Putin's economic woes, the price of vodka, and dying pensioners

In the first entry of this blog (Tuesday, 10 June 2014) I wrote that,

"The lanes of history are littered with men who have behaved as Putin currently does over Crimea and the Ukraine. Nowadays there are many who are likening him to Hitler or Stalin. If we go back further in history the name of Napoleon springs to mind. Still further, during the heyday of the Roman Empire, the image of Nero looms large.

But Putin is Putin, living today with his peculiar demons and not with those of others."

Pictured From left to right : Russian Ambassador to

Belarus Alexander Surikov, Russian Ambassador

to Ukraine Mikhail Zurabov and former Ukrainian

President Leonid Kuchma

A rather potent and recent indicator of the peculiarity of Putin's demons is the failure of the Minsk talks which ended yesterday (Dec 24, 2014),

"after more than five hours, with no indication of progress and questions about when the next round might take place." (ABC News: Yuras Karmanau Associated Press : Dec 24, 2014) (my emphasis)

Furthermore that,

"News media were not allowed access to the meeting and the participants left the session without comment. Another round had been tentatively set for Friday, but the Belarusian Foreign Ministry said after the session's conclusion that it was unclear if that would take place." (ibid Yuras Karmanau) (my emphasis)

From this failure we can rightly assume that the economic catastrophe that has just recently descended upon Putin's Russia, and which Putin almost rather glibly dismissed during his marathon press conference last Thursday, has rather rattled him. 

Thus, as Tom Parfitt reported from Moscow,

"Vladimir Putin signalled he would not back down over the Ukraine crisis on Thursday, likening the West to a bloodthirsty opponent intent on “tearing out the claws and teeth” of the Russian bear.

Speaking at his annual press conference in Moscow, Russia’s president accused the United States and Europe of deciding “that they are winners, they are an empire now and the rest are vassals and they have to be driven into a corner”.(Daily Telegraph: 18 Dec 2014) (my emphasis)

But the more significant statement of Putin during this marathon press conference was,

President Putin enjoying a concert 

honoring security personnel Saturday

with FSB director Alexander Bortnikov

 and SVR director Mikhail Fradkov.

"The strength is in the truth. When a Russian feels he is right, he is invincible — I am saying it with absolute sincerity," he argued, making a reference to popular Russian film "Brother 2," which, according to a review at the time of its release in 2000, "manifested Russia's new snobbery toward the U.S."(The Moscow Times ; van Nechepurenko Dec. 21 2014) (my emphasis)

Is it any wonder, therefore , that the recently convened Minsk meeting ended up in failure, even though there has been a prisoner exchange between Putin's rebels in eastern Ukraine and the Ukrainian army? (BBC News Europe : 26 December 2014)

Yet, as reported in Xinhua  by He Mengshu,

"Merkel is known to have discussed the issue many times with world leaders, including U.S. President Barack Obama, Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, emerging more and more as a pivotal leader in helping settle the conflict." (China News : 26-12-2014)

As He Mengshu notes, Merkel has become the pivotal point around which a diplomatic resolution of the war between Ukraine and Russia revolves. What will Merkel now do given that even the lastest attempt at resucitating the Minsk protocols of September has ended in failure? Added to which, that dyed-in-the-wool Lavrov has the temerity to suggest that,

"In order to solve the ongoing crisis in the country, Ukrainian authorities must launch constitutional reform uniting all political forces and all regions of the war-torn country, the Russian Foreign Minister has said.

The reform must take into consideration all strata of Ukrainian society and representatives from all the country’s regions, Sergey Lavrov stated in an interview with Kommersant daily, released on Thursday" (RT : December 25, 2014) (my emphasis) 

This is yet another subtle message that Putin really wants the creation of a Federal Ukraine. As stated in the Minsk protocols,

“To decentralize power, including through the adoption by Ukraine of law 'on provisional procedure for local government in parts of Donetsk and Lugansk regions (law on special status),'” states one of the provisions in the document." (RT: September 07, 2014) (my emphasis)

As I have stated before, Putin has long ago relegated those Minsk protocols to the dustbin of history. Now they are merely a tool that Putin uses to shore up Merkel's pivotal position in trying to diplomatically bring to an end the war between Ukraine and Russia. 

But for how long can Putin  play this game with Merkel, especially now that the Russian economy is in dire straits? For how long can Lavrov, this so-called 'experienced' Foreign Minister of Russia, continue to play this game of deception on the international stage? Surely even he must be tiring of having to continually sing the mantra of giving the rebel-held territoriy of eastern Ukraine 'special status' simply so that Putin can 'save face'?

Let it be said that Putin does not give a fig for the brutal suffering of the people in the rebel-controlled area of eastern Ukraine. Does Putin loose any sleep over the fact that the elderly are starving and freezing to death in the rebel held areas of eastern Ukraine? 

"Though Ukraine has not publicly discussed starvation deaths, it acknowledges there is a humanitarian crisis in the eastern region because of the conflict and blames the separatists and Russia for supporting the rebels.
The government cut off pensions this month to people in all areas of eastern Ukraine controlled by separatists to undercut support for pro-Russian rebels." (USA Today: Tatyana Goryachova and Hal Foster : December 25, 2014) (my emphasis)

And whilst pensioners are starving and dying in eastern Ukraine,

"Russian President Vladimir Putin ordered his government to rein in rising vodka prices, as he battles to preserve his popularity amid an aggravating economic crisis ....... Russia is facing its worst economic crisis since 1998, when the country devalued the rouble and defaulted on its debt .." (Daily Mail: 26 December 2014) (my emphasis)

Is the noose tightening around Putin's neck?  Is Putin on the verge of creating a 'Black Swan' event to maintain his popularity in Russia?

(to be continued)

Putin, Khodorkovsky, and Medvedev ... Ukraine no longer non-aligned

Finally it has dawned upon Dmitri Medvedev that the Russian economy is not in the good shape that Putin, in his meeting with the press last Thursday (18 Dec. 2014), assumed it to be.

"Russian President Vladimir Putin has attempted to assuage fears of economic collapse and promised rapid recovery as he faced hundreds of journalists amid the worst financial crisis of his rule." (Aljazeera :  18 Dec 2014)

As he boldly stated,

"Under the most unfavourable world conditions, such a situation can last two years," Putin said days after the Russian rouble fell to record lows, following a 60-percent dive in value since the beginning of the year." (ibid Aljazeera) (my emphasis)

Like King Canute, Putin is ordering the waves of a disastrous Russian economic downturn to recede but, unfortunately, to no avail.

Unlike Putin, Dmitri Medvedev is under no illusions. Yesterday (Tues. 23 Dec. 2014) he warned that,

".... the country faces a risk of a "deep recession" if the government ditches its spending plans.
Speaking at a meeting of his party, Medvedev said ...... that the government won't retreat from its strategic aims and social spending. Otherwise, he said Russia could plunge into a "deep recession." (CNBC : Tues. 23 Dec. 2014)

              Khodorkovsky                           Medvedev

If Medvedev is under no illusions about the parlous state of the Russian economy, then neither is Khodorkovsky.

"[Khodorkovsky] is proposing himself as a “crisis manager” to bring real democracy to the country if President Vladimir Putin leaves office.

On his own potential role in Russia, the former owner of the Yukos oil company said he was “by mentality a crisis manager”.
“My personal interest is what I can do — and that’s [lead] a transitional government, which carries out political reform. And that means only one thing — rule of law.” (FT : Neil Buckley: December 19, 2014) (my emphasis)

                        Bloomberg TV : Recent (Dec 2014) Khodorkovsky Interview

Khodorkovsky is throwing his hat into the Russian political ring, strangely enough almost with the blessing of Putin himself. For did Putin not recently say that,

" .... former oil tycoon Mikhail Khodorkovsky, one of his biggest critics, had the right to engage in politics “as any Russian citizen” ( Reuters : December 18 2014)

                            Putin                                         Khodorkovsky

What is rather puzzling about this new stance of Khodorkovsky is that almost a year ago (12 Dec 2013)  he said that, " .... he would return to Russia, but ruled out entering politics to challenge the regime of President Vladimir Putin" (Daily Telegraph : Roland Oliphant : 22 Dec 2013) (my emphasis)


Even more interesting, he also said on that same day that,  " ..... he and Mr Putin know each other so well that they "do not need to say another word to receive another word to understand one another's answers .." (ibid Roland Oliphant) (my emphasis)

As strange as these developments may seem in light of Russia's current economic problems; let it not be forgotten that Putin and Khodorkovsky share the SAME view about Ukrainian Crimea being historically an integral part of 'Mother Russia'. Just as Putin will never return Ukrainian Crimea to Ukraine, neither will Khodorkovsky.

Kasparov regards this stand of Khodorkovsky as nothing short of scandalous.

Kasparov

"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." (EuroMaidan Press: 20 Oct. 2014) (my emphasis)

If Kasparov is right in his assessment that there really is no alternative to Putin in Russia, then you have to conclude that even Khodorkovsky, who could soon replace Medvedev, will also be confronted by the fact that Ukraine has just voted to drop its non-aligned status and work towards NATO membership.

 The apoplexy in the Kremlin following to-day's (23 Dec 2014) vote in the Ukrainian Rada is best summed up by that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet Foreign Minister Lavrov viz.

"Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov called the move "counterproductive" and said it would boost tensions." (BBC News Europe: 23 December 2014)

President Poroshenko

President Propshenko, addressing foreign ambassadors on Monday night said,

"Ukraine's "fight for its independence, territorial integrity and sovereignty has turned into a decisive factor in our relations with the world". (ibid BBC News) (my emphasis)


We await Putin's response to this decisive vote in the Ukrainian Rada. Is this the 'Black Swan' event which Khodorkovsky, in his Bloomberg TV Interview, argues is needed to change the political landscape in Russia, or will this vote force Putin into precipitating a dangerous 'Black Swan' event that could lead to his demise.

(to be continued)

Putin, Lukashenko, and Nazerbaev ... and new sanctions against Crimea

In a previous blog I mentioned that,

"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?"

Furthermore ,

"As reported by Abdujalil Abdurasulov (BBC: 9 November 2014) from northern Kazakhstan,

"The crisis in Ukraine has prompted many [in Kazakhstan]  to ask who the Russian community in Kazakhstan would support if relations with Moscow turned sour.

"Events in Ukraine became a good lesson for Kazakhstan," says Dosym Satpayev, a political analyst.
He says that it helped people to realise that northern Kazakhstan is a very sensitive issue - and not simply because of large Russian communities living there.

Mr Satpayev argues that people in the region, like many others in Kazakhstan, are especially receptive to Russia's propaganda machine. (my emphasis)"

Even more interesting, "[the] Belarusian President Lukashenko says that if the seizure of Crimea is justified on the grounds that it is an historically Russian territory then, based the same reasoning, most of Russia, Western and Eastern Europe should be returned to Khazakstan and Mongolia." (Ukraine Today: 9 Oct. 2014) (my emphasis)

It is therefore interesting that both the president of Belarus and Kazakhstan, Lukashenko and Nazarbaev respectively, are having discussions with Ukrainian president Poroshenko. Lukashenko visited Kiev on the 19th Dec. 2014, and Nazarbaev will be seeing him on the 22 Dec. 2014.

Thereafter, both Lukashenko and Nazarbaev will be visiting Moscow on 23 Dec. 2014

" for a meeting of presidents from the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO)" (RFERL : Sunday, December 21, 201)

The CSTO is,

" .... an intergovernmental military alliance which was signed on 15 May 1992. In 1992, six post-Soviet states belonging to the Commonwealth of Independent States—Russia, Armenia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan—signed the Collective Security Treaty. Three other post- Soviet states—Azerbaijan, Belarus, and Georgia—signed the next year and the treaty took effect in 1994. Five years later, six of the nine—all but Azerbaijan, Georgia, and Uzbekistan—agreed to renew the treaty for five more years " (Wikipedia)"

Now it is interesting to note that Putin chaired a meeting with senior military officials at the Defense Ministry's control room in Moscow, December 19, 2014 ( Vladimir Soldatkin, Reuters Dec 20, 2014)

Furthermore, that he spoke at a concert honouring past and present security service staff at the State Kremlin Palace in Moscow, December 20, 2014. (Reuters/Alexei Druzhinin/RIA Novosti/Kremlin) (my emphasis)

At this concert, Putin categorically said that,

"Russia will not be intimidated over its actions in Ukraine and Crimea,  ....... as his foreign ministry warned that it was preparing to retaliate against fresh Western sanctions. " (ibid Alexei Druzhinin) 

These new sanctions refer, of course, to those recently announced by the EU,  Canada and the US. These sanctions are specifically directed towards the occupation by Russia of Ukrainian Crimea.

Given Nazarbaev's fears that what Putin has done in Ukraine he may also, in the near future, attempt to do in Kazakhstan, and that Lukashenko disagrees with his annexation of Ukrainian Crimea; what, then, will they be discussing at their upcoming meeting in Moscow on 23 Dec. 2014?

Putin cannot be as belligerent towards them as he is towards the EU, US, and Canada in particular.

It would therefore seems as though a sort of re-start of those Trojan Minsk proposals of Putin is on the cards for discussion between Putin, Nazarbaev, and Lukashenko.. This would tie in with Nazarbaev's and Lukashenko's visit to Kiev, as well as to Merkel's, Hollande's, and the 'fragrant' Mogherini's constant chant that those Minsk proposals hold the key to ending the war between Russia and Ukraine.

Unfortunately, as I stated in an earlier blog, Putin seems to have already relegated the Minsk proposals to the dustbin of history.

Added to which, Pososhenko is adamant that he will not

" ....  discuss one of the separatists' main demands -- that he resume the social welfare payments to the war-torn region that Kiev suspended last month ... since [he] argues [quite correctly] that the money is being stolen by the insurgents and used to pay guerrillas and foreign mercenaries." (AFP : December 21, 2014)

This main 'demand' of Putin's rebels could be due to,

" ...[their] inability to improve life in the socially devastated region [which now] threatens to turn the locals against them and undermine their claims of legitimacy." (ibid AFP) (my emphasis)

Added to which, no matter how many times Putin throws a tantrum against the EU, US, and  Canada in particular, his 'tanking' economy due to falling oil prices and the near collapse of the rouble cannot be stopped by simply 'shouting at it'.

(to be continued)

Putin's News Conference

Today, 18th December, 2014, Putin has had his now annual 'meeting with the press'. Representatives of the press around the world were told to keep their questions rather short so that Putin 'could be heard', so to speak. And 'heard' he was!

What did they hear? As Tom Parfitt reports from Moscow,

"Vladimir Putin signalled he would not back down over the Ukraine crisis on Thursday, likening the West to a bloodthirsty opponent intent on “tearing out the claws and teeth” of the Russian bear.

Speaking at his annual press conference in Moscow, Russia’s president accused the United States and Europe of deciding “that they are winners, they are an empire now and the rest are vassals and they have to be driven into a corner”.(Daily Telegraph: 18 Dec 2014) (my emphasis)

Furthermore, as Tom Parfitt reports,

"...the Russian leader was tough in his words over the annexation of Crimea and the ongoing war in eastern Ukraine, once again blaming the West for starting the conflict – while ducking a sharp question from a Ukrainian journalist who asked how many Russian soldiers had died fighting there, and what he would say to their mothers." (ibid Daily Telegraph)

Why is it then that the likes of Merkel, Hollande, Renzi, and the 'fragrant' Mogherini, continue to place nearly ALL their diplomatic eggs into the Minsk Protocols basket? Putin is continuously signalling that he simply will NOT 'back down over Ukraine'. Therefore, the question that needs to be asked is,

"Is Putin's fervent nationalistic stance purely for his Russian audience; to somehow deflect their gaze away from the dire Russian economy and towards those 'bloodthisty' western opponents of Russia?"

Many western 'political pundits' are of the opinion that this is, indeed, the case. But for how long can this last? How long can Putin literally 'pull the wool' over the eyes of the Russian people? Nothwithstanding the fact that Putin is practically in complete control over what the Russian people hear and see and read, nevertheless there comes a point when all his 'patriotic' nationalistic fervour is bound to run into a buffer. And that buffer is the failing Russian economy, the falling value of the rouble, and the increasingly rapid rise in the price of basic goods such as food.

As John Simpson says in the video,

" ... Next month (Jan 2015) the big price rises will start coming through  and the economic FREEZE will be [in Russia] in earnest."   

On the same day as Putin 'met the press',

“... President [Obama] signed into law H.R. 5859, the "Ukraine Freedom Support Act of 2014," which contains sanctions provisions on various Russian persons and entities and military and non-military assistance authorities for Ukraine.”

The bill authorizes the provision of lethal assistance and aid in energy and defense sectors, as well as civil society to the Ukrainian government and the imposing of a new round of economic sanctions against Russia." (Russian Sputnik News :19.12.2014) (my emphasis)

Coupled to this are the new sanctions that are being imposed by the EU, specifically "outlawing European investment in Crimea". These are far more modest than the sanction provisions contained in the bill that Obama signed.

Yet at the same time, the 'fragrant' Mogherini has stated that,

“The fact that Russia is in a difficult situation from a financial point of view is not good news, first of all for Russian citizens, but also it is not good news for Ukraine, it is not good for Europe or for the rest of the world,” Ms. Mogherini told reporters ahead of a summit meeting in Brussels of European leaders." (New York Times: Andrew Higgins: Dec. 18, 2014)

More than anything else, what these words of the 'fragrant' Mogherini conveys is that the current sanctions against Russia is a critical element in the demise of the Russian economy. As she herself says,

"Europe has no interest in aggravating financial turmoil in Russia, for which President Valdimir V. Putin blamed outside forces on Thursday [during his 3 hour long press conference] (ibid Andrew Higgins)

This is why,

"..President François Hollande of France said that if  “Russia sends the signals we expect” and curbs its support for armed rebels in eastern Ukraine, Europe should shift to a softer approach with Moscow." (ibid Andrew Higgins)

Yet Merkel, who spoke to her Russian counterpart by phone on Wednesday (17 Dec. 2014), noted that [Putin] has made many promises. But she said Russia continues to flout several items in the so-called Minsk peace plan and all she can do is “hope” that a recent ceasfire will hold.

"If the President of the Russian Federation, Putin, said about the territorial integrity of Ukraine [then] he must believe in the word", said German Chancellor Angela Merkel.
She said that the message of the President of Russia made during a recent phone conversations With the heads of Germany, France and Ukraine ( " channel format " ), RIA " Novosti." If he (President of Russia) said that [he] is committed to the territorial integrity of Ukraine, we must believe his word and work on it, " Merkel said after an EU summit in Brussels. (News RIN.ru: 19 December 2014)

How can Merkel say that we must believe the word of Putin when she also says that she has

"noted that [Putin] has made many promises. But she said Russia continues to flout several items in the so-called Minsk peace plan and all she can do is “hope” that a recent ceasfire will hold."?

History warns us that such "hope" can be very dangerous indeed. In this I am reminded of Neville Chamberlain who,

" .... amidst cheering crowds ..  brandished a piece of paper signed by German Chancellor Adolf Hitler which he assured the British people that he had brought 'peace with honor' guaranteeing 'peace in our time'. The date was September 30th, 1938.

Hitler promptly proceeded to [violate] the Munich Agreements and his assurances to Chamberlain by invading Czechoslovakia (March 1939), just as,

"Russia continues to flout several items in the so-called Minsk peace plan ....",

.... and this from the mouth of Merkel herself.

Has Merkel become the modern Neville Chamberlain?

There is, truly, nothing new under the sun.

(to be continued) 

Will Putin create an 'incident' to raise the price of oil?

Hardly has the meeting between the 'fragrant' Mogherini and Poroshenko reached the half-way stage than that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet Foreign Minister of Putin, Lavrov, announces that,

"...he has serious reasons to believe that the United States is attempting to change [Putin's] regime and destabilize the situation in Russia with the help of sanctions." (Moscow, Dec. 16. :Tass)

Furthermore that, (and this IS the interesting bit)

"There will be no “second Crimea” in south-east Ukraine, but Crimea is Russian land, Lavrov stressed. Moscow unambiguously supports Ukraine’s territorial integrity, he added.
Degree of autonomy of Donetsk, Luhansk regions should be determined by Ukrainians, Russia does not offer federalization or autonomy, the foreign minister said." (ibid Tass)

What signal, exactly, is Lavrov sending out with these comments?

These comments are, not necessarily in order but , that:

• the US is seeking the 'overthrow' of Putin
• the US wants to destabilize Russia
• Crimea is Russian land
• south-east Ukraine is not a 'second' Crimea for Russia
• Russia does NOT want their proxy rebel-held territories in Donetsk and Lughansk to be 'autonomous' from, or 'federalized' within, Ukraine
• Moscow (Putin) unambiguously supports Ukraine's territorial integrity

It really is the last three points that signals a shift from the previous clamour of Putin about what the status of the rebel-held territory in eastern Ukraine should be.

Thus it was that on August 27, 2014, Putin stated before his talks with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko in Minsk, Belarus that,

".....Ukraine's government [must] begin negotiations [in Minsk] on the issues of statehood for the southeast of Ukraine...... according to an interview [that he had] with Russia's state TV Channel 1." (Michael B Kelley and Reuters: Aug. 31, 2014) (my emphasis)

Furthermore that,

"Previously, Russia has only called for greater rights under a decentralized federal system for the regions claimed by separatists." (ibid Michael Kelly and Reuters) (my emphasis)

What we have here is a rather strange transformation from Putin's call for federalism in Ukraine, then his call for 'autonomous' statehood for the rebel-held territories in eastern Ukraine, and now Lavrov speaks about 'no federalization' nor any 'autonomous statehood' for those same rebel-held areas of eastern Ukraine. This transformation has taken place over the space of 3 1/2 months! 

Is Putin beginning to loose his grip in the Kremlin? Are 'PANIC' cracks beginning to appear amongst his kleptocratic clan? (previous blog entry)

What is perhaps more illustrative of these 'panic' cracks appearing within Putin's kleptocratic clan is that Medvedev, who will go down in history as keeping the Russian presidential seat warm for Putin, is now trying to emerge as a growling Russian bear.

As reported by Peter Leonard,

"Russia looks intent to pile on the economic misery. In a detailed op-ed piece Monday, Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev painted a grim forecast of Russian economic blockades ahead as Ukraine embarks on closer integration with Europe." (Yahoo News: December 15, 2014)

Yet, just as you thought that Putin was beginning to falter somewhat,


 "Stockholm: A Russian military jet nearly collided with a commercial passenger plane in international airspace near southern Sweden on Friday, the Swedish authorities said" (Johan Ahlander : Sydney Morning Herald: December 15, 2014)

These 'macho' postures of Putin and his 'sidekick' Medvedev are not only for the consumption of the West, but also for the Russian people. The Russian economy is 'tanking' and, somehow, Putin must create an incident which will stem the falling price of oil. This is more so because,

Abdalla el-Badri

"On Monday (15 December 2014), Opec officials reiterated their opposition to cutting production. Abdalla el-Badri, the Opec secretary general, said the group could manage an oil price slump without amending production. Suhail bin Mohammed al-Mazroui, oil minister of the United Arab Emirates, an Opec member, said there was no need for an emergency meeting of the cartel to help support prices." (Jennifer Rankin and Philip Inman : The Guardian: Tuesday 16 December 2014) (my emphasis)

 With all of this as the backdrop, the meeting between the Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko and the 'fragrant' Federica Mogherini included the following confirmations viz.

" ..... that the EU paid top-priority attention to Ukraine. [Mogherini stated that,] "We can begin our work using the instruments that have emerged due to the Association Agreement and implement the reforms. We should continue our joint work just as we have ratified the Agreement." (Press Office of President Poroshenko 16.12.2014)

She also stated that, 

 " ...the EU would do everything,  for the Minsk agreements to be fulfilled." (ibid Press Office) (my emphasis)

This almost single-minded focus of the EU on Putin's Trojan Minsk agreement, especially by Merkel, Hollande, and Matteo Renzi (Germany, France, and Italy), does not seem to accept the fact that Putin himself has already relegated it to the political dustbin of history. It's only real diplomatic use is to expose Putin as someone who both lies internationally and simply does not keep his word.

It should also be borne in mind that Germany, France, and Italy have 'oodles' of money invested in Putin's Russia. Is this what is driving them to 'tip-toe' around Putin? Are Ukrainians to be sacrified on the alter of the Euro?

Yet again am I reminded of the words of Alexander Motyl. (CNN: July 25, 2014)

"Prosperous capitalist democracies, and especially prosperous capitalist democracies that are part of a self-styled community of values called the European Union, cannot take the easy way out and pretend values do not matter. In the final analysis, the willingness of France, Germany and all the other states making up the European Union to respond to Putin's evil doing will determine the moral fate of the EU. If they sacrifice morality to arms contracts or gas, the EU will have lost its rasion d'etre. Worse, like Putin, it will be without a soul." (my emphasis)

(to be continued)

The suffering of Ukrainians and Russians being caused by Putin

Today is a sad day indeed. If, like myself, you have experienced the openess and kindness and hospitality of the Russian and Ukrainian people, then surely your heart must bleed at the suffering that they must now endure, thanks to Vladimir Putin's 'psychotic' dream of restoring the old Czarist Empire of Russia. The airwaves of the world are resounding with the falling price of the Russian currency, the rouble. Food is becoming more and more expensive. Russians are already beginning to hoard food.

A website has emerged that rather poignantly tells us, second by second, what is happening to the price of the rouble, as well as telling us what is happening to the price of a barrel of oil, the very foundation on which the Russian economy rests. Already interest rates have been hiked to more than 17%, making it more much expensive for ordinary Russians to even borrow money from their banks.

                  

The Russian economy is not simply faltering, it is rapidly slowing down. And with this slowing down will come unemployment and even more suffering for the Russian people. (BBC Business News: 16 December 2014)

Putin is not only making the Ukrainian people suffer, he is doing it to the Russian people as well. As reported by Pete Spence of the  Daily Telegraph,

"Russia’s rouble has slumped, hitting many Russian consumers by pushing up inflation at a time when any hopes for growth are distant." (14 Dec 2014)

"One Muscovite resident told Business Insider that ATMs in the city are being routinely emptied by people eager to withdraw as much cash as they can either to change into dollars or purchase goods with before the value falls even further. He said the mood there is unlike anything he had ever seen "including during the crash of 2008-9". (Tomas Hirst : Business Insider : Dec. 11, 2014)

Putin's criminal acts against Ukraine has precipitated the same types of problems in Ukraine. In the rebel-held territories of eastern Ukraine such problems are even more intense.

"...with the coming of winter it has become evident that the separatist leadership is incapable of providing any kind of normal life for the inhabitants in the occupied territories without external financial support. Bitterly cold Donetsk and Luhansk find themselves on the verge of a humanitarian catastrophe. Smaller towns have already crossed the line: if we are to name things what they are, there is famine in the towns. Old people in particular are suffering. With the absence of functioning social and medical agencies the old people are slowly dying in their freezing homes with no food or medicines. (Ivan Iakovyna of EuroMaidan Press (2014/12/12)

So what real options does Putin now have?

According to Ivan Iakovyna, 

"By the beginning of December, the overall status of the separatists deteriorated. The hope that after the Battle of Ilovaisk Ukraine would agree to recognize the separatists and would agree to provide an official plan to federalize eastern Ukraine has been dashed. The isolation of the occupied territories from any financial means has led to the crash of the local economy. Moscow has ended up with a bunch of armed people, a destabilized region, and a famished and freezing population.

 

The Russian leadership is left with four options:

• To escalate the conflict and to force the Ukrainian side to declare federalization and to take on the responsibility for Donbas and its people
• To drop the Novorossia project, let the people fend for themselves, close off the border to Russia and  admit and declare defeat
• To freeze the conflict by absorbing Donbas and its resources
• To try to achieve the original objectives through negotiation

The first option has been rejected by the hawks in the Kremlin [for the following reasons] (collapse of the economy, social upheaval and popular unrest).
The second option is unacceptable for ideological reasons. The Russian people who for over a year have been told that “those are our people” will be unable to comprehend or to accept such a decision. Today already men like Strelkov-Girkin are explicitly blaming the Kremlin for betraying “Novorossia” and are gaining popularity among the most conservative segment of Russian society. Besides, in Moscow everyone understands that abandoning Donbas will not lift the international sanctions that are in place. Crimea is next in line. For the Kremlin it is essential to keep stoking instability in eastern Ukraine for as long as possible. Capitulation is not an option." (my emphasis)

If  Ivan Iakovyna is right in his assessment that "Capitulation is not an option" for Putin, what will the 'fragrant' Mogherini, who must also be aware that capitulation is not an option for Putin; what will she be able to 'suggest' at her meeting today with Poroshenko that will alleviate the suffering of the Ukrainian and Russian people? Can she cast from her mind her past (?) communist mind-set when having her discussion with Poroshenko about how to get Putin to leave eastern Ukraine and return Ukrainian Crimea to Ukraine?  

         

(to be continued)

Mogherini ... Putin's 'favourite' EU representative ..

The 'fragrant' Federica Mogherini, former member of the Italian Communist party and currently a member of the Italian Democrats of the Left, now holds the critical position as the EU's Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. Her election to this top EU post was not without critics, especially from former east European countries who are now members of the EU. They argued that she is too soft on Putin. (right: The young Mogherini with Yasser Arafat)
 

There was further consternation when she choose as her  spokeswoman Catherine Ray (left) , the wife of  

Gazprom lobbyist, Tomas Barros-Tastets. 

This coming week will test severly the 'fragrant' Mogherini's political allegiance towards the EU's fractured political stance towards Putin's invasion of eastern Ukraine, and his annexation of Ukraine's Crimea and its absorbtion into  Russia.

Like Merkel's Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier, the 'fragrant' Mogherini is also chanting the 'mantra' of Putin's Minsk agreement. In her first bi-lateral meeting with Secretary of State John Kerry, this is the 'mantra' that she chanted during their meeting with the press. (U.S. Department of State: 03 December 2014)

Events have somewhat moved on since then. Mogherini now has huge challenges before her as the issue of Ukraine becomes top of her agenda for the coming week.

As reported by Reuters,

"With Moscow showing no sign of reversing its decisiosn [about its annexation of Ukrainian Crimea], Mogherini must tread a fine line between EU governments such as the Baltics, Poland, and Britain which backs tough sanctions on Russia and those such as Italy, Cyprus and Bulgaria that are sceptical about them." (Daily Mail :14 December 2014)     

Mogherini herself does not see sanctions as an end in themself  but, like Frank-Walter Steinmeier, wants to start a dialogue suggested by Putin and that would be between Russia, the EU, and members of  his own Eurasian Economic Union, to discuss Russian concerns about Ukraine's  Free Trade Agreement with the EU. (ibid Daily Mail)

It really beggars belief that both Mogherini and Steinmeir are even willing to consider this suggestion by Putin, whose very criminal acts in Ukraine have led not only to the resumption of the Cold War between Russia, the US, and the EU, but is also fast heading us all towards a Hot War.

  

What is even more galling is that they are both willing to EXCLUDE Ukraine from a discussion ABOUT Ukraine that is being suggested by Putin himself. Do they not realise that Putin would later simply ignore these discussions just as he has done with his Trojan Minsk Proposals?

Is it any wonder that,

"EU governments in eastern Europe particulalrly are suspicious of any attempt to "re-set" relations with  Moscow"? (ibid Daily Mail) (my emphasis)

To-morrow (Tues 16 Dec) the 'fragrant' Mogherini will be visiting Kiev "to have discusions with Poroshenko about eastern Ukraine to help resolve the crisis over Moscow's annexation of Ukraine's Crimea region and its support for militants in eastern Ukraine, which led the EU and United States to impose economic sanctions on Russia". (Ukraine Today : Dec. 15, 2014) (my emphasis)

She will also

" ..... raise economic, political and judicial reforms that the EU believes are urgently needed in Ukraine." (ibid Ukraine Today)

Given the fact that Steinmeister and herself are in lock-step together in 

"wanting to start a dialogue suggested by Putin and that would be between Russia, the EU, and members of  his own Eurasian Economic Union", (ibid Daily Mail),

what, exactly, will she be discussing with Poroshenko (left) when one can surmise that what he says will simply be ignored by herself? After all, if she is willing to EXCLUDE him from discussions about the country of which he is president, which Putin has criminally invaded, and who has annexed Ukrainian Crimea; what is she really going to discuss?

I shall hazard a guess and say that:

• she will try to convince him to agree to that suggestion of Putin that she and Steinmeister are in favour of,
• she will use the question of  "economic, political and judicial reforms that the EU believes are urgently needed in Ukraine." (ibid Ukraine Today) as a 'stick' to get him to at least 'partially' agree to Putin's new Trojan suggestion,
• she will also use EU monetary support for Ukraine as yet another 'stick' to swing him in the direction of Putin's Trojan suggestion, and finally,
• she may suggest that Putin's Trojan Minsk Protocols be amended, something which Kutchma is aware may be in the offing. (Interfax Ukraine : 03.12.2014)

What she WILL NOT discuss is;

• all those billions that Yanukovich stole from the coffers of Ukraine and that are now propping up Putin's banks
• all the money that Putin OWES Ukraine for water, gas, and electricity that Ukrainian Crimea is still getting from Ukraine, and
• all those billions that Yanukovich and his criminal cohorts have spirited out of Ukraine whilst he was president, and that even the United States is determined to help Ukraine find and recover billions of dollars of assets it says were stolen by its former president and his aides.

No-one in the EU wants to confront Putin about the billions of dollars that were stolen from Ukraine and that now props up his banks! And which Putin KNOWS ABOUT! Not even Merkel has raised this issue with Putin. 

Yet they all gloss over the fact that Putin is bankrolling right-wing EU fascist parties!

What does all of this tell us about the 'fragrant' ex-communist Mogherini? 

As was once said about Richard Nixon,

"Would you buy a second-hand car from this man"? 

One could equally say,

"Would you buy a second-hand Mercedes from Mogherini?"

(to be continued)

Is Putin heading the world towards a HOT WAR?

As winter begins to take hold, and the cold begins to descend upon the people of Ukraine during this time of hope for the coming new year,

"Deputy Foreign Secretary Sergei Ryabkov on Saturday blamed "anti-Russian moods" in Washington for the new bill authorizing lethal military aid to Kyiv and deeper sanctions against Russia."

"The bill, passed unanimously by the U.S. Senate, authorizes $350 million in military hardware and munitions to Ukraine, and new sanctions against high-profile Russian exporters.  The bill now heads to the House of Representatives." (VOA News: December 13, 2014)

But this bill still needs the signature of President Obama, a signature that he says depends on the EU coming 'on board' if he is to sanction more sanctions against Putin and his kleptocratic 'siloviki'. But will the EU come on board?

Already, in Merkel's Germany,

"At least 3,500 people took part in [a] protest, organized by the German Peace Movement in the capital Berlin on Saturday. Press TV reported.The demonstrators marched to the presidential Bellevue palace to condemn the West’s confrontation with Russia over the conflict in Ukraine." (Iran Daily : December 14, 2014)

whilst Merkel herself continues to

"...[call] for a diplomatic solution to the conflict in eastern Ukraine. She said that the first steps had been taken with the Minsk Agreement in September and they should be built on. (DW : 13.12.2014)

She continues to "reassure Russia about closer European trade ties with Ukraine." (ibid DW)

Meanwhile, in an interview with Euronews, the leader of the French fascist 'Front Nationale', Marine Le Pen, continues to heap praise upon Putin. (14/12/2014)

And in Italy,

"Forceful and plain-spoken, [Matteo] Salvini has emerged at the same time as the 39-year-old [Italian] prime minister, Matteo Renzi, highlighting the generational change shaking up Italian politics since the fall of Silvio Berlusconi in 2011.

He is a friend of Marine Le Pen, leader of France's far-right National Front, and well-disposed to a Russian president [ Putin] who has spurred anger, and economic sanctions, in Brussels over his policies towards pro-Russian rebellion in eastern Ukraine." (EurActiv : 11/12/2014) (my emphasis)

"Salvini has become Italy's second-most popular leader since taking over the party, founded in the early 1990s as a separatist, anti-immigrant movement in the prosperous north of Italy." (ibid EurActiv) (my emphasis)

What we have, therefore, is the triumvirate of Germany, France, and Italy, amongst other former Eastern European members of the EU such as Hungary, who can easily scupper any call for increased sanctions against Putin's Russia.

More importantly, both PUTIN and OBAMA know this!

It is against this backdrop that Russia's Deputy Foreign Minisister Ryabkov said on Saturday that,

"We will not be able to leave that [i.e. new US sanctions against Putin's Russia] without an answer," Russia's Interfax news agency quoted [him] as saying. He did not say what form of counter-measure Moscow might take." (Enca : Saturday 13 December 2014)

Mikhail Yemelyanov of the Fair Russia party told reporters on Friday (12 December 2014) that,

“The decision of the US Senate is extremely dangerous. If it is supported by the [US] House of  Representatives and signed by their president [Obama], Russia must reply with adequate measures,”
“It is quite possible that we should return to the decision by our Upper House and give the Russian president an opportunity to use military force on Ukrainian territory preemptively. We should not wait until Ukraine is armed and becomes really dangerous,” the lawmaker stated.(RT : December 12, 2014)

We are now beginning to enter the stage when the Cold War that Putin precipitated can become a Hot War. 

As Stephen Szabo says,

"Russia's annexation of Crimea and support for the continuing insurgency in Eastern Ukraine mean that peace in Europe can no longer be taken for granted. For several reasons, the West's current confrontation with Russia is arguably more serious and dangerous than the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962." (Real Clear World : December 11, 2014) 

 (to be continued)

Is Putin evil?

In July of this year I pointed out that Angela Merkel and Putin had secret talks at which Merkel conceded Ukraine Crimea to Putin in exchange for ending the war between Russia and Ukraine.

Merkel and Putin

It would now seem that two members of the Brookings Institution, Michael O'Hanlon and Jeremy Shapiro (Washington Post : December 7, 2014) have come to the same conclusion, amongst others, as did Angela Merkel viz. that

• "Russia can make its historically based claim on Crimea but would have to accept a binding referendum under outside monitoring that would determine the region’s future, with independence as one option." (ibid O'Hanlon and Shapiro) (my emphasis)

Apparently they argue that this is in keeping with some of the ideas of Henry Kissinger and Zbigniew Brzezinski regarding the current situation between Ukraine and Russia. 

Jeremy Shapiro

Besides succumbing to Putin's propaganda about Russia's historical claim to Ukrainian Crimea,  they also claim that Putin's invasion of Ukraine, his annexation of Crimea, and his support for the separatists in the rebel-held territories of eastern Ukraine does not involve making a moral judgement about his actions.  

Shapiro and O'Hanlon should be reminded of the words of Alexander Motyl. On July 25, 2014, Motyl stated that,

"Is Putin evil? His actions certainly are, if by evil we understand behavior that willfully, consciously and purposely destroys human life. Perhaps we can call his actions undeniably evil and Putin himself "evil enough." Evil enough for what? Evil enough for condemnation by people of good will."

He further stated that,

"Such countries as France and Germany, which have extensive economic relations with Russia, face a difficult moral choice. They must ask themselves whether Putin is evil or evil enough. If they decide his killing spree in eastern Ukraine is neither evil nor evil enough, they must explain -- to themselves and to the rest of the world -- just why they believe the destruction of Ukrainian, Russian, Malaysian, Dutch and other lives is not a form of evil behavior." (ibid Alexander Motyl) (my emphasis)

It really would seem that neither Shapiro or O'Hanlon would regard Putin's actions over Ukraine as evil. If so, would they regard Hitler as having being an 'evil' man?

If not so, then that famous comparison of Hilary Clinton, a former Secretary of State just like their idols Kissinger and Brzezinski, that 

" ...... Russian President Vladimir Putin's aggression in Ukraine [are akin] to actions taken by Nazi leader Adolf Hitler outside Germany in the run-up to World War II", is a false comparison since Putin's actions in Crimea are simply NOT evil.

But perhaps the most critical assessment of the recommendations of Shapiro and O'Hanlon regarding the war between Putin and Ukraine comes from Paul R. Gregory. He correctly states that,

Paul R. Gregory

 "They offer a “compromise” that concedes Crimea to Russia, deprives Ukraine of its sovereign choice of economic and security arrangements, refuses to arm Ukraine, and weakens NATO in return for Russian “promises” of good behavior. O’Hanlon and Shapiro admit that “many Western voices will view any such effort as rewarding Russia and Putin,” but their approach is “designed not as a reward but to protect Ukraine’s security—and our own.” I agree their proposal rewards Putin, but I contend it weakens both our security and Ukraine’s." (ibid Paul R. Gregory) ( Forbes : Dec. 11, 2014)  (my emphasis)

He concludes his article with a pertinent question to Shapiro and O'Hanlon viz.

"I would ask them: How could anyone be worse than Putin, who, among other things, turned Russia into a kleptocratic state (See Karen Dawisha’s Putin’s Kleptocracy), annexed territory by force, attacked sovereign neighbors, closed down opposition media, jailed ordinary protesters, and does not hesitate to lie to foreign leaders?" (ibid Paul R. Gregory)

In other words, how can you NOT make a MORAL judgement about Putin's invasion of Ukraine, and his subsequent actions in Crimean and eastern Ukraine?

(to be continued)