Putin using the 'ceasefire' to prepare for his offensive against Mariupol

We have to ask ourselves the following questions viz.

(1) "Is this current lull in the attacks of Putin's proxies and his Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine a sign that the Minsk2 'ceasfire' is beginning to hold, and that the heavy weaponry of the rebel forces is, in fact, being pulled back?

Or is it, as Maria Tsvetkova (left) reports,

(2) "Kiev says the rebels are using the truce to regroup and pulling out heavy weaponry to prepare for more attacks on other areas of eastern Ukraine outside their area of control, including the government-held port city of Mariupol.


"There are signs the enemy is preparing for further offensives," military spokesman Andriy Lysenko (right) said on Sunday. "Everywhere where the militants show that they are withdrawing heavy weaponry, it is either simply to relocate (the armaments) where they are planning attacks or remove them only to put them back in place the next night," he told a briefing." (Reuters : Mon Mar 2, 2015) (my emphasis)

Without a doubt, Putin's supporters in the EU (and around the globe) will answer "yes" to question (1), and simply "ignore" question (2). 

Let us remind ourselves that the 'fragrant' Mogherini (left), in a paper she presented to the EU foreign ministers in mid January 2015, noted,

" .... a common, long-term aim of free trade from "Lisbon to Vladivostok" and said the EU might study expanding trade with Russia and its Eurasian Economic Union of ex-Soviet states. It was Ukraine's preference of free trade with the EU rather than with the EEU that sparked the confrontation." (Jan Strupczewski and Alastair Macdonald : Reuters : Wed Jan 14, 2015) (my emphasis)

However, one diplomat, from an eastern European country,

" ...  which counsels against the EU showing weakness toward Moscow, said the paper appeared to reflect an eagerness on the part of countries such as France and Mogherini's native Italy to set aside the dispute over Ukraine in order to revive profitable business with Russia." (ibid Jan Strupczewski and Alastair Macdonald) (my emphasis) 
 
In light of the international outcry over the assasination of Boris Nemtsov (right), and the near-death situation of the hunger-striking Ukrainian, Nadiya Savchenko, incarcerated in a Moscow jail; what do those Putin supporters in the EU now have to say about increasing pressure on Putin to stop his war with Ukraine? 

Added to which Kiyoshi Takenaka, reporting from Japan, states that, 

"No normalization of ties between Ukraine and Russia is likely unless the region of Crimea, now under Russian control, is returned to Kiev's sovereignty, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin said on Tuesday.

Klimkin (left), on the second day of his two-day trip to Japan, also said the border between Ukraine and Russia needed to be completely closed to achieve any settlement to the armed conflict between Kiev and pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine." (Reuters : Tue Mar 3, 2015) (my emphasis)

Furthermore, in light of Andriy Lysenko, Ukrainian military spokesman, reporting on Sunday that,

"There are signs the enemy is preparing for further offensives,"

the US military’s top-ranking officer, General Martin Dempsey (right), has called for Washington to arm Ukraine.

“I think we should absolutely consider lethal aid and it ought to be in the context of Nato allies because [Russian President Vladimir] Putin’s ultimate objective is to fracture Nato,” Dempsey told the Senate armed services committee." (Agence France-Presse in Washington :Tuesday 3 March 2015)

And now President Obama is,

"..... weighing a possible move to provide weapons to Kiev but some Nato members – including France and Germany – are opposed to arming Ukraine over fears it could further escalate the conflict in eastern Ukraine." (ibid Agence France-Presse in Washington) (my emphasis)

 Alexander Motyl (right) rather neatly sums up the 'false' assumptions of Merkel, Hollande, and those other EU states opposed to supplying Ukraine with arms.

" .... the argument against arms deliveries to Ukraine assumes that Putin will escalate regardless of the costs involved. [Putin's] .. . relentless, single-minded pursuit of ....... [trying to destroy Ukraine for the primary reason of protecting himself and his 'siloviki' from being correctly identified as the criminals that they are, under the propaganda umbrella of 'Novorossiya'] ......, regardless of the costs and benefits involved, is what we generally characterize as fanaticism or, possibly, as a psychological disorder.

In any case, such behavior is anything but rational in the realist sense of the term.Merkel and Hollande, together with the  Mogherini's and Putin supporters in the EU, 

" ... want to have it both ways - arguing for and against rationality in general and in the Russian context in particular." (Washington Post : March 3, 2015) (my emphasis)

In other words, they view Putin's as:

(1) 'rational', by invoking Russia’s close historical, cultural, and religious ties to Ukraine" but
(2) 'irrational', because they fear that arming Ukraine will make him escalate his war with Ukraine, regardless of the costs and benefits involved.

What they do not see is Putin as the criminal that he is, sitting at the apex of a pyramid of corruption and criminality that he has built up from his earlier days in the 1990's in St. Petersburg, as Karen Dawisha in her book, "Putin's Kleptocracy", has fully exposed.

For a more detailed presentation of "Putin's Kleptocracy by Karen Dawisha go to:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGXAY0BxEV4 

(to be continued)

Putin and his weapon of 'fear' against Ukraine and the Russian opposition

As reported this morning by Carol Morello (left) of the Washington Post, John Kerry, US Secretary of State, and Sergei Lavrov, that dyed-in-the-wool-Soviet foreign minister of Putin, are meeting in Geneva to discuss the Ukrainian crisis, amongst other topics.

As she says,

"Last week, Kerry accused officials in Moscow of lying “to my face” about the conflict raging in Ukraine between Russian-backed rebels and government troops. There was no warmth in the room when the two diplomats first met and shook hands. Neither smiled as they greeted each other, though Lavrov smiled briefly after the cameras were turned off." (Washington Post : March 2, 2015) (my emphasis)

And following on from Putin's warning last week about cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine;

"The European Commission has invited the Russian and Ukrainian energy ministers for talks in Brussels [today] to discuss gas supply problems." (Reuters (as reported in Yahoo News) : 2nd March, 2015)

Pavel Polityuk (left) reports, however, that,

"Ukraine's state energy firm Naftogaz once again charged Russian gas giant Gazprom with violating the terms of an EU-backed winter gas supply agreement, Ukrainian company said on Monday [2nd March]." (Reuters as reported in the Daily Mail : 2 March 2015) (my emphasis)

"In February, the agreement was violated by the Russian side. Gas for which we have paid in advance was not delivered in full last month. The deal is continuing to be violated this month," Naftogaz quoted its chief executive Andriy Kobolev (right) as saying." (ibid Pavel Polityuk) (my emphasis)

 As Valentyn Zemlyansky has explained,

 "All these threats by ... [Putin about cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine] are not particularly frightening for us, as the situation has radically changed compared to last autumn," said Zemlyansky, [former spokesman for Ukraine's gas firm Naftogaz]. "We've passed through the winter season - the mild weather really helped us, as well as decreased consumption by industry."

He estimated Ukraine would consume about 35 billion cubic meters of gas in 2015. That is not far out of line with what it produces itself and imports from Europe, although it will be important to build up reserves for next winter's peak." (Peter Graff and Pavel Polityuk : Reuters : Thu Feb 26, 2015) (my emphasis)

With this in mind, it begins to appear as though Putin's threat about cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine is nothing more nor less than his attempt to increase the dire economic difficulties in which Ukraine finds itself in. Just as the Soviet Union was bankrupted when trying to counter Ronald Reagan's Strategic Defense Initiative (SDI) ('Star Wars'), so too is Putin trying to push Ukraine into bankruptcy by using his "gas supply weapon" and by keeping the war in eastern Ukraine going.

 
As the late Ronald Hilton (left) pointed out,

" .... in its efforts to keep up with the American defense build-up [in the eighties], the Soviet Union was compelled in the first half of the 1980s to raise the share of its defense spending from 22 percent to 27 percent of GDP, while it froze the production of civilian goods at 1980 levels."


This 'economic' dimension of Putin's 'maskirovka' strategy viz. to try and push Ukraine over the economic cliff into bankruptcy, is another critical factor in the continual breaking of the Minsk2 ceasefire by Putin's proxies and his Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine.

As Gleb Garanich reports, 
 

"In order to mislead OSCE representatives, the rebels are moving military equipment from the front line ... and bringing it back at night," military spokesman Andriy Lysenko (right) said.
"There are signs the enemy is preparing for further offensives," he said, naming as major targets government-held Mariupol, a strategic port city, and Artemivsk, north of the rebel stronghold of Donetsk.
While there was no shelling in the night, rebels shelled government troop positions 34 times on Saturday, wounding eight Ukrainian soldiers, Lysenko said." (Reuters : Sun Mar 1) (my emphasis)



Even the head of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Ilkka Kanerva, admits to the refusal of Putin's proxies and his Russian soldiers to allow the OSCE monitors to fully monitor their 'withdrawal' of heavy weaponry according to Minsk 2 proposals.


 As RFE/RL reports,

" .... the head of the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly, Ilkka Kanerva (left) said the separatists continued to impose restrictions on the monitors' movements.
Kanerva said in a statement that he was "profoundly disturbed" by the rebels' "continuing refusal to grant unlimited, safe access to OSCE monitors on the ground in Ukraine and their violations of the Minsk Package of Measures." (VoA : February 25, 201)(my emphasis)

Perhaps most indicative of Putin's proxies and Russian soldiers preparing for further offensives against Mariupol and Artemivsk is the fact that Kanerva has informed us that,

" ..... [the] rejection by Russia of an enlarged monitoring mission on Ukrainian-Russian border runs counter to international community's efforts." (Ukraine Today : Feb. 26, 2015) (my emphasis)

Putin threatening to 'turn off the gas taps' to Ukraine and, by implication, the EU, together with the brutal assasination of Boris Nemtsov a few hundred metres from the Kremlin, are both indications that he is ratcheting up the weapon of 'fear' in his armoury.

It is therefore no coincidence that,

"The night following the murder of Nemtsov, his papers, writings and computer hard drives were confiscated in a search performed by police in his flat on Malaya Ordynka street." (Wikipedia)(my emphasis)

What is Putin trying to conceal from the Russian public and the world?

However, the international community is now well aware that Nemtsov was gathering incontrovertible evidence about Putin's central role in arming his proxies in eastern Ukraine, as well as supporting them with thousands of Russian soldiers that are fighting and dying alongside them.

And finally John Kerry, US Secretary of State has publicly called Putin and his kleptocratic clique  'liars', no doubt to the utter astonishment of Lavrov and, perhaps, even Putin himself.

We now wait to see how those ardent supporters of Putin within the EU will respond to these events of the last few days.

As the late Harold Wilson once said at a party conference in 1960,

"Forty-eight hours is a long time in politics".

(to be continued)

Putin dismissive about brutal killing of Boris Nemtsov

"Nemtsov was working on a report presenting evidence that he believed proved Russia's direct involvement in the separatist rebellion that has raged in eastern Ukraine since last April. Ukraine and the West accuse Russia of backing the rebels with troops and sophisticated weapons. Moscow denies the accusations." (CBC News : Feb 27, 2015) (my emphasis)

So wrote a report by the Associated Press  following the brutal killing of Boris Nemtsov yesterday as he walked over a bridge tens of metres from the Kremlin itself. 

An ardent critic of Putin, Nemtsov feared that Putin would have him killed.

"In a recent interview, Mr Nemtsov had said he feared Mr Putin would have him killed because of his opposition to the war in Ukraine." (BBC News : 28 February 2015)

  
Tributes to Nemtsov are now pouring in from all over the world, urging Putin to conduct a transparent investigation into this brutal killing of a man who not only exposed the gargantuan corruption that took place in setting up Putin's Sochi Winter Olympics earlier this year ($30 billion is said to have been corruptly stolen), but who was on the verge of exposing to the Russian people the central role being played by Russia in Putin's war againt Ukraine.

According to Putin's spokesman, Dmitry Peskov,

"Putin said the "cruel murder" had "all the signs of a contract killing" and called it a provocation -- a word meant to suggest Nemtsov was killed in order to blacken the government's reputation." (VoA : February 27, 2015)

No-one should be surprised that Putin, by using the word, "provocation", is rather dismissive of this brutal killing of Nemtsov, just as he was dismissive of the killing of Anna Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko.

Reacting to this expected statement of Putin, Gary Kasparov tweeted,

" '[Journalist Anna] Politkovskaya was gunned down. [Malaysian Airlines flight] MH17 was shot out of the sky [over the conflict zone in eastern Ukraine]. Now Boris is dead. As always, Kremlin will blame opposition, or CIA, whatever.' " (ibid Voa) (my emphasis)

RT, Putin's international propaganda TV mouthpiece, immediately confirmed exactly what Kasparov said viz. As always, Kremlin will blame opposition, or CIA, whatever.' In this instance, the reporting in the west about Nemtsov's murder are simply, "fake stories".

"Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko called Nemtsov a personal friend and a "bridge" between the two countries. He said on his Facebook page that he hopes the killers will be punished." (ibid VoA)

What we now wait for is that the findings of Nemtsov about the direct involvement of Russia in eastern Ukraine should now be made public for the whole world to see.

(to be continued)

Putin's current 'empty' threats about cutting off gas supplies

In yesterday's post I ended by remarking that,

" Will the 'fragrant' Mogherini still rush into Putin's arms tomorrow?"

Lavrov and the 'fragrant Mogherini

Well .... she may not be rushing into Putin's arms, but she has had a little tete a tete with that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet foreign minister Lavrov over the phone yesterday, ostensibly to discuss Putin's threat to cut off gas supplies to Ukraine and, by implication, the EU.

The 'fragrant' Mogherini said that,

"We discussed how to solve the issue of gas supply at trilateral level," Mogherini said, referring to Russia, Ukraine and the EU."(Reuters/Dado Ruvic : Thu Feb 26, 2015)

She then went on to say that,

"There will be a meeting on Monday. The Russian energy minister will participate. We agreed that if things go well, we could develop a bilateral dimension for energy talks between EU and Russia." (ibid Reuters) (my emphasis)

Now, "The EU and Russia have for years had an "energy dialogue" to discuss energy cooperation but there has been little effort to work together since Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimea region last year, leading the EU to impose economic sanctions on Moscow." (ibid Reuters) (my emphasis)

What, therefore, is the 'fragrant' Mogherini up to by even suggesting that Russia and the EU could re-instate their bi-lateral "energy dialogue", even though Putin and his army still occupies Ukrainian Crimea, and contrary to the stand that has been taken by the EU over the previous "energy dialogue" between themselves and Russia?

And now Putin, spitting nails, has apparently, 


"...accused Kiev of threatening to cut off gas to separatist regions in the east of the country, an act which he said "smells of genocide",   

even though,


 "... in practice, the volumes for rebel areas are small and Kiev couldn't cut them off if it tried, because rebels and Russians control pipes at the border."(Reuters/Gleb Garanich : Thu Feb 26, 2015) (my emphasis)
 
Valentyn Zemlyansky informs us that,

"All these threats by ... [Putin] are not particularly frightening for us, as the situation has radically changed compared to last autumn," said Zemlyansky (pic. right), [former spokesman for Ukraine's gas firm Naftogaz]. "We've passed through the winter season - the mild weather really helped us, as well as decreased consumption by industry."

He estimated Ukraine would consume about 35 billion cubic meters of gas in 2015. That is not far out of line with what it produces itself and imports from Europe, although it will be important to build up reserves for next winter's peak." (Peter Graff and Pavel Polityuk : Reuters : Thu Feb 26, 2015) (my emphasis)

In light of what Zemlyansky has said, we have to ask ourselves, "What, exactly, is the 'fragrant' Mogherini really up to by suggesting that the EU could resume " a bilateral dimension for energy talks between EU and Russia." if  "things go well" at the energy talks on Monday between the EU, Ukraine, and Russia? 

Putin really does not have a leg to stand on regarding his empty threats about cutting off gas supplies to Ukraine and the EU. In fact, Putin is 'shooting himself in the foot' since in the very near future Ukraine will no longer have to purchase gas from him, as Zemlyansky indirectly points out. 

Are these 'empty threats' of Putin his way of trying to influence to-day's scheduled meeting of the UN's Security Council to discuss the ceasefire in ukraine?
 
"The UN Security Council (pic. right) scheduled an emergency session to discuss the fragile ceasefire in Ukraine on Friday, a year to the day since Russian troops and pro-Moscow forces began seizing ports and cities on the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea." (Bangkok Post : 27 Feb 2015) (my emphasis)

This meeting must be sticking in the craw of Putin since the UN has come out strongly against his annexation of Crimea. No doubt to try and give a 'figleaf' of respectability to his argument that his proxies and his Russian soldiers are 'adhering' to the protocols of Minsk2 he will, through the mouth of Russian UN representativeVitaly Churkin (pic. left), point to the fact that his heavy weaponry in eastern Ukraine are withdrawing from the frontline strictly according to the Minsk2 protocols.

What he will deliberately leave out is the fact that he is massing his troops and weaponry near Mariupol as a prelude to attacking that strategic port in the very near future.

As reported by Agence France-Presse 14hrs. ago (current GMT: 11.10 am 27 Feb 2015 ),

"Russia wants to secure a land corridor in eastern Ukraine that could include Mariupol but pro-Moscow rebels may wait until the spring to attack the strategic port city, the US spy chief said Thursday.

"He wants a whole entity composed of the two oblasts (regions) in eastern Ukraine which would include a land bridge to Crimea and perhaps a port in specifically Mariupol.

"We do not believe that an attack on Mariupol is imminent. I believe they will wait until the spring before they attack." (Yahoo News : 27 Feb., 2015) (my emphasis)

It is with this possibility in mind that the UK, US, and Canada, are sending military trainers to Ukraine to prepare the Ukrainian army for this offensive that Putin's generals are setting up.

Is this why Lavrov (pic. left), at a conference yesterday

" ..... accused the West of putting forward "ridiculous" demands. "Everyone understands perfectly well that there are no ideal truces and ideal cease-fires," he said." (VoA News : February 26, 2015) (my emphasis)

And what are these ridiculous demands that the West is putting foreward?

"Both the United States and some leaders in Europe have threatened to impose tougher sanctions against Moscow if it does not stop supporting pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine." (ibid VoA News) (my emphasis)

For, " there are no ideal truces and ideal cease-fires" read "Mariupol can therefore be attacked by our soldiers and proxies"

We now wait to see what the UN Security Council will come up with. But we really should not hold our breath. After all, Vitaly Churkin, Putin's mouthpiece, can simply veto anything that goes against the grain of Putin's dangerous fantasies about bringing into being Alexander Dugin's (pic. right) geopolitical dreams about "Novorossiya".

(to be continued)  

Putin finally exposed!

Finally, the truth is beginning to emerge.

It now transpires that Putin,

" ..... has been planning to annex parts of Ukraine for more than 12 months, according to sensational claims made in a Russian newspaper.

Vladimir Putin’s office reportedly compiled a detailed roadmap of how a "pro-Russian drift" could allow it to seize Crimea and some eastern provinces, just a few weeks prior to the ousting of President Viktor Yanukovych and the start of the Ukrainian crisis." (VoA : Wednesday 25 February 2015)

KyivPost has supplied a full Engllish translation of Putin's road-map for annexing eastern Ukraine.

".... an English-language translation done by the Kyiv Post of a leaked analytical note published by the Russian online newspaper Novaya Gazeta on Feb. 24. According to sources of Novaya Gazeta, one of Russia's last independent newspaeprs, this document was written and provided to the President Vladimir Putin's office for consideration between Feb. 4-12, 2014, the same month that the EuroMaidan Revolution drove President Viktor Yanukovych from power on Feb. 22, 2014." (KyivPost : Feb. 25, 2015)

 In this document it is stated that,

"Firstly, the Yanukovych regime is completely bankrupt. His political, diplomatic, financial and information support by the Russian Federation no longer makes sense." (ibid KyivPost)

Furthermore, ".... constructive and “smoothing" participation of Russia into a highly-probable process of disintegration of the Ukrainian state will not only give impulse for the Kremlin integration projects, it will also allow our country to keep, as it was mentioned above, a control over Ukrainian gas pipeline system. It will also allow to significantly change geopolitical landscape in Central and Eastern Europe, with Russia getting back one of the main roles there." (ibid KyiPost) (my emphasis)

With all of this now being revealed, how will Merkel, Hollande, and those supporting Putin in the EU, react to these revelations? 

Will it spur them on to finally 'bite the bullet' and support Ukraine with tougher economic sanctions against Putin and, more importantly, supply Poroshenko with the necessary weapons with which to defend Ukraine against Putin's road-map?

Cyprus, the money-laundering capital of Russia, gives us the answer! Cyprus President Nikos Anastasiadis ahead of a visit to Moscow, has stated that,

"“We have openly said in the Council of Europe that sanctions will not solve the problem. Sanctions will only create wider problems for the whole European Union. It turns out that these sanctions will be paid for by the people from the smallest of the countries,” he said, adding that Cyprus is very closely connected with Russia." (RT : February 24, 2015) (my emphasis)

And why is he against sanctions from the EU on Russia? Because,

Nikos Anastasiadis

“Our [Cyprus's]economy and defense are highly dependent on our relations with Russia. Thousands of Russian companies work in Cyprus, we have large investments made by the citizens of Russia,” he said. “Our tourism also strongly depends on Russians.” (ibid RT) (my emphasis)

And as these revelations hit the international community, Michael Fallon, UK Defence Secretary, reported to the House of Commons (February 25, 2015) that Britain will be supplying Ukraine with training and logistics, and possibly more, so that it can defend itself against Putin's army.

In the US and Canada similar moves are afoot.

"Sen. Bob Menendez (D-N.J.) said on Wednesday that the administration should impose tougher sanctions against Russia in the wake of additional ceasefire violations in Ukraine.

Sen. Bob Menendez

"........it is time to fully implement the law.
"The legislation was necessary in December and even more so today... I appreciate the administration's comprehensive efforts to counter Russian agression, but I also believe it is not enough," he said. "Fully implementing the sanctions and the assistance in the Ukraine Freedom Support Act will help Ukraine restore its sovereignty. It will restore its territorial integrity, and it will help deter Russia from further destabalizing the region." (The Hill : February 25, 2015)
The Ukraine Freedom Support Act includes:

"SEC. 6. INCREASED MILITARY ASSISTANCE FOR THE GOVERNMENT OF UKRAINE. (a) In General.--The President is authorized to provide defense articles, defense services, and training to the Government of Ukraine for the purpose of countering offensive weapons and reestablishing the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including anti-tank and anti-armor weapons, crew weapons and ammunition, counter-artillery radars to identify and target artillery batteries, fire control, range finder, and optical and guidance and control equipment, tactical troop- operated surveillance drones, and secure command and communications equipment, pursuant to the provisions of the Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751 et seq.), the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151 et seq.), and other relevant provisions of law." (Congres.Gov) (my emphasis)

Defence Minister Jason Kenney

In Canada,

"The Harper cabinet is actively and seriously considering whether Canada should join the U.S. and Britain in a military training mission to shore up embattled Ukrainian troops, Defence Minister Jason Kenney said Wednesday." (Global News : February 25, 2015)

It is now to be seen whether Merkel and Hollande, together with Putin's supporters in the EU, will be supportive of the actions that Britain, the US, and Canada are taking in helping Ukraine to defend itself against Putin's proxies and Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine by dramatically increasing EU sanctions against Russia. 

Poland and the Baltic states are more than willing also to support Ukraine, with defensive weapons if necessary.

Cyprus's President Nikos Anastasiadis, who has gone 'cap-in-hand' to Putin to ask for a bailout of his faltering economy, would be wise to educate himself on the parlous state of the Russian economy itself.

Putin is willing to 'bail him out' simply because he does not want to see the 'money-laundering' capital of Russia go under economically. What will then happen to all that Russian criminal money languishing in the banks of Cyprus?

We now wait patiently to see just what the EU ministers will do now that Putin's Ukrainian adventurism has finally been exposed. Will the 'fragrant' Mogherini still rush into Putin's arms tomorrow?

(to be continued)

Is Putin finally being confronted?

Oh! What a tangled web we weave

When first we practice to deceive

It would seem that the 'fragrant' Mogherini may be running into the arms of Putin this Friday or so, at least, says the Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Meshkov. (KyivPost : Feb. 24, 2015) (pic. the 'fragrant' Mogherini and Sergey Lavrov, that dyed-in-the-wool Soviet foreign minister of Putin)

On a Sunday program (22 Feb. 2015) of the Italian television channel RAI-3 «She tempo che fa» she answered a question of the presenter as follows: 

The 'fragrant Mogherini

""The real question Putin is: what are your intentions? Back to the Cold War? We will not follow this path, for us the logic of the fifties - it's not logic, rather it was his logic (Putin), these last few months. But before the erroneous logic is the worst thing you can do - is to follow this logic. What you need to do is to go back to work, negotiations, now it is his turn to give us the answer. Cease-fire agreement had been reached, an action plan, revision of the constitution, decentralization, it is clear that the situation remains very difficult. Now he (Putin) can prove that he can be part of the solution that will lead to cooperation. It is in the interests of Russian. There's still time. It is in the interests of Russians, Ukrainians, Europeans need to find a solution to this conflict and return to work. " (Cyplive : 24.02.2015) (my emphasis)

But what does the following actually mean?

• "what are your intentions?" Has it not yet sunk into her head that Putin's intentions is to annex bits of Ukraine whilst at the same time trying to prevent the Ukrainians from seeing their future as being part of the EU rather than being a vassal of Russia?
• "for us the logic of the fifties - it's not logic, rather it was his logic ...... But before the erroneous logic is the worst thing you can do - is to follow this logic." How can the 'logic' of the fifties not be 'logic', whilst at the same time be 'logic' for Putin? Surely if it's 'not logic' then it must be 'illogical'
• "What you need to do is to go back to work, negotiations, now it is his turn to give us the answer." Is this to mean that whatever answer Putin gives us we simply have to accept it?
• "Europeans need to find a solution to this conflict and return to work." Has Putin's war with Ukraine put the European nations out of work?

With a  High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy like the 'fragrant Mogherini, who needs an enemy of Ukraine, like Putin, when she is doing rather a good job of being one herself? Is it any wonder that many EU states were against her appointment as the EU's High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy.

And whilst the 'fragrant' Mogherini is considering running into the arms of Putin in Moscow this coming Friday, the foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, Germany, and France, met in Paris yesterday (23 Feb. 2015) to try and rescue the failed Minks2 ceasefire.

As reported from Paris by the Associated Press (AP),

"Talks about a fragile peace deal for Ukraine ended in tension Tuesday, with differences over who is at fault over continued violence despite a cease-fire.

The foreign ministers of Russia, Ukraine, Germany and France met in Paris amid uncertainty that the accord will hold — in particular a promised withdrawal of heavy weapons from the front line." (AP : 24 Feb., 2015) (my emphasis)

   (Ger) Steinheimer         (Ukr) Klimkin               (Fr) Fabius              (Ru) Lavrov

And while these talks in Paris dissolved into nothingness, David Cameron, UK Prime Minister, has decided to send British troops to Ukraine to act purely in a training capacity.

 

"The United Kingdom stunned officials across Europe with a unilateral announcement that it would send 75 troops to Ukraine within the month to train the country's embattled forces in four skill sets – infantry, intelligence, logistics and medical." (KyivPost : Feb. 25, 2015)

"The UK decision followed hot on the heels of the Paris meeting's conclusion, implying impatience and frustration with yet another fruitless round of talks with an intransigent Russia." (ibid KyivPost) (my emphasis)

Lt. General Ben Hodges

"For its part, the US has already pledged a full battalion of advisers to help train three Ukrainian battalions in spring this year, at the Yavariv training center in the western Ukrainian city of Lviv.

.....The US Army Europe commander, Lt. General Ben Hodges, said American soldiers will teach the Ukrainians how to better defend themselves against "Russian and rebel artillery and rockets." " (ibid KyivPost)

The US and Britain should now take the next step and supply Ukraine with defensive weapons.

Mindful of the fact that President Obama is a 'hairs breadth' away from sending defensive weappons to Ukraine; Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov starts to dish out threats in the event of President Obama giving the green light for sending defensive weapons to Ukraine.
 

Sergey Ryabkov

"If the US were to supply Ukraine with ammunition and weapons, it would “explode the whole situation” in eastern Ukraine and Russia would be forced to respond “appropriately,” Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov said.

“It would be a major blow to the Minsk agreements and would explode the whole situation,” TASS quoted Ryabkov as saying.
 
Moscow would not be able to remain indifferent “to such provocative actions,” he added. “We’ll have to respond appropriately.” (RT : February 24, 2015) (my emphasis)

How Ryabkov could keep a straight face when Putin's Russian soldiers and proxies in eastern Ukraine blew Minsk2 out of the water when they attacked and over-ran Debaltseve, and are at this very moment preparing for an attack upon Mariupol, should simply leave everyone speechless, especially the likes of Merkel and Hollande. 

These threats of Putin should be confronted head-on, as Prime Minister David Cameron suggests.

"“People will be looking at Mariupol as the next potential flashpoint, and if that were to happen, I think the argument for further action would be overwhelming. I think that would be the view of countries like Poland, the Baltic states and many others." (ibid KyivPost) (my emphasis) 

David Cameron and Petro Poroshenko

The $64 question that we should now all be asking ourselves is,

The 'fragrant' Mogherini with Lavrov and Putin

"Will the 'fragrant' Mogherini be running into the arms of Putin this coming Friday, as Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Meshkov has suggested, in light of all these developments that have taken place?"

Exactly whose side is she on?




(to be continued)

What, now, will the US and the EU do to stop Putin?

Yesterday (23/2/2015) Putin gave an interview on Russian TV that was, no doubt, watched by the vast majority of Russians. There are some salient points that he mentioned viz.

1. Mr Putin was asked if there was a real threat of war, given the situation in eastern Ukraine. "I think that such an apocalyptic scenario is unlikely and I hope this will never happen," he said
2. As for Russia invading Ukraine, President Putin once again shrugged off evidence that he's deployed troops to help the rebels. He said Kiev was claiming that to hide its humiliation at being defeated by former miners and tractor drivers.
3. The Russian leader also said the Minsk deal had become an "international legal document" following UN Security Council approval of a Russian-drafted resolution endorsing it. (BBC News Europe : 24 February 2015) (my emphasis)

Point (1) is simply a baldfaced brazen lie. I am reminded of a talk that Putin gave to students in St. Petersburg last year (2014), when he threatened nuclear war if  there should be any military response from the west to what was then taking place in eastern Ukraine.

Point (2) is another brazen lie that he told the Russian people. Putin and his Kremlin acolytes have been singing this mantra since the start of the criminal uprising in eastern Ukraine that he has orchestrated from the very beginning. The growing number of Russian soldiers that have died in eastern Ukraine cannot forever be concealed from the Russian people.

Earlier this month, at the Munich Security Conference, Poroshenko presented proof of the Russian soldiers that have died in eastern Ukraine.

Point (3) is admirably dealy with by John Kerry. Putin is himself 'breaking' the Minsk deal [that has] become an "international legal document" following UN Security Council approval of a Russian-drafted resolution endorsing it. What recently happened in Debaltseve is ample evidence of him trampling all over the Minsk2 agreements, as is the current and increasing build-up of Russian and his proxy forces on the outskirts of Mariupol in preparation for an attack on this Ukrainian port.

  
In this clip from his interview, Putin also says that,

 ''A big European country like Ukraine should – in the first place – return the nation to normal, restore the economy, society and relations with the south-east of the country in a civilized way and ensure legitimate rights and interests of the people in Donbass,” said Putin. (Sofia News Agency : February 24, 2015, Tuesday) (my emphasis)

But what about the effect that the sanctions against Russia are having on the Russian economy; sanctions that are a direct result of his war with Ukraine, and his overwhelming support of the rebels in eastern Ukraine with both Russian soldiers and sophisticated Russian military equipment.

As reported in the the Moscow Times (Jan. 26 2015),

"Russia's consumer rights watchdog said Monday that it had imposed a temporary ban on salt imports from a state-owned Ukrainian producer, citing a violation of legislation.

Artyomsol exports salt to 22 countries in Europe and the Commonwealth of Independent States, which groups former Soviet republics. Its annual capacity is more than 7 million tons and it has had an estimated 24 percent share of the Russian market."

Thanks to Putin, has salt has now become a 'prized' commodity for the Russian consumer?

Even though John Kerry has stated that yet more sanctions could descend upon Russia, thanks to Putin trampling all over the recently agreed Minsk2 ceasefire, an "international legal document"; the question remains whether sanctions on their own will stop Putin from spilling his war with Ukraine into wider Europe.

Now, more than ever, is the time to supply Ukraine with defensive armaments to prevent Putin from attacking Mariupol.

Andrius Kubilius, a former PM of Lithuania, expresses rather succinctly what options are now open to the West to stop Putin from escalating the war in eastern Ukraine.

The next few days will determine what actions against Putin will come into force from both the US and the EU.

(to be continued)