To ban offensive operations
• To ban flights by combat aircraft over the security zone
• To set up an OSCE monitoring mission
• To withdraw all foreign mercenaries from the conflict zone

Points 2 and 5 are of particular interest. Does it refer to BOTH Russia AND Ukraine? Similarly, if Donetsk and Luhansk are given self-rule, will Ukrainian soldiers also be regarded as "foreign mercenaries" by these entities? Notice that none of these points even mention having a buffer zone along the border between Russia and Ukraine. In effect, the current areas controlled by Russia's proxies in Donetsk and Luhansk will become an integral part of Russia."

Let us also be reminded of who attended this Minsk meeting:

• Swiss diplomat and OSCE representative Heidi Tagliavini
• Former president of Ukraine and Ukrainian representative Leonid Kuchma
• Russian Ambassador to Ukraine and Russian representative Mikhail Zurabov
• Russia's proxies in Eastern Ukraine DPR and LPR leaders Aleksandr Zakharchenko and Ihor Plotnytskiv

No current EU representative, nor the current Ukrainian President, nor the current Ukrainian Prime Minister attended this meeting.

With the exception of Heidi Tagliavini (a Swiss diplomat), this was a meeting rubber-stamping Putin's agenda and attended by those who feared him (Kuchma), depended on his patronage (Mikhail Zurabov), and his Russian criminal cohorts disguised as 'leaders' in eastern Ukraine (Zakharchenko and Plotyntskiv).

Now it only remains to be seen what falls out from that "deep into the night" meeting betweeen Merkel and Putin (16 into 17 October 2014). Let us also not forget that, "... on 31st July 2014, it emerged that Putin and Merkel had secret talks that conceded Crimea to Russia in exchange for ending the war between Ukraine and Russia. And yet the war in eastern Ukraine continues, (October 18 2014) notwithstanding Putin's Minsk Agenda.

Whilst all these meetings were happening in Milan, Putin had something of a headache to contend with. On the same day (17 October) that he met all those leaders for a "breakfast" meeting, the price of oil continued on its downward spiral. Given the 'one trick' energy-exporting nature of Russia's economy, Putin was somewhat apocalyptic about the effects that this fall in the price of oil could have on the world economy. As Tomas Hirst points out,

"Vladimir Putin said Friday that the global economy would collapse if the oil price was allowed to remain at around $80 a barrel for too long.
At a press conference following talks on the Ukrainian crisis in Milan, Italy the Russian president warned that prices as low as $80 a barrel would cause US oil production to crash as well as putting pressure on the rest of the global economy."

Jake Rudnitsky and Henry Meyer  have put it even more succinctly. 

" The decline in oil prices may be depriving Russian President Vladimir Putin of his biggest ally..."

 

 Even more disconcerting, as Pavel Koshin points out,

".. if oil prices drop to $87 per barrel and the dollar-ruble exchange rate trades as high as 40 in 2015. In such a scenario, Russia would have to use money from its Reserve Fund, which comprises about $90 billion, he announced at the Oct. 13 session of the State Duma, the lower chamber of the Russian parliament.

All of these recent developments have spurred the growth of numerous conspiracy theories among the Russian elites and led to a certain amount of consternation. They have also made Russian policymakers reassess their economic policy."

Russia, already awash with 'conspiracy' theories about the war they are having with Ukraine, now has a 'new' conspiracy actor on the stage viz. the price of oil. Just how many 'conspiracy' theories can the Kremlin invent without becoming a hostage to its own conspiracies? If the myth that there is no Russian soldiers actively engaging in a war in eastern Ukraine has taken such a powerful hold on the mind of the ordinary Russian citizen, what will the Kremlin myth that Obama and Saudi Arabia are trying to bring Russia to its knees by forcing the oil price to collapse do to the minds of the Russian people?

(to be continued)

Putin, the Church, and Ukraine

On the 9th June 2014, I wrote that,

"If Patriarch Kirill could raise Putin's status to sainthood, as Pope Francis recently did with John Paul II, he would do so gladly, and with all the pomp and splendour at his command. And if, in the process, the Russian people are once again reduced to serfdom, then so be it. Was it not during the era of the Czars, when the vast majority of Russians were serfs, that the Russian Orthodox Church was at its zenith?
Ironically, the utter failure of the Bolsheviks to excise the power of the Russian Orthodox Church from the heart of the Russian people has given Putin the perfect vehicle with which to emulate St. George, with the active help and support of Patriarch Kirill. One can only wonder at what is currently being disseminated amongst the people of Russia by the footsoldiers of the Russian Orthodox Church. The deafening silence of the Russian pulpits about the evil been done by Putin in Ukraine has, after all, its historical counterpart in Germany under Hitler. There is, truly, nothing new under the sun."

And now (6 Oct. 2014) it is emerging that the " .. role that Kirill's resurgent church played in the release of the [OSCE] monitors sheds light on how a close cooperation between the state and the church in Russia is now playing out in Ukraine.

What the Russian Orthodox Church (ROC) presents as its humanitarian mission in east Ukraine, Western Diplomats see as a pattern of cooperation in which the church is acting as a "soft power" ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin" (Gabriella Baczynska and Tom Henegan) (see also Forbes)

It is well know that "[i]n the early 1990s and later on, Kirill was accused of having links to the KGB during much of the Soviet period, as were many members of the Russian Orthodox Church hierarchy, and of pursuing the state's interests before those of the Church. His alleged KGB agent's codename was "Mikhailov". (Tony Halpin)

Furthermore, "Kirill [was accused] of profiteering and abuse of the privilege of duty-free importation of cigarettes granted to the Church in the mid-1990s and dubbed him "Tobacco Metropolitan". The Department for External Church Relations was alleged to have acted as the largest supplier of foreign cigarettes in Russia. Kirill’s personal wealth was estimated to be $1.5 billion by sociologist Nikolai Mitrokhin in 2004, and at $4 billion by The Moscow News in 2006. However, Nathaniel Davis noted that "...There is no evidence that Metropolitan Kirill has actually embezzled funds. What is more likely is that profits from the importation of tobacco and cigarettes have been used for urgent, pressing Church expenses. The duty-free importation of cigarettes ended in 1997".(Wikipedia) and (Forbes)

Kirill in 1981

Like Putin, Patriarch Kirill also has expensive tastes in watches. Lest this be made public, a picture of him wearing a $30,000 Breguet watch was doctored so that the watch vanished from his wrist and was not on public view. However, sometimes things do go awry, as the pictures below goes to prove. They forgot to 'doctor' the reflection of the watch on the table.

Now you see it (un-doctored)                                          Now you don't (doctored)

The Kyiv Patriarchate, which has 2,781 parishes, split from the Moscow Patriarchate’s Ukrainian Orthodox Church, which has 11,358 parishes, in 1992, after Moscow refused to recognize the Ukrainian church’s independence.(KyivPost Oct. 2 2014)

The conflicts that now exist amongst the Russian and Ukrainian Orthodox Christians in Ukraine have been amplified by the growing schism between the followers of Patriarch Filaret, of the Kyiv Patriarchate, and those of Patriarch Kirill. 

As reported by the KyivPost (Oct. 2 2014), 

"[t]he Kyiv Patriarchate, which describes itself as patriotic and pro-European, has strengthened its position after supporting the EuroMaidan Revolution that drove President Viktor Yanukovych out of power. It has also taken a strong stand in support of Ukraine's defense against Russia's war. Now it is hoping that the wave of patriotic sentiment will help unify the two major Ukrainian Orthodox groups into a single independent church."

Patriarch Filaret

Furthermore, that "[t]he unification of the Moscow Patriarchate's Ukrainian Orthodox Church and the Kyiv Patriarchate will inevitably happen because Ukraine has become an independent state and must have its own independent church", said Filaret. (KyivPost)

Given the preponderence of parishes of the Moscow Orthodox Church in Ukraine, one can only begin to imagine what the Ukrainian members of those parishes, who sympathise with the EuroMaidan revolution, must be going through. Even more depressing for them, how do they now respond towards their priests from whom they seek spiritual guidance? And what about those priests themselves, who take their orders from Patriarch Kirill? 

Let us not forget that Patriarch Kirill "called the "12 years of Vladimir Putin's rule a "miracle of God (my emphasis)" and criticised his opponents, at a gathering where religious leaders heaped praise on the [then] prime minister." (Reuters Feb 8, 2012)
 

Where Kirill praised Putin

And now?

How does Putin's 'religious' oligarch sleep at night?

(to be continued)

Putin putting on a brave face ...

"Oh! what a tangled web we weave

  When first we practice to deceive"

Lavrov has said that ties with Washington needs a reset v2.00, whilst at the same time continuing to maintain the deception that Russia does not have any intimate involvement with her proxies in eastern Ukraine. Furthermore, whilst bombs from Russian proxies are raining around Donetsk airport, Lavrov has the effrontery to say that,

" ..... thanks to "initiatives of the Russian President", the situation was improving on the ground in Ukraine, where a ceasefire has been in place for several weeks. The Sept.5 truce is largely holding though some fighting has continued in places including the rebel stronghold of Donetsk."

 Pro-Russian rebels fire towards Ukrainian positions near the airport, from make-shift shelters inside houses

Meanwhile, Poland has yesterday ( Tue Oct 7, 2014) warned Russia that it could face tougher sanctions over Ukraine because breaches of the ceasefire continues due in main to the active support been given by Putin to his proxies in Donetsk in particular. 

"If Russia does not change its policy, sanctions will be toughened and they will make themselves felt even more in Russia," Schetyna said in an interview with Polish broadcast Polsat News."

  

Even the IMF has concluded that the battered Russian economy faces more pain over Ukraine, as reported yesterday by Max Delaney

But Putin is putting on a brave face  by saying at an annual conference in Moscow, and attended by Russian delegates and other business leaders from around the world, that the Russian economy will grow despite sanctions. (3 Oct 2014)

Putin addressing delegates

What is the effect of the sanctions against Russia on Central Asia?
As Stephen Blank points out (May 27, 2014),

"U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has called Russia’s invasion, occupation and annexation of the Crimean peninsula. along with its incitement of a civil war in Eastern Ukraine. a game-changer. One region where this description could possess particular resonance is Central Asia. All Central Asian governments have considerable reasons for alarm in the wake of Russia’s actions and the supine Western response. In this context, Vladimir Putin’s speech to the Duma of March 18, 2014 represented a landmine under the sovereignty and territorial integrity of all five Central Asian states with the threat of Russian military action should they somehow threaten the dignity and honor of Russians who are citizens in their states." (my emphasis)

"Kazakhstan, which had previously boasted the most dynamic economic outlook in the region, seems especially vulnerable to continued Russian economic myopia. Not only does a weakening ruble continue to threaten Kazakhstan’s economy, but the Moscow-led counter-sanctions also present a significant risk to sustained growth. As one economic analyst told The Astana Times, “Russian counter-sanctions in food products can be expected to, on balance, have an overwhelmingly negative overall impact on Kazakhstan through potential food price inflation and domestic supply risks[.]” It’s small wonder Kazakhstan has been one of the most vocal nations calling for an end to all post-Crimea sanctions." (Casey Michel October 02, 2014)

Kazakhstan

"Furthermore, "Not only has Moscow’s decision-making [regarding Ukraine] continued to erode its own economic salience, but, for those most dependent on a healthy Russian economy – in Astana, in Bishkek – the fiscal realities of a Russian partnership seem ready to continue their downward trend for the foreseeable future." (my emphasis) (Casey Michel)

As with Ukraine, "Vladimir Putin made ominous comments on Kazakhstan's statehood at the Seliger Youth Forum last month"  (Casy Michel The Moscow Times September 16, 2014) It would therefore seems that Putin's dream about a Eurasian Economic Community, a counter economic block to the EU, is rapidly evaporating. Putin's fine words viz. "that the Russian economy will grow despite sanctions", simply does not "butter any parsnips". But for how long will these sanctions last?

It is interesting to note that, "EU diplomats said that countries with close ties to Russia such as Italy, Austria and Finland are reluctant to implement the new sanctions. German Chancellor Angela Merkel called for the sanctions to go ahead, adding that "they could always be suspended at a later date (my emphasis) if there was progress towards a peace plan for Ukraine." What is even more interesting is that Italian Foreign Minister Federica Mogherini, who has been chosen to be the EU's new foreign policy chief, told reporters in Brussels that "Some countries are asking for time", declining to say who those countries were. "Unity in this is absolutely crucial and strategic," she said. (Reuters 10 September 2014)

What is rather interesting about both Merkel and the 'fragrant' Mogherini is that both were active participants in the communist parties in their respective countries.

Federica Mogherini

Mogherini was a member of the Italian Communist Youth Federation from 1988,  and in 1996 she joined the Youth Left after the dissolution of theItalian Communist Party and its transformation into a social-democratic party. Thus, her appointment [as the EU's new foreign policy chief] has proved extremely controversial because she and the Italian government were seen in many quarters as too sympathetic to Moscow, and French newspaper, 'Le Monde' has described the appointment as "a sad day for Europe".

Just recently the 'fragrant' Mogherini, facing European Parliament lawmakers in a confirmation hearing (06 October 2014), and asked how she would deal with the Russian "bear" -- often used as diplomatic shorthand for a powerful and unpredictable Moscow, she responded,

"I do not have much experience of dealing with bears," Mogherini said, suggesting her   colleagues from countries closer to Russia might be better placed to answer the question.
"However, I would say we need a mix of assertiveness and diplomacy... the balance would depend on the reaction of the bear."

Angela Merkel and Putin

 Merkel was "a former member of the East German Communist Party who functioned as a mid-level propaganda commissar for the Free German Youth, that is, the young Communists. She and the then-KGB operative Putin, who is fluent in German, were active in East Germany at the same time. Whether they met or worked together, [we simply do not know], but they were both in the same line of work" (M.E. Synon  3 July 2014)

It should always be borne in mind that when Merkel advocates maintaining sanctions  against Russia (October 3 2014), nonetheless Putin has more than enough supporters in Germany to counteract her stance. As Clemens Wergin reported in May of this year, "..an investigative report by the newspaper Welt am Sonntag revealed how a shady network of Russia supporters has shaped public discourse in Germany." These 'shady' supporters are not only German industrialists but also German politicians and political parties. Why? Because Putin "[is] leaving Germany’s factories in a worse state than anyone imagined." (Peter Spence 23 Sept 2014)

Bearing all this in mind, can we really say that Putin is "putting on a brave face", or does he believe that his "friends" in the EU will soon begin to clamour for the suspension of the sanctions against Russia. With the 'fragrant' Federica Mogherini at the helm of  the EU's foreign policy, and Merkel worrying about both the outcome of the upcoming German Federal elections and the growing parlous state of the German economy (Mike Bird Oct 7 2014), 

Putin may, indeed, be in a much stronger position regarding the suspension of EU sanctions thanks to Mogherini and Merkel. Added to which, the ISIS situation in the Middle East, coupled with the global ebola scare, is pushing the Ukrainian invasion by Russia onto the diplomatic back-burner, so to speak. The impending outcome of the German federal elections has, indeed, become critical for Poroshenko. Will Angela Merkel still be in power?

Putin bribing his main supporters and controlling what Russians hear about the war in Ukraine

If Putin thought that his recent threats or that his attempted deflection of the eyes of the EU and the US away from Ukraine and towards the Middle East and ISIS was working, he must have been somewhat disappointed now that EU ambassadors have decided to keep the current round of sanctions against Russia in place.

"The EU is to keep sanctions against Russia in place, judging that Ukraine's peace deal is not fully effective.

EU ambassadors who met on Tuesday had noted some "encouraging developments" since the 5 September ceasefire was agreed, an EU spokeswoman said. But other parts of the peace deal "will need to be properly implemented", said the spokeswoman, Maja Kocijancic." (BBC News 30 September 2014)

Adding to his woes, the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission (SMM) to Ukraine will be supplying Ukraine with drones as an additional monitoring instrument. (October 1st 2014)

Even the economy is having severe problems, with the Russian government unwilling to face up to this reality, as reported in the Economist. (30 September 2014)

"TODAY  Russia submitted its budget to the Duma, the lower house of the parliament. After three rounds of discussions, Vladimir Putin, the president, will sign it into law. The budget shows how much trouble the Russian economy is in—and how unwilling the government is to face up to reality. ......The budget looks like a desperate attempt by the Kremlin to project strength and maintain public support, when in fact it is looking ever weaker."

"The budget sees slower public wage increases, but nonetheless allocates 57 percent of its spending to social causes, chiefly supporting Putin's main electorate — pensioners and state sector employees." (Moscow Times)

But will Putin's blatant bribing of pensioners and state sector employees still the growing voices of despair amongst Russia's wives and mothers who have lost husbands and sons in his war against Ukraine?

 

 

As Corey Flintoff has reported,

"Valentina Melnikova, the head of the Committee of Soldiers' Mothers, an organization representing the troops' families, said in an interview with the independent TV channel Rain that there are reports that families have been told to keep quiet about the losses of their loved ones in the service."

But how much longer can Putin sustain the lie that," ...  Russian soldiers are part of the battle — though they are ...... volunteers, on leave from their army jobs", even in the face of  " [t]he Russian TV channel NTV [carrying] a report on the funerals of two Russian paratroopers who were killed while fighting in Ukraine", and who were buried with full military honours? (Corey Flintoff)

If this does not indicate Putin's contempt for the Russian people, as does his previous go-ahead to the FSB to blow up those flats in Russian cities in 1999 that killed hundreds of Russians, then I fail to see what else can. Putin should be made aware of the truism that:

You can fool ALL of the people SOME to the time,

SOME of the people ALL of the time,

But NOT all of the people ALL of the time.

 

That Putin is under the delusion that he can fool all of the people all of the time is indicated by him and his Security Council embarking to-day (1st October 2014) on a discussion about how to counteract "threats to national security in the information sphere", as reported by Itar Tass, the Russian News Agency.

This is why more than 2000 websites have been closed in Russia over the past two years.

But unfortunately for him, railing against the internet as a CIA tool unleashed by the US upon the world rather displays his ignorance about about the actual origins of the internet. What it does display, however, is that the Kremlin is turning more and more to conspiracy theory as a "major tool" with which to manage its own people, as Vladimir Zhirinovsky has suggested it should do. What is very sad is that this is being done over the dead bodies of Russians and Ukrainians.

Putin may be in a powerful position to bribe the Russian people to believe in his narratives about Ukraine, and to control what the Russian people hear about his invasion of Ukraine, but there is still the rest of the world. Putin is throwing millions of dollars into his global TV propaganda machine, RT (Russia Today). As Benjamin Bidder of Der Spiegel points out:

"Since 2005, the Russian government has increased the channel's annual budget more than tenfold, from $30 million (€22.6 million) to over $300 million. Russia Today's budget covers the salaries of 2,500 employees and contractors worldwide, 100 in Washington alone. And the channel has no budget cuts to fear now that Putin has issued a decree forbidding his finance minister from taking any such steps."(my emphasis)

RT Headquarters in Moscow

True to the proposal of Vladimir Zhirinovsky, "Russia Today also uses a chaotic mixture of conspiracy theories and crude propaganda [with which to manage its global audience]. On the program "The Truthseeker," the attack on the Boston Marathon, in which two ethnic Chechens killed three people with bombs in April, mutated into a US government conspiracy" (Benjamin Bidder)

But even more disconcerting is the fact that Sergey Lavrov, that Soviet dyed-in-the-wool Foreign Minister of Russia, is doing precisely what Zhirinovsky has suggested.

"Russia’s foreign minister [Lavrov] said on Wednesday that 400 bodies had been found in mass graves in eastern Ukraine but the claim looked highly contentious after it emerged that reports from the scene had been distorted by Russian media", as reported from Moscow by Tom Parfitt  (1st October 2014)"

“This is obviously a war crime,” Sergei Lavrov told a press conference in Moscow. “Already more than 400 bodies have been discovered in burial sites outside Donetsk and we hope that western capitals will not hush up these facts [because] they’re horrific.”

Unfortunately for Lavrov, one of Putin's proxies in Donetsk,  Andrei Purgin, had to correct him.

"Andrei Purgin, a senior rebel leader, said that only nine bodies had been discovered, not 400. “We were misunderstood,” he said, according to Interfax. We were speaking about the fact that 400 is the overall number of unidentified bodies in Donetsk morgues, 90% of whom are civilians who died at different times.”

What Putin and his clique seem to be quite oblivous about is that the global audience has access to a wide range of  different perspectives about the current war between Ukraine and Russia. Furthermore, Putin and his clique cannot control what the global audience reads or views. Thus the global audience has viewed the recent toppling of Lenin's statue in Kharkiv.

Toppling Lenin's statue in Kharkiv

The toppling of Lenin statues has happened throughout Ukraine. (Rick Noack). And the whole world knows about it, and why the Ukrainian people have done this. RT may give its 'Putin spin' about this event but, yet again, the  'false' Putin propaganda-narrative simply shines through, as in the case of the Boston Marathon bombings.

(to be continued)

Putin protecting his mafia-siloviki clan

Like any mafia Don who protects those closest to him, Putin's response to the sanctions imposed upon Russia and his clique by the EU, US, and Japan is to:

• Create a law, proposed by the deputy of the United Russia faction Vladimir Ponevezhsky, to amend current legislation so that the individuals, whose property was arrested under "unjust judicial acts," could apply to the Russian court asking to be compensated for seized property. 
• Create a law to seize the assets of foreign states and foreign entities (read "foreign individuals and companies")
• To receive compensation from foreign states for the seized property of Russian citizens 

The heading of Kenneth Rapoza's article says it all:
   
"Russia's Latest Retaliation Against Sanctions Puts American Multinationals In Crosshairs"

In other words, Putin is wanting to 'compensate' members of his closest clique whose assets have been confiscated under the rules of the sanctions that have been imposed upon Russia and his 'oligarch' supporters closest to him. A recent case in point of the seizure of assets by an EU country is that of Italy, where the authorities have seized 30 m Euros worth of assets from Arkady Rotenberg, a very close ally of Putin from his days in St. Petersburg.

Arkady Rotenberg

As Tomas Hirst  reveals, Boris Nemtsov, in response to these proposed laws, has written on Facebook

"What is [the benefit of] a strongman's (Putin's) friendship? It's when you have 4 villas, apartments and a hotel seized in Italy and your accomplice in the Kremlin immediately introduces a bill for damages from the Russian budget." 

                                       (click subtitles for an English translation in fullscreen)
In other words, Putin's  created 'oligarch clique' want to be compensated by the Russian taxpayer from whom they stole their money in the first place. 

Yet, as Hirst points out, "Given Russia's parlous economic position — GDP grew only 0.8% this year — the concept of using state funds to bail out multimillionaire businessmen may be received poorly in the country."(my emphasis)

But will the ordinary Russian taxpayers even mildly grumble about these oligarchs being compensated by the State with their money, given the fact the nearly ALL the Russian media is really the propaganda tool of Putin? Furthermore, that the latest Russian budget, " ..[has] allocated 57 percent of its spending to social causes, chiefly supporting Putin's main electorate — pensioners and state sector employees.", as reported in the Moscow Times.(Sep. 18 2014)

Are these laws proposed by Putin really to stave off  dissent among the business elite, who may begin to challenge his actions against the West and against Ukraine? As John Lough points out,

"The ‘economic bloc’ in the government has found itself marginalized with decision-making left to an increasingly narrow group around Putin." (my emphasis)

John Lough. Associate Fellow, Russia and Eurasia Programme, Chatham House

And it is precisely this narrow group of decision-makers (read "Putin's clan") that have been targeted by sanctions, and that is now ensuring that these sanctions will not impoverish them.

At the same time "Putin has deliberately chosen to make an example of Yevtushenkov and send a signal to keep big business on its toes. The core message is that there are new rules of the game and no one is untouchable." (John Lough) (my emphasis) One can almost hear the ghostly echo of Khodorkovsky rattling about in his prison cell.

Meanwhile, in Ukraine, the battle for Donetsk airport continues, nothwithstanding that 'ceasefire' clause of the agreed Minsk (read "Putin's") Protocol of 5th September 2014.
 

Is it any wonder that, " Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko told German Chancellor Angela Merkel -- his closest and most powerful European ally -- on Monday that Russia was ignoring the terms of a September 5 peace pact the sides sealed in the Belarussian capital Minsk", as reported by Dmitry Zaks. Is this breaking of the ceasefire by Russia's proxies in eastern Ukraine Putin's ploy to undermine " the ballot for October 26 parliamentary polls once the registration deadline passes on Tuesday night (30 Sept 2014)."? (Dmitry Zaks)

Poroshenko's "highly controversial decision to promise temporary self-rule for territories under rebel control in exchange for their renouncement of independence has dominated political debate in the run-up to the parliamentary polls". (Dmitry Zaks) (my emphasis) One can only hope that he will  secure a majority in the 450-seat chamber though, as Dmitry Zaks points out, "his chances of forging a coalition that could help him make peace with Russia while securing a military and economic alliance with the West at present look somewhat remote."

Meanwhile, as new evidence is emerging that Russian troops are active in eastern Ukraine, Obama and the EU are focusing their efforts on takling ISIS in the Middle East.

Moscow's plan to decoy the West

As  Eglė Samoškaitė points out, "Moscow seems to be making [an] effort to patch up its relations with the West after a fall-out over Ukraine by trying to refocus attention away from Eastern Europe and onto the Middle East. Experts say, however, that the trick might not work." On the other hand, it may work. And this is the big danger for Ukraine. 

(to be continued)

Putin's 'one trick' energy economy and the coming of winter

Anne Applebaum, in a talk given at the LSE (London School of Economics) on 28 January 2013, pointed out that Russia is a 'one-trick' energy exporting economy, much like e.g. Saudi Arabia.

As Danny Vinik, amongst many others, shows; Russia's total energy exports constitutes more than two-thirds of their total exports.

It is this singular and incontrovertible fact, together with the critical dependence of many EU countries on Russian gas imports, that gives so many in the EU cause for concern about not ruffling the feathers of the increasingly paranoid Putin, in particular over his invasion of Ukraine. Putin has no other alternative but to use a plethora of different economic, re-armament, and military threats against the Ukraine and the EU in particular purely as a means of disguising his major concern should  the income from Russia's energy exports begin to fall due to the start of fracking in the EU. As Bjorn Lomberg points out,"Fracking could free Europe from Putin" Is it therefore any wonder that Putin is throwing a lot of money into an anti-fracking campaign? As Robert Zubrin points out:

"... it should come as no surprise that the Putin regime is pulling out all the stops in fomenting the global anti-fracking movement, with Europe as its central target. Leading the propaganda campaign has been RT News, Russia’s state-owned television network, which broadcasts around the world in English and other languages."

Putin against fracking

And supporting Putin's anti-fracking propaganda in the EU Parliament are 50 Green MEP's.
 

With Putin's 'friends' like this in the EU Parliament, does Ukraine need enemies

With all of this in mind, and re-visiting that deal brokered after hours of acrimonious negotiations in Berlin by Günther H. Oettinger, the European Union energy commissioner, on 26th September, and that set out the following:

• Ukraine to pay 'over the odds' ($385 per 1,000 cubic meters) for it's gas from Russia when compared to the rest of the EU.
• Ukraine to pay 'upfront' for its gas. Gazprom will ensure that at least 5 billion cubic meters of gas are supplied to Ukraine from October to March which must be prepaid before delivery.
•  The EU to guarantee a loan from the International Monetary Fund to help Ukraine meet its debt payments. The deal foresees an initial installment of $2 billion due by the end of October, with the outstanding $1.1 billion due by the end of December,

is it any wonder that Poroshenko has backed off from this EU-backed Russian deal? Andriy Kobolev, [Ukraine's] Naftogaz state energy firm chief, has also firmly stated that "No final decision was adopted. Not a single document was signed -- period".

Günther H. Oettinger, the European Union energy commissioner

Why, therefore, are so many EU politicians blinded by the fact that Putin is more dependent on Russia's sale of gas to the EU than the EU is dependent on Russia supplying it with gas? Russia's threat to cut off gas supplies to Europe would seriously cripple the Russian economy. The European public may experience a rather cold winter in their homes, but the warmth that Russian homes will enjoy over this winter will be coupled with higher inflation, a drastic fall in their standard of living, and food shortages. Add to this Putin's threat to the Russian people to cut off their access to the internet, a threat that will particularly be hard felt by the younger generation, and you have a volatile mixture that could lead either to a 'Russian Spring' or to fully fledged Russian fascistic militarism. The stage has already been set up by Putin for the latter scenario. But even here Putin is taking a big gamble. Already he is causing Russia to be viewed negatively by the rest of the global community, not only by the EU and the US. The credibility of Russia in relation to the war in Ukraine has taken a rather steep dive at the UN. Russia may be able to use conspiracies as a "major tool" with which to manage its own people, but this will simply not work on the rest of the global community.

The question why so many EU countries are still afraid to bite the bullet and seriously confront Putin and his actions in Ukraine still remains.Why is only Ukrainian President Poroshenko standing up to Putin? Only last Sunday  he said that Kiev’s EU Association Agreement will come into force in full in November despite an agreement between Moscow, Brussels and Kiev to postpone full implementation until January 2016. This has rather angered Putin, forcing him into even more apopletic threats.“Russia is guided by the agreements reached at the three party talks, but at the same time is ready to defend its position. Russia remains committed to these agreements, but is ready to respond if [a party to the deal acts] in breach of previously reached agreements,” Dmitry Peskov (Putin's spokesman) said on 29 September 2014.

Dmitry Peskov. Putin's spokesman

Is this latest threat of Putin yet another indicator that the wobbling Russian economy could soon be teetering on the precipice of a headlong nosedive into recession? All those nest eggs that were stored away when the Russian economy was in full flow, and oil and gas money simply swamped the government coffers to overflowing, are already beginning to disappear thanks, in particular, to the implementation of the latest EU and US (and Japanese) sanctions against Russia.

(to be continued)