Putin will not allow either UN or EU 'ceasefire' monitors in eastern Ukraine

Now that Debaltseve has fallen into the hands of Putin's proxies and his Russian soldiers, there is an urgency that the borders between the occupied eastern Ukraine territory and the rest of Ukraine be fully patrolled by observers of the 'ceasefire'. The paltry 250 OSCE observers are simply not enough to fully ensure that the 'ceasefire' holds.

To this end, Poroshenko has called for,

"..... UN peacekeepers to be deployed to eastern Ukraine to enforce a ceasefire.
At an emergency security meeting [of Ukraine’s Security Council] , he said such a force would help guarantee security "in a situation where the promise of peace is not being kept".(BBC News Europe : 19 February 2015) (my emphasis)

Putin is rather livid that Poroshenko now aims to have international monitors of the 'ceasefire' that his proxies and Russian soldiers have, with impunity, broken these last few days. It was therefore to be expected that his mouthpiece at the UN, Vitaly Churkin, blew a gasket on hearing about the call of Poroshenko for UN peacekeepers, and immediately proclaimed that,

Churkin

“I think it’s a little bit disturbing, because they just signed the Minsk agreements on February 12. And the Minsk agreements provide for the role of the OSCE; there is nothing about the UN or European Union. So for them to start talking immediately about something else… I think instead of coming up with new ideas they should really work harder on implementing what they agreed on,” (RT: February 18, 2015) (my emphasis)

Samantha Power

That Churkin can say this with a straight face simply beggars belief when, as US Ambassador to the UN, Samatha Power, has recently pointed out,

"Russia signs agreements then does everything within its power to undermine them. Russia champions the sovereignty of nations and then acts as if a neighbour's borders do not exist." (BBC News Europe : 17 February 2015). (my emphasis)

Michael Fallon

It is with this in mind that Michael Fallon, UK Secretary of Defence, has

"...called for Nato states to be prepared for aggression from Russia "in whatever form it takes", and added that "Nato is getting ready" for such circumstances:

"I'm worried about Putin. I'm worried about his pressure on the Baltics, the way he is testing Nato." (Anoosh Chakelian : New Statesman :19 February, 2015) (my emphasis)

Poroshenko's call for UN peacekeepers, or an EU policing force, to act as monitors of the 'ceasefire' along the borders of eastern Ukraine and rebel-held territory should be immediately implemented as a preventative measure against the impeding attack by Putin's forces on Mariupol. 

Without Mariupol, Putin will NOT have his land-bridge between Russia and Crimea.

He will not stop until this aim is achieved. As Samantha Power has pointed out, "Russia champions the sovereignty of nations and then acts as if a neighbour's borders do not exist."

He will, however, have to fight his way through UN (or EU) 'ceasefire' monitors. 


With his pathological mind-set about "Novorossiya" he may, indeed, simply ignore either UN or EU 'ceasefire' monitors and simply go ahead with his invasion of Mariupol, just as he has ignored protocol when sending his nuclear bombers to fly along the English Channel without having their transponders on. Having their transponders on would signal to other commercial aircraft that they are in the vicinity, and so prevent a possible collision between them.

It is this dangerous behaviour of Putin that Michael Fallon is rightly worried about, as are the Baltic states of Estonia, Lithuania, and Latvia. These states have large populations of Russians, and Putin's nationalist propaganda blares out of their TV screens each and every day. Indeed, Putin has already indirectly threatened them.

"If I wanted, in two days I could have Russian troops not only in Kiev, but also in Riga, Vilnius, Tallinn, Warsaw and Bucharest," Mr Putin allegedly told President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine, reported Süddeutsche Zeitung, a German newspaper." ( Justin Huggler, Berlin : The Telegraph :18 Sep 2014) (my emphasis)


We now wait to see what the EU decides in relation to Poroshenko's call for 'ceasefire' monitors.

It can be expected that Germany's Angela Merkel will try to spike this suggestion of Poroshenko to the relief, no doubt, of many other EU countries sympathetic towards (or fearful of ) Putin.
 
And the UN?

"UN peacekeeping operations are deployed with the consent of the main parties to the conflict. This requires a commitment by the parties to a political process. Their acceptance of a peacekeeping operation provides the UN with the necessary freedom of action, both political and physical, to carry out its mandated tasks." (UN Peacekeeping)

Given Vitaly Churkin's 'hissy fit' on hearing about the suggestion of Poroshenko regarding UN peacekeepers being deployed in eastern Ukraine; it is obvious that Putin will simply say "nyet".

However, this response of his will reveal his contempt for the 'ceasefire'.

Putin will have to tread more carefully if the EU does decide to put together an EU policing force to monitor the 'ceasefire'. Such a force WILL NOT require his consent. It is for this reason that Poroshenko would prefer to see an EU policing force in operation rather than a UN peacekeeping force. The latter is 'dead in the water' even before it is discussed.

Unfortunately, Putin has many 'marionettes' in the EU that he controls. What is the guessing that they will speak as 'one voice' and also say "nyet"?

(to be continued)

Putin has publicly relegated the Minsk 'ceasefire' agreement to the dustbin of history

Yesterday the prime minister of Hungary, Victor Orban, met with Putin in Budapest, ostensibly to,

".... negotiate a new agreement for Russian gas supplies." (BBC News Europe : 17 February 2015)

Victor Orban is considered to be,

" ... among Mr Putin's closest allies in Europe." (ibid BBC) (my emphasis)
 
No doubt with the Hungarian uprising in 1956 in mind,

"Some 2,000 people have marched through the Hungarian capital, Budapest, ahead of talks between Prime Minister Viktor Orban and Russian President Vladimir Putin" (ibid BBC)

 
After their meeting, Putin gave a press conference about the continuing fighting in eastern Ukraine. There is something rather ominous about the 'smirk' on his face at the start of his press conference.

Putin legitimises the breaking of the ceasefire by his proxies and Russian soldiers in eastern Ukraine, and actually suggests that the Ukrainian forces defending their country should lay down their arms and simply surrender to the forces that he controls. 

Yet it has been but a few days ago since the Minsk agreements about a 'full' ceasefire in eastern Ukraine, a ceasefire that Putin himself endorsed at a press conference.

And now, to add insult to injury, Vitaly Churkin, Russian ambassador to the UN, drafted a resolution concerning the situation in Ukraine that was unanimously approved by the Council.
 
"The UN Security Council on Tuesday (17 Feb. 2015) unanimously adopted a resolution endorsing measures for the implementation of the new truce on Ukraine crisis.
In the Russian-drafted resolution, the Council reaffirmed "its full respect for the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine," and expressed "its grave concern at the tragic events and violence in eastern regions of Ukraine." (China Europe : Feb. 17 (Xinhua)) (my emphasis)

Ambassador Samantha Power

"US Ambassador Samantha Power welcomed the agreement but said that Russia had to prove its commitment to peace. ...

"Russia signs agreements then does everything within its power to undermine them. Russia champions the sovereignty of nations and then acts as if a neighbour's borders do not exist." (ibid BBC) (my emphasis)


It is blatantly obvious that Putin is not concerned at all about breaking agreements. 

Putin is being driven not only by the fact that his 'ardent' supporters in the EU (including the 'fragrant' Mogherini, practically all the right-wing and extreme right-wing MEP's, the Czech president, Victor Orban, Matteo Renzi and, more recently, Alexis Tsipras, the new Greek prime minister) will ensure that the EU will not be able to talk with one voice about how to help Ukraine, nor will the EU and the US see 'eye to eye' about what further actions against Russia should be put in place so that the costs to Russia of Putin's adventurism in eastern Ukraine is ratcheted up.

Putin is not simply 'cocking a snook' at the US and the EU, he is trying to elevate himself even above the UN itself, which he also treats with utter contempt.

That 'smirk' on his face at the start of his press conference in Hungary yesterday is very telling indeed. But what is even more disconcerting is that Putin is writing the 'hymn sheet' from which his kleptocratic clique at the Kremlin is singing in unison. From Lavrov to Churkin; as soon as a lie emanates from the mouth of Putin, that lie becomes their mantra.

The fear of himself that Putin is creating within the Kremlin mirrors that which Stalin created. Is there a silent  Khrushchev amongst his kleptocratic clique at the Kremlin?

(to be continued)

Putin vs Obama

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

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

Furthermore that,

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

Ian Bond

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

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

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

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

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

Vitaly Churkin : Russian UN Representative

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


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

This is evidenced by the fact that,

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

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

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

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

          Angela Merkel              Francois Hollande            Federica Mogherini

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

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

will fall on many deaf ears in the EU.

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

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

(to be continued)