Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

by **seemslikeadream** » Wed Nov 19, 2014 8:46 pm

The Anti-Empire Report #134
By William Blum – Published November 19th, 2014

Russia invades Ukraine. Again. And again. And yet again … using Saddam’s WMD

“Russia reinforced what Western and Ukrainian officials described as a stealth invasion on Wednesday [August 27], sending armored troops across the border as it expanded the conflict to a new section of Ukrainian territory. The latest incursion, which Ukraine’s military said included five armored personnel carriers, was at least the third movement of troops and weapons from Russia across the southeast part of the border this week.”

None of the photos accompanying this New York Times story online showed any of these Russian troops or armored vehicles.

“The Obama administration,” the story continued, “has asserted over the past week that the Russians had moved artillery, air-defense systems and armor to help the separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk. ‘These incursions indicate a Russian-directed counteroffensive is likely underway’, Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said. At the department’s daily briefing in Washington, Ms. Psaki also criticized what she called the Russian government’s ‘unwillingness to tell the truth’ that its military had sent soldiers as deep as 30 miles inside Ukraine territory.”

Thirty miles inside Ukraine territory and not a single satellite photo, not a camera anywhere around, not even a one-minute video to show for it. “Ms. Psaki apparently [sic] was referring to videos of captured Russian soldiers, distributed by the Ukrainian government.” The Times apparently forgot to inform its readers where they could see these videos.

“The Russian aim, one Western official said, may possibly be to seize an outlet to the sea in the event that Russia tries to establish a separatist enclave in eastern Ukraine.”

This of course hasn’t taken place. So what happened to all these Russian soldiers 30 miles inside Ukraine? What happened to all the armored vehicles, weapons, and equipment?

“The United States has photographs that show the Russian artillery moved into Ukraine, American officials say. One photo dated last Thursday, shown to a New York Times reporter, shows Russian military units moving self-propelled artillery into Ukraine. Another photo, dated Saturday, shows the artillery in firing positions in Ukraine.”

Where are these photographs? And how will we know that these are Russian soldiers? And how will we know that the photos were taken in Ukraine? But most importantly, where are the fucking photographs?

Why am I so cynical? Because the Ukrainian and US governments have been feeding us these scare stories for eight months now, without clear visual or other evidence, often without even common sense. Here are a few of the many other examples, before and after the one above:

The Wall Street Journal (March 28) reported: “Russian troops massing near Ukraine are actively concealing their positions and establishing supply lines that could be used in a prolonged deployment, ratcheting up concerns that Moscow is preparing for another [sic] major incursion and not conducting exercises as it claims, US officials said.”

“The Ukrainian government charged that the Russian military was not only approaching but had actually crossed the border into rebel-held regions.” (Washington Post, November 7)

“U.S. Air Force Gen. Philip M. Breedlove told reporters in Bulgaria that NATO had observed Russian tanks, Russian artillery, Russian air defense systems and Russian combat troops enter Ukraine across a completely wide-open border with Russia in the previous two days.” (Washington Post, November 13)

“Ukraine accuses Russia of sending more soldiers and weapons to help rebels prepare for a new offensive. The Kremlin has repeatedly denied aiding the separatists.” (Reuters, November 16)

Since the February US-backed coup in Ukraine, the State Department has made one accusation after another about Russian military actions in Eastern Ukraine without presenting any kind of satellite imagery or other visual or documentary evidence; or they present something that’s very unclear and wholly inconclusive, such as unmarked vehicles, or unsourced reports, or citing “social media”; what we’re left with is often no more than just an accusation. The Ukrainian government has matched them.

On top of all this we should keep in mind that if Moscow decided to invade Ukraine they’d certainly provide air cover for their ground forces. There has been no mention of air cover.

This is all reminiscent of the numerous stories in the past three years of “Syrian planes bombing defenseless citizens”. Have you ever seen a photo or video of a Syrian government plane dropping bombs? Or of the bombs exploding? When the source of the story is mentioned, it’s almost invariably the rebels who are fighting against the Syrian government. Then there’s the “chemical weapon” attacks by the same evil Assad government. When a photo or video has accompanied the story I’ve never once seen grieving loved ones or media present; not one person can be seen wearing a gas mask. Is it only children killed or suffering? No rebels?

And then there’s the July 17 shootdown of Malaysia Flight MH17, over eastern Ukraine, taking 298 lives, which Washington would love to pin on Russia or the pro-Russian rebels. The US government – and therefore the US media, the EU, and NATO – want us all to believe it was the rebels and/or Russia behind it. The world is still waiting for any evidence. Or even a motivation. Anything at all. President Obama is not waiting. In a talk on November 15 in Australia, he spoke of “opposing Russia’s aggression against Ukraine – which is a threat to the world, as we saw in the appalling shoot-down of MH17”. Based on my reading, I’d guess that it was the Ukranian government behind the shootdown, mistaking it for Putin’s plane that reportedly was in the area.

Can it be said with certainty that all the above accusations were lies? No, but the burden of proof is on the accusers, and the world is still waiting. The accusers would like to create the impression that there are two sides to each question without actually having to supply one of them.

The United States punishing Cuba

For years American political leaders and media were fond of labeling Cuba an “international pariah”. We haven’t heard that for a very long time. Perhaps one reason is the annual vote in the United Nations General Assembly on the resolution which reads: “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”. This is how the vote has gone (not including abstentions):

Year Votes (Yes-No) No Votes
1992 59-2 US, Israel
1993 88-4 US, Israel, Albania, Paraguay
1994 101-2 US, Israel
1995 117-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan
1996 138-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan
1997 143-3 US, Israel, Uzbekistan
1998 157-2 US, Israel
1999 155-2 US, Israel
2000 167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands
2001 167-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands
2002 173-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands
2003 179-3 US, Israel, Marshall Islands
2004 179-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2005 182-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2006 183-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2007 184-4 US, Israel, Marshall Islands, Palau
2008 185-3 US, Israel, Palau
2009 187-3 US, Israel, Palau
2010 187-2 US, Israel
2011 186-2 US, Israel
2012 188-3 US, Israel, Palau
2013 188-2 US, Israel
2014 188-2 US, Israel
This year Washington’s policy may be subject to even more criticism than usual due to the widespread recognition of Cuba’s response to the Ebola outbreak in Africa.

Each fall the UN vote is a welcome reminder that the world has not completely lost its senses and that the American empire does not completely control the opinion of other governments.

Speaking before the General Assembly before last year’s vote, Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez declared: “The economic damages accumulated after half a century as a result of the implementation of the blockade amount to $1.126 trillion.” He added that the blockade “has been further tightened under President Obama’s administration”, some 30 US and foreign entities being hit with $2.446 billion in fines due to their interaction with Cuba.

However, the American envoy, Ronald Godard, in an appeal to other countries to oppose the resolution, said:

The international community … cannot in good conscience ignore the ease and frequency with which the Cuban regime silences critics, disrupts peaceful assembly, impedes independent journalism and, despite positive reforms, continues to prevent some Cubans from leaving or returning to the island. The Cuban government continues its tactics of politically motivated detentions, harassment and police violence against Cuban citizens.

So there you have it. That is why Cuba must be punished. One can only guess what Mr. Godard would respond if told that more than 7,000 people were arrested in the United States during the Occupy Movement’s first 8 months of protest in 2011-12 ; that many of them were physically abused by the police; and that their encampments were violently destroyed.

Does Mr. Godard have access to any news media? Hardly a day passes in America without a police officer shooting to death an unarmed person.

As to “independent journalism” – What would happen if Cuba announced that from now on anyone in the country could own any kind of media? How long would it be before CIA money – secret and unlimited CIA money financing all kinds of fronts in Cuba – would own or control most of the media worth owning or controlling?

The real reason for Washington’s eternal hostility toward Cuba has not changed since the revolution in 1959 – The fear of a good example of an alternative to the capitalist model; a fear that has been validated repeatedly over the years as many Third World countries have expressed their adulation of Cuba.

How the embargo began: On April 6, 1960, Lester D. Mallory, US Deputy Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs, wrote in an internal memorandum: “The majority of Cubans support Castro … The only foreseeable means of alienating internal support is through disenchantment and disaffection based on economic dissatisfaction and hardship. … every possible means should be undertaken promptly to weaken the economic life of Cuba.” Mallory proposed “a line of action which … makes the greatest inroads in denying money and supplies to Cuba, to decrease monetary and real wages, to bring about hunger, desperation and overthrow of government.”

Later that year, the Eisenhower administration instituted its suffocating embargo against its everlasting enemy.

The United States judging and punishing the rest of the world

In addition to Cuba, Washington currently is imposing economic and other sanctions against Burma, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Iran, China, North Korea, South Korea, United Arab Emirates, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Switzerland, Turkey, Germany, Malaysia, South Africa, Mexico, South Sudan, Sudan, Russia, Syria, Venezuela, India, and Zimbabwe. These are sanctions mainly against governments, but also against some private enterprises; there are also many other sanctions against individuals not included here.

Imbued with a sense of America’s moral superiority and “exceptionalism”, each year the State Department judges the world, issuing reports evaluating the behavior of all other nations, often accompanied by sanctions of one kind or another. There are different reports rating how each lesser nation has performed in the previous year in areas such as religious freedom, human rights, the war on drugs, trafficking in persons, and sponsors of terrorism. The criteria used in these reports are often political. Cuba, for example, is always listed as a sponsor of terrorism whereas anti-Castro exile groups in Florida, which have committed literally hundreds of terrorist acts over the years, are not listed as terrorist groups or supporters of such.

Cuba, which has been on the sponsor-of-terrorism list longer (since 1982) than any other country, is one of the most glaring anomalies. The most recent State Department report on this matter, in 2012, states that there is “no indication that the Cuban government provided weapons or paramilitary training to terrorist groups.” There are, however, some retirees of Spain’s Basque terrorist group ETA (which appears on the verge of disbanding) in Cuba, but the report notes that the Cuban government evidently is trying to distance itself from them by denying them services such as travel documents. Some members of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) have been allowed into Cuba, but that was because Cuba was hosting peace talks between the FARC and the Colombian government, which the report notes.

The US sanctions mechanism is so effective and formidable that it strikes fear (of huge fines) into the hearts of banks and other private-sector organizations that might otherwise consider dealing with a listed state.

by **seemslikeadream** » Fri Jan 02, 2015 5:24 pm

by **RocketMan** » Sat Jan 03, 2015 6:16 am

A friend of my clearly on the NATO/US/Ukraine government side of things posted this, but I found it interesting nonetheless. Stone may have trouble calibrating his dissident impulses in his older years, veering too close to authoritarian actors at times.

http://krytyka.com/en/community/blogs/o ... iver-stone

I hope that, at this early stage, your first thoughts about your possible film on Ianukovich and his rule have been misinterpreted or misunderstood and that my remarks prove unnecessary and irrelevant. But, in as much as you do seem interested at this point in a documentary film about one of the great events of post war Europe, I hope that you will record not only the activities of the CIA in that event. I trust you will also record the role of Putin’s FSB in bringing Ianukovich to power in 2010, in controlling his government thereafter, and in the events of 2013-14. Since Mr. Putin’s government has obviously given you a visa and permission to visit Mr. Ianukovich in Russia, dare one imagine your hosts might also oblige you with access to FSB files about FSB activities?

In any case, I trust that any film you might make on Ukraine will pay due attention to the interests and grievances of Ukrainians, who, like their eastern European counterparts demonstrated in 1989, do not want to be ruled by pro-Kremlin elites and are now again, as in 1917-22, fighting a Russian invasion to prove it. I would also hope that if a director of your repute did make a documentary film about Ukraine it would not simply parrot the ideas of a reviled ousted dictator who built fortified fairy-land palaces with gold toilets in a country foul with corruption private wealth and public squalor. I would hope such a film explain that Ukrainians want no more to be controlled by Russia or Russian controlled dictators, than Latin American and Asian peoples want to be controlled by America or American controlled dictators.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sun Jan 04, 2015 5:29 pm

Op-Ed Kiev's brutal strategy in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine

By LEV GOLINKIN Opinion Commentary Europe Ukraine Russia Laws and Legislation Ukraine Crisis (2013-2014)

A brutal winter and brutal actions from Kiev in eastern Ukraine
Ukraine cannot afford to have Donetsk and Luhansk solidify into a permanent conflict zone
In mid-December, President Obama signed into law the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, which, among options for more sanctions against Russia, calls on the White House to provide Kiev with assistance for internally displaced persons as well as to cooperate with international organizations to distribute aid in Ukraine.

Where the U.N. sees a looming humanitarian disaster [in eastern Ukraine], Kiev may see an opportunity.
-
Such aid is sorely needed in eastern Ukraine. Much of the infrastructure of Donetsk and Luhansk — the main cities in the Donbas region — has been destroyed, coal and food supplies are disrupted, and Kiev froze government pension and other payments to the region in November. With brutal winter conditions approaching, risks of starvation and death are becoming too real. As the United Nations and Amnesty International put it, a humanitarian crisis is looming.

Unfortunately, recent statements by Col. Oleksiy Nozdrachov, Ukraine's chief of military and civilian cooperation in eastern Ukraine, show disturbing signs of Kiev's attitude toward this crisis. Where the U.N. sees a looming humanitarian disaster, Kiev may see an opportunity.

Kiev's strategy, as outlined by Nozdrachov in USA Today, is to continue withholding government services from the rebel-held areas in hopes that increased suffering will turn the local population against the separatists. “This shows the population in the occupied territory that the situation under the Ukrainian government is much, much better,” Nozdrachov said. In addition, an Amnesty International report posted Dec. 24 said pro-Kiev “volunteer battalions are increasingly blocking humanitarian aid into eastern Ukraine in a move which will exacerbate a pending humanitarian crisis.”

These actions are reprehensible. Kiev, and most of the world, rightly views the petty warlords in control of Donbas as illegitimate entities. However, if a gunman takes over an office building, no police department in the United States would condone withholding basic necessities from the hostages in the hope that they would rise up and vanquish the perpetrator. Providing aid to civilians trapped in a standoff is not appeasement or negotiation with terrorists; it is a fundamental principle: preventing needless loss of life.

Why the U.S. has an obligation to help Ukraine defend itself
Why the U.S. has an obligation to help Ukraine defend itself
Any decision to use the tragic situation in eastern Ukraine as a weapon is not only morally repugnant, but it also will surely have negative repercussions for Kiev. The strategy may help force the rebels to capitulate and allow Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko to establish nominal control over the region. But Ukraine is a land where grudges run deep. Western Ukrainians have never forgotten the genocidal policies of Josef Stalin's Russia (which, incidentally, employed hunger as a weapon); the Russian-speaking residents of Donbass are not likely to forgive Kiev for starving them into submission. Anger at Kiev, and the West, will continue to simmer in Donbass. And that is a problem.

Ukraine cannot afford to have Donetsk and Luhansk solidify into a permanent conflict zone such as Transnistria in Moldova and Abkhazia and South Ossetia in Georgia, regions where long-standing enmities fester, preventing true national unity in those countries. Ukraine has long been teetering on the brink of economic collapse. Turning it around will be an enormous undertaking by the most optimistic of estimates; doing so without the industrial centers and natural resources of Donetsk and Luhansk may be impossible. Ukraine's best chance to beat back economic disaster is to move forward as a united nation, and to do that, it needs to win back the eastern Ukrainians.

That presents a challenge, which cannot be overcome by simply regaining territory and planting a Ukrainian flag. Eastern Ukraine is separated from the rest of country by a cultural, linguistic, and even religious, divide, with one of the two major Orthodox churches aligned with Kiev and the other with Moscow. It is a blurry divide, running through towns, sometimes through neighborhoods and families. Until last year, it was not an insurmountable barrier to national unity — if that were the case, Ukraine would have split apart in the early 1990s, as did Yugoslavia and Czechoslovakia. But after 4,700 deaths in eastern Ukraine and Crimea, more than a million displaced persons and continued fighting, the chasms have deepened.

On Monday, Poroshenko announced that he would meet Jan. 15 with representatives from France, Germany and Russia to discuss a peace settlement for Ukraine. Ukraine, he said, cannot win back Donbas militarily. In Moscow, Russia announced that it would continue to supply oil to Ukraine, and over the weekend, prisoners were exchanged between Kiev and rebel forces in separate peace talks in Minsk. These are welcome moves, but for the millions of pensioners and other civilians in Donbas, will the resolution they portend — a resolution that has been so far been elusive — come fast enough?

Lev Golinkin, who was born in the former Soviet Union — in the city of Kharkov, which is now part of eastern Ukraine — is the author of the memoir "A Backpack, a Bear, and Eight Crates of Vodka." He lives in New Jersey.

Germany Says Ukraine, Russia Ready To Meet 'As Soon As Possible'

By RFE/RL
January 02, 2015

The German Foreign Ministry says Russia and Ukraine have agreed to meet “as soon as possible” to discuss ending the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

A ministry spokesperson said German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier discussed the standoff between Ukrainian forces and pro-Russian separatists in a January 2 telephone conference with his Ukrainian, Russian, and French counterparts.

"There was agreement that a meeting of the contact group should take place as soon as possible," the spokesperson said in a statement, without indicating when such a meeting might take place.

More than 4,700 people have been killed in eastern Ukraine since the fighting erupted in April after Russia annexed Ukraine’s Crimea territory the previous month.

The conflict has severely strained Russia’s relations with the West.

by **seemslikeadream** » Mon Jan 05, 2015 10:54 am

Google (not so good) Translator

Colonel Cassad

1. At the front the whole unchanged. Major clashes and attacks are on the territory of the NPT in the region of Donetsk, both have a slight loss in humans. The intensity of the shelling and shooting somewhere at the end of November, beginning of December. Story telling with artillery and MLRS tap did not work, so in addition to the shootings small groups, both sides are actively using conventional and rocket artillery shelling and usually activated by the night, apparently in order not to irritate overly impressionable OSCE observers. Over the past week the parties continued to accumulate power, but as a whole, the rate of increase of the junta several groups outpacing capacity categories VSN. At current trends, over time, the balance of power at the same Donetsk can be quite unfavorable. On the other hand, at the front Volnovakha south, the enemy continues to strengthen its long-term defense without special claims on the fact that the cut position of BCH between Donetsk and Novoazovskiy and get to the border with Russia, it is obvious that the site yet, that is not considered a priority for possible attack . 2. "Armistice" still does not work. Another attempt to return to Minsk will be in mid-January, up to that time will be guaranteed the next negotiations on the exchange of prisoners, as well as 1-2 consultations where the umpteenth time will try to dilute the heavy weapons and once again raise the issue of joint patrols the demarcation line, with a fair discussion requirements of the junta to allow Ukrainian border guards on the border with LC and DNI with Russia. In view of Washington's position, the chances of achieving peace is still insignificant. Europe continues to certain fluctuations related to the understanding of the risks of participation in the American combination in the Ukraine. Joint statement of the leader of the SPD, that we should not too hard to beat Russia and the Russian Federation should be given the opportunity to save face, reflects the reluctance on the part of the political establishment of the EU to fight Russia "to the bitter end." But in general, these votes so far inferior cohesive Atlantic lobby headed by Merkel and Cameron, which are essentially in agreement with the basic requirements of the Washington complete capitulation of Russia in Ukraine. Since no guarantee to get the Kremlin can not, yet still continues the old line - the Kremlin offers Donbass return to Ukraine on its own terms, but as these conditions Donbass within Ukraine does not need to Washington, we have to deal with parallel state building in New Russia creating typical authorities unrecognized state formations. When is the bifurcation point and the situation will undergo qualitative changes is not clear. 3. Continuing explosions in the cities of South-East and the invasion of the junta in Odessa, show that in parallel with the war in the Donbas, quite sluggish, but purposefully unwinds the armed underground. Of course, some of this underground activity may be a provocation and operational work of the Security Service of Ukraine and American curators, but it is quite obvious (and it even recognizes Kostya Grishin), which fully separatist and anti-fascist movement in the cities of the South-East is not suppressed, and it serves as a breeding ground for the underground. Of course, the value of these shares more advocacy than military, but any underground always starts with the fact that asserts itself, and the real effectiveness comes a little later, particularly in those cases where the underground guerrillas or closely related to the "mainland". As discussed in the spring, the Russian Federation has always retained the option to increase support for the underground in Ukraine, with the aim of forcing the destabilization of a number of areas as well as in the interests of the internal collapse of Ukraine and to ensure favorable conditions for the occurrence in certain areas. In the meantime, all the proceeds in a slow mode. rebuttals Ukrainian fascists that they want to develop in retaliation guerrilla movement in Russia are likely targets of propaganda than a real threat. The problem of the junta that our guerrillas operate under partially supported their activities population. If the junta will try to unleash similar processes in the border areas of the Russian Federation, then it will have to operate in a hostile-minded people so significant strategic prospects for the junta in this matter, although individual explosions or assassinations, I would not rule out, but it will (if they ) is that the one-time actions, while the underground work in the Ukraine seen a certain system. 4. The humanitarian situation is still very heavy. Immediate threat of starvation yet, but "white convoys" and the non-governmental humanitarian aid is still sorely lacking. In principle, it is clear that winter DNR and LC somehow survive, but the level of life in general will continue to decline as establish a full-fledged economic conditions in the ongoing fighting and the economic blockade, unrealistic. New Russia has in fact turned into a subsidized region, in which Russia along different lines fills a significant amount, as directed to ensure the front and on the humanitarian disaster relief. Even if we can establish an uninterrupted coal trade with the junta and all the money to the penny will go to the local budget, it closes only the last hole, but does not compensate for the huge hole in the budget, which is covered only by the forces of the Russian Federation. Because of political uncertainty, the pace of construction of public and economic institutions are extremely low and do not give reason to believe that in the foreseeable future of the republic will be able to go to the self. 5. Another of the interesting things. Count of Chechens in the Donbas in the last couple of weeks has increased significantly, some "Kadyrov" really stopped in New Russia. Regarding the shootings near Anthracite, then yes - have taken place, and 200s were there too. Low-intensity conflict for control of the coal supplies last. Junta declared limits on posts with the Donbas, black coal schemes touched a little, counterfeit coal still flows through the front line, all threatening communiques NSDC stumble upon a banal corruption when "businessmen with Donbass" simply negotiate with the junta officers at checkpoints and "small "rollback calm myself continue the business. Someone is fighting someone continues to make money. Heard even (as though I can not say) a story that allegedly took place even exchanges "black carbon" for weapons. Can well assume that this was the good officers of the junta did not hesitate to sell arms to militias and the spring and summer.

by **seemslikeadream** » Wed Jan 07, 2015 12:56 pm

MH17 probe asks if Dutch secret service warned of danger over Ukraine
Date
January 7, 2015 - 7:18AM

The Hague: The Netherlands wants to know whether its intelligence services warned airlines of danger when flying over war-torn Ukraine prior to the downing of flight MH17 in July, officials say.

Dutch officials are leading the probe into what brought down the Malaysia Airlines Boeing 777 over Ukraine and killed 298 people aboard, most of them Dutch, as well as why the flight route had been given the all-clear. There were 38 Australian citizens and residents on the flight.,

The Dutch safety board in charge of both inquiries asked the Intelligence and Security Services Oversight Committee (CTIVD) to investigate what assessment the domestic intelligence agency (AIVD) and military intelligence service (MIVD) made of flight routes over Ukraine ahead of the July 17 disaster.

"What information did the two services have prior to the MH17 crash about the security situation in eastern Ukraine, and how did they share this information with relevant aviation parties? What were the reasons for doing/not doing so?" the CTIVD said on its website.

The MH17 flight from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur was shot down over territory in eastern Ukraine controlled by pro-Russian separatists, who have been fighting Kiev forces since April.

Ukraine and the West accuse Russia of supplying the rebels with a surface-to-air missile launcher, but Russia has said a Ukrainian military jet was responsible for the crash.

Three other commercial planes were flying in the vicinity of the Malaysia Airlines flight - two Boeing 777s and an Airbus 330 - when it was shot down.

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 2:11 pm

ZNET

Shadow Bankers now run Ukraine

By Jack Rasmus
Source: Sputnik News
January 8, 2015

With Ukraine’s economy sinking faster into depression by the month, since November 2014 the IMF, European Commission, and USA have been intensifying their demands that Ukraine’s Poroshenko government expand and accelerate the IMF’s April 2014 plan to ‘restructure’ the Ukrainian economy.

With Ukraine’s economy sinking faster into depression by the month, since November 2014 the IMF, European Commission, and USA have been intensifying their demands that Ukraine’s Poroshenko government expand and accelerate the IMF’s April 2014 plan to ‘restructure’ the Ukrainian economy.
In October, the World Bank forecast that Ukraine’s 2014 GDP will fall by at least —8%. That now appears to be a floor for the decline, as the economy has continued to further deteriorate rapidly. At the start of 2015 the situation has become dire. Ukraine’s central bank foreign currency reserves are now equal to less than one month. Meanwhile Ukraine’s own currency continues to decline in value, its export earnings fall, and credit is quickly drying up.

The latest IMF mission that visited Kiev before the New Year break confirmed fears that Ukraine will soon need an additional $15 billion loan. That additional funding was also confirmed by a USA White House spokesperson who, in response to a press query, admitted a new package was coming and that the USA would participate. The IMF is therefore, in recent weeks, in the process of implementing its ‘Plan B’ for restructuring Ukraine’s economy. In anticipation of providing more money, Plan B means “front-loaded implementation of reforms”, as the IMF’s December 13, 2014 press release noted. That in turn means more aggressive restructuring and even more direct control of Ukraine’s economy.

In the past, the IMF has allowed a host country to implement the plans and restructuring details it defines as necessary. The IMF lays out the program; the host country implements-under the direction of the IMF mission team of technocrats. However, this time it appears the IMF-and the European and American interests behind it-are demanding that its own more ‘reliable’ western managers directly manage the IMF program implementation.

After a flurry of IMF missions back and forth to Ukraine in November, on December 2 the Poroshenko government therefore agreed and appointed two western shadow bankers-one from the USA and one from Europe-to its two key economic positions of Minister of Finance and Economics Minister-to ensure that restructuring now occurs more rapidly, more aggressively, and to the fullest benefit of western economic interests.

In an unprecedented move, Natalie Jaresko, a USA citizen and current private equity firm, Horizon Capital, CEO was appointed Ukraine Finance Minister; and Aivaras Abramavicius, a Lithuanian with past employment ties to Swedish and German investment banks and, like Jaresko, educated in the USA, was appointed Ukraine Economics Minister.

Who is Natalia Jaresko?
Jaresko is not just a shadow banker, the CEO of the USA, Chicago based, private equity firm, Horizon Capital. She began as a former official of the US State Department, a chief of the economic section of the US Embassy in the Ukraine in the early 1990s. Jaresko was, as they say, ‘in the right place at the right time’, when President Bill Clinton in 1995 set up the USA government funded, ‘Western NIS Enterprise Fund’ (WNISEF), a USAID $150m fund to promote USA and western investments into the then newly created Ukraine after the Soviet Union breakup. WNISEF specifically targeted Ukraine and Moldova for western investors. Clinton appointed Jaresko to the WNISEF, along with several other ‘private’ bankers who together would operate WNISEF on behalf of the US State Department. Jaresko became WNISEF’s president and CEO in 2001.

As a new Clinton-appointed director of WNISEF in 1995, Jaresko lost no time in quickly leveraging WNISEF to create her own private equity firm targeting investments into Ukraine and other former East European Soviet republics. In 1995, according to Bloomberg News, at the same time WNISEF was established, Jaresko and two other Chicago investors, Jeffrey Neal and Mark Iwashko, together founded Horizon Capital, a US private equity firm. Horizon Capital thereafter managed WNISEF, extracting millions in fees over the years since 1995.

Around the time of the ‘orange revolution’ in 2005, Jaresko and Horizon subsequently set up another fund within Horizon, called the ‘Emerging Group Growth Fund’ (EGGF). Today Horizon, WNISEF, and EGGF coordinate their investment activities throughout the Ukraine-Moldova and beyond, including Belarus.

In her current role as Finance Minister, Jaresko may be in a unique position to indirectly funnel the most lucrative Ukraine investment opportunities and Ukraine company acquisitions to her Horizon Capital private equity firm.

Who is Horizon Capital?
Horizon Capital, like all private equity firms, not only seeks deals on its own, but also functions as a conduit to other big investors and shadow banks. Horizon will arrange and broker the ‘deals’ for big USA finance capitalists to purchase Ukrainian companies, in return for fees and for sharing spin-offs and sell-offs in the future.

Who Horizon will likely benefit is suggested by its Board of Directors’ many other USA corporate connections. The board members have interests and ownership in scores, perhaps hundreds, of other companies in the USA. It will be easy for them to put these companies in touch with Horizon’s Kiev offices which in turn no doubt will be in constant contact with Jaresko. She apparently plans to retain her position as CEO of Horizon even as she functions as Finance Minister. Jaresko and Horizon need not consider any of this a ‘conflict of interest’. Horizon need not directly invest or acquire companies; it will be the enabler-broker for the real investors back in Chicago and the USA. Jaresko will suggest the relationships, Horizon set them up, collect fees, and put the right USA capitalists in touch with the ‘right’ Ukraine businesses.

A closer look at Horizon’s Board of Directors reveals the likely USA companies, banks and investors who may directly benefit from their Horizon Capital-Jaresko connection:

Board director Patrick Arbor has long time connections with Chicago banks, USA commodity producers, options and futures traders. Director Whitney Macmillan with the giant USA agribusiness firm Cargill. Directors Robert Cotton and Richard Arthur with USA defense companies, like Hughes Electronics and Lockheed-Martin’s naval and submarine electronics divisions. Horizon co-founder Jeffrey Neal, held long time CEO and senior positions with global investment banks and Merill-Lynch, now a subsidiary of Bank of America. The other Horizon co-founder, Mark Iwashko, co-founder with Jaresko in EGGF, now independent, has extensive holdings and connections in mortgage banking and industrial manufacturing. He is also chairman of the Ukraine real estate firm, Dragon Ukraine properties PLC’.

Not coincidentally, agribusiness, naval construction, finance & banking, construction, and defense sales to Ukraine will prove among the ‘hot Ukraine investment opportunities’ as the USA deepens its economic and political penetration of the Ukraine in the months ahead. Horizon and its investor connections in the USA are thus well-positioned to benefit from Jaresko’s key role as Finance Minister.

Poroshenko’s other ‘foreign’ appointment of Aivaras Abramavicius, a Lithuanian with similar deep connections to German and Swedish west European hedge funds and bankers. He’ll serve a similar role of ‘conduit’ no doubt, on behalf of western European economic exporters and importers.

Together, Jaresko and Abramavicius will function much like western ‘economic viceroys’ (in the British 19th century imperialist tradition), determining who gets the IMF money, who gets connected with western bankers and investors, who gets investments and acquisitions from western corporations-in short who benefits (and who doesn’t) from new western economic ties now being deeply forged in Ukraine.

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu Jan 08, 2015 8:10 pm

by **seemslikeadream** » Fri Jan 09, 2015 12:52 pm

More than one million flee, Ukraine close to 'humanitarian catastrophe'
BY KIERAN GUILBERT
Thu Jan 8, 2015 1:26pm EST

LONDON (Thomson Reuters Foundation) - More than one million people have been driven from their homes by the conflict in Ukraine, hampering aid efforts and leaving the country on the verge of a humanitarian catastrophe, aid agencies said on Thursday.

The number of people uprooted within Ukraine, 610,000, and of refugees who have fled to neighboring countries, 594,000, has more than tripled since August, figures from the United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs (OCHA) show.

The U.N. said an estimated 5.2 million people in Ukraine were living in conflict zones, of whom 1.4 million were highly vulnerable and in need of assistance as they face financial problems, a lack of services and aid, and harsh winter conditions.

The conflict between Ukraine and pro-Russia separatists, killed more than 4,700 people last year and provoked the worst crisis in relations between Russia and the West since the Cold War.

Denis Krivosheev, deputy director of Europe and Central Asia at Amnesty International, said residents in separatist-controlled Luhansk and Donetsk could barely afford food and medicines, especially vulnerable people such as pensioners.

"While it may be too early to call this a humanitarian catastrophe, it's clearly progressing in that direction," Krivosheev told the Thomson Reuters Foundation by email.

The provision of humanitarian aid was being hampered by pro-Kiev volunteer battalions that were increasingly preventing food and medicine from reaching those in need in eastern Ukraine, he said.

"Attempting to create unbearable conditions of life is a whole new ballgame... using starvation of civilians as a method of warfare is a war crime."

The battalions often act like "renegade gangs" and urgently need to be brought under control, Krivosheev added.

Social benefits, including pensions, have also become a major concern for those in eastern Ukraine following Kiev's decision to transfer the payments to government-controlled areas, the U.N. refugee agency (UNHCR) said.

UNHCR spokesman William Spindler said those unable to leave their homes, such as the elderly and the sick, and people living in institutions were not receiving the help they needed.

The problem was made worse by the fact that humanitarian organizations had limited access to the areas controlled by armed groups fighting the government, he added.

The crisis blew up after street protests in Kiev overthrew the Moscow-backed president last February and a pro-Western leadership took over, committed to integrating the former Soviet republic into the European mainstream.

This set Kiev and the Western governments backing it at odds with Russia, Ukraine's former Soviet overlord, which wants to keep Ukraine within its political and economic orbit.

by **seemslikeadream** » Sun Jan 18, 2015 6:33 pm

Ukraine says it reclaimed Donetsk airport after 'massive military operation'

People hold signs that read 'I am Volnovakha' during a rally on Independence Square in Kiev, Ukraine, in solidarity with the victims of a rocket attack this week that claimed 13 lives on a highway in the country's war-torn east, on Sunday, Jan. 18, 2015. IMAGE: AP PHOTO/EFREM LUKATSKY
BY CHRISTOPHER MILLER

The Ukrainian military on Sunday said its forces had rebuffed an assault by Russian-backed rebels, and reclaimed almost all the territory of Donetsk airport in eastern Ukraine that was lost in recent weeks, after Kiev rushed tanks to the battle lines in a "massive operation" overnight.

Ukrainian officials reported at least six people were killed, including four soldiers. They said roads were closed, a bridge was destroyed, houses were demolished, and electricity was cut to housing complexes and businesses, as rocket and artillery fire exploded across the Donetsk region.

Andriy Lysenko, a Ukrainian military spokesperson, said on Sunday that the offensive had "succeeded in almost completely cleaning the territory of the airport, which belongs to the territory of Ukrainian forces, as marked by military separation lines." Ukraine had not violated the Minsk peace accords agreed to with Russia and separatist leaders last September in doing so, he added.

Ukraine
Smoke rises over the new terminal of Donetsk airport in Donetsk, eastern Ukraine on Thursday, Jan 15, 2015.
IMAGE: AP PHOTO / MSTYSLAV CHERNOV
"There wasn't a quiet moment [in Donetsk] all night," said Andriy, a local taxi driver and resident in his 50s who has lived in Donetsk his entire life. Speaking by phone, he told Mashable that the violence was the worst he's seen and heard since summer. Andriy asked that his last name not be used, fearing retribution from the rebels.

Rebels had claimed control of the wrecked Donetsk airport, once a site of great strategic importance — now a point of pride for the warring sides — that has been a focus of combat since the conflict began last April.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has staked his reputation on the fight for Donetsk airport, saying, "If we give up Donetsk [airport], the enemy will be at Borispil or Gostomel or even in Lviv."

Footage uploaded to the YouTube channel of Kiev's military operation in the east showed dozens of tanks moving toward the battle lines in Donetsk on Saturday.

Besides capturing the airport, the army's apparent aim with its operation was to push the rebels back, and open a corridor to evacuate wounded soldiers trapped in its terminal. Official and unofficial reports indicated that Kiev's operation to evacuate injured soldiers was successful.

The rebel leader of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People's Republic, Alexander Zakharchenko, chalked up the operation to "just another [of] Kiev’s attempt to unleash a war," in comments carried by Russian news agency TASS.

The fighting reportedly continued through the morning, with fresh orders for Ukrainian forces to strike known separatist positions around Donetsk, according to presidential advisor Yuriy Biryukov in a Facebook post.

Ukrainian forces have stuck to the ceasefire long enough, but now "we will hit [the rebels] in the teeth," he said.

Russia's LifeNews, which reportedly has close ties to Russian security services, said a separatist-controlled bridge leading to the airport had been destroyed during the fighting, showing a video of it apparently collapsed and burning.

A producer for Russian state-run media outlet RT.com posted images that appeared to corroborate the report:

CHRIS FLOYD
ALTERNET
ZNET

by **Nordic** » Mon Jan 19, 2015 1:59 am

http://fortruss.blogspot.com/2015/01/bl ... media.html

Bloodbath at Peski? Ukrainian Media Reporting Heavy AFU Casualties

1/18/2015

Peski under Buratino fire. There are many killed.

http://www.ipukr.com/?p=33875

Translated from Ukrainian by J.Hawk

Russian terrorists have used their super-weapons. Just this moment Peski came under fire from heavy artillery. It ended when the terrorists used Buratinos [TOS-1 heavy self-propelled flame/fuel-air-explosive rocket launcher]. According to our information, Peski are mostly burned out, and artillery battle is continuing. Ukrainian losses are simply catastrophic. We are awaiting further information.

Translator’s Note: That such news should even see the light of day suggests a certain degree of panic on the Ukrainian side. And, typically, any Ukrainian setback automatically leads to accusations of Russian involvement, though even the photograph above which the Ukrainian media used is of…Azeri TOS-1’s during a parade in Baku. Evidently even Azerbaijan is now intervening in the Donbass.

by **seemslikeadream** » Wed Jan 21, 2015 2:15 pm

Ukraine Announces Mass Conscription for ‘Continental War’ With Russia
Russia, EU Continue to Try to Resume Ceasefire
by Jason Ditz, January 20, 2015

Russian officials, with support from the European Union, are continuing to try to get the ceasefire in Ukraine back in place, after it collapsed over the weekend with a full-scale Ukrainian military offensive in the east.

Ukraine’s government doesn’t seem interested with this, however, and is rather unveiling plans to dramatically increase military conscription with an eye toward a bigger war.

The ceasefire began faltering last week when the eastern rebels pressed into the Donetsk Airport, and the Ukrainian military blamed Russia, then followed up with an offensive against Donetsk and other rebel cities.

The Ukrainian parliament is now talking up a “full-scale continental war” against Russia as the reason for their increased conscription, and is back to lobbying the West for military aid for a massive war they assume will begin at any moment.

by **Nordic** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 6:04 am

This is creepy and bizarre. American mitary brass visiting a Ukrainian military hospital and handing out little trinkets to wounded Ukie soldiers and telling them in this weird robotic monotone, that they're proud of their service.

Fucking disturbing as hell.

http://m.liveleak.com/view?i=0a8_1421879810

by **seemslikeadream** » Thu Jan 22, 2015 10:41 am

those are special Girl Scout cookies from Victoria

Pentagon Confirms US Troops Will Deploy to Ukraine in Spring
Unknown Number of Troops to Carry Out Training in Lviv
by Jason Ditz, January 21, 2015

US Army commander in Europe Lt. Gen. Ben Hodges visited Ukraine today, as Pentagon officials confirmed plans to send troops to war-torn Ukraine this spring for a “training operation.”

Officials say the number of troops involved has not been determined at this time, and that the troops are part of an effort to strengthen the “rule of law” in the country.

By “rule of law,” they mean getting the Ukrainian military, which is ratcheting up its conscription, ready to crush eastern rebels, who have been demanding reforms after the new government imposed a series of harsh restrictions on the ethnic Russian east.

So far, the plans are to put the troops in Lviv, in the far west, which should keep the US forces from getting too directly into the nation’s civil war, though officials are saying this is just the “first step in further training,” which means more operations could happen, putting troops closer to the frontlines.

by **seemslikeadream** » Fri Feb 06, 2015 3:24 pm

WEEKEND EDITION FEBRUARY 6-8, 2015

The Real Reason Washington Feels Threatened by Moscow
The Fallujah Option for East Ukraine
by MIKE WHITNEY
“I want to appeal to the Ukrainian people, to the mothers, the fathers, the sisters and the grandparents. Stop sending your sons and brothers to this pointless, merciless slaughter. The interests of the Ukrainian government are not your interests. I beg of you: Come to your senses. You do not have to water Donbass fields with Ukrainian blood. It’s not worth it.”

— Alexander Zakharchenko, Prime Minister of the Donetsk People’s Republic

Washington needs a war in Ukraine to achieve its strategic objectives. This point cannot be overstated.

The US wants to push NATO to Russia’s western border. It wants a land-bridge to Asia to spread US military bases across the continent. It wants to control the pipeline corridors from Russia to Europe to monitor Moscow’s revenues and to ensure that gas continues to be denominated in dollars. And it wants a weaker, unstable Russia that is more prone to regime change, fragmentation and, ultimately, foreign control. These objectives cannot be achieved peacefully, indeed, if the fighting stopped tomorrow, the sanctions would be lifted shortly after, and the Russian economy would begin to recover. How would that benefit Washington?

It wouldn’t. It would undermine Washington’s broader plan to integrate China and Russia into the prevailing economic system, the dollar system. Powerbrokers in the US realize that the present system must either expand or collapse. Either China and Russia are brought to heel and persuaded to accept a subordinate role in the US-led global order or Washington’s tenure as global hegemon will come to an end.

This is why hostilities in East Ukraine have escalated and will continue to escalate. This is why the U.S. Congress approved a bill for tougher sanctions on Russia’s energy sector and lethal aid for Ukraine’s military. This is why Washington has sent military trainers to Ukraine and is preparing to provide $3 billion in “anti-armor missiles, reconnaissance drones, armored Humvees, and radars that can determine the location of enemy rocket and artillery fire.” All of Washington’s actions are designed with one purpose in mind, to intensify the fighting and escalate the conflict. The heavy losses sustained by Ukraine’s inexperienced army and the terrible suffering of the civilians in Lugansk and Donetsk are of no interest to US war-planners. Their job is to make sure that peace is avoided at all cost because peace would derail US plans to pivot to Asia and remain the world’s only superpower. Here’s an except from an article in the WSWS:

“The ultimate aim of the US and its allies is to reduce Russia to an impoverished and semi-colonial status. Such a strategy, historically associated with Carter administration National Security Advisor Zbigniew Brzezinski, is again being openly promoted.

In a speech last year at the Wilson Center, Brzezinski called on Washington to provide Kiev with “weapons designed particularly to permit the Ukrainians to engage in effective urban warfare of resistance.” In line with the policies now recommended in the report by the Brookings Institution and other think tanks calling for US arms to the Kiev regime, Brzezinski called for providing “anti-tank weapons…weapons capable for use in urban short-range fighting.”

While the strategy outlined by Brzezinski is politically criminal—trapping Russia in an ethnic urban war in Ukraine that would threaten the deaths of millions, if not billions of people—it is fully aligned with the policies he has promoted against Russia for decades.” (“The US arming of Ukraine and the danger of World War III“, World Socialist Web Site)

Non-lethal military aid will inevitably lead to lethal military aid, sophisticated weaponry, no-fly zones, covert assistance, foreign contractors, Special ops, and boots on the ground. We’ve seen it all before. There is no popular opposition to the war in the US, no thriving antiwar movement that can shut down cities, order a general strike or disrupt the status quo. So there’s no way to stop the persistent drive to war. The media and the political class have given Obama carte blanche, the authority to prosecute the conflict as he sees fit. That increases the probability of a broader war by this summer following the spring thaw.

While the possibility of a nuclear conflagration cannot be excluded, it won’t effect US plans for the near future. No one thinks that Putin will launch a nuclear war to protect the Donbass, so the deterrent value of the weapons is lost.

And Washington isn’t worried about the costs either. Despite botched military interventions in Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and half a dozen other countries around the world; US stocks are still soaring, foreign investment in US Treasuries is at record levels,, the US economy is growing at a faster pace than any of its global competitors, and the dollar has risen an eye-watering 13 percent against a basket of foreign currencies since last June. America has paid nothing for decimating vast swathes of the planet and killing more than a million people. Why would they stop now?

They won’t, which is why the fighting in Ukraine is going to escalate. Check this out from the WSWS:

“On Monday, the New York Times announced that the Obama administration is moving to directly arm the Ukrainian army and the fascistic militias supporting the NATO-backed regime in Kiev, after its recent setbacks in the offensive against pro-Russian separatist forces in east Ukraine.

The article cites a joint report issued Monday by the Brookings Institution, the Atlantic Council, and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs and delivered to President Obama, advising the White House and NATO on the best way to escalate the war in Ukraine….

According to the Times, US officials are rapidly shifting to support the report’s proposals. NATO military commander in Europe General Philip M. Breedlove, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel, US Secretary of State John Kerry, and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Martin Dempsey all supported discussions on directly arming Kiev. National Security Advisor Susan Rice is reconsidering her opposition to arming Kiev, paving the way for Obama’s approval.” (“Washington moves toward arming Ukrainian regime“, World Socialist Web Site)

See what’s going on? The die is already cast. There will be a war with Russia because that’s what the political establishment wants. It’s that simple. And while previous provocations failed to lure Putin into the Ukrainian cauldron, this new surge of violence–a spring offensive– is bound to do the trick. Putin is not going to sit on his hands while proxies armed with US weapons and US logistical support pound the Donbass to Fallujah-type rubble. He’ll do what any responsible leader would do. He’ll protect his people. That means war. (See the vast damage that Obama’s proxy war has done to E. Ukraine here: “An overview of the socio – humanitarian situation on the territory of Donetsk People’s Republic as a consequence of military action from 17 to 23 January 2015“)

Asymmetrical Warfare: Falling Oil Prices

Keep in mind, that the Russian economy has already been battered by economic sanctions, oil price manipulation, and a vicious attack of the ruble. Until this week, the mainstream media dismissed the idea that the Saudis were deliberately pushing down oil prices to hurt Russia. They said the Saudis were merely trying to retain “market share” by maintaining current production levels and letting prices fall naturally. But it was all bunkum as the New York Times finally admitted on Tuesday in an article titled: “Saudi Oil Is Seen as Lever to Pry Russian Support From Syria’s Assad”. Here’s a clip from the article:

“Saudi Arabia has been trying to pressure President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia to abandon his support for President Bashar al-Assad of Syria, using its dominance of the global oil markets at a time when the Russian government is reeling from the effects of plummeting oil prices…

Saudi officials say — and they have told the United States — that they think they have some leverage over Mr. Putin because of their ability to reduce the supply of oil and possibly drive up prices….Any weakening of Russian support for Mr. Assad could be one of the first signs that the recent tumult in the oil market is having an impact on global statecraft…..

Saudi Arabia’s leverage depends on how seriously Moscow views its declining oil revenue. “If they are hurting so bad that they need the oil deal right away, the Saudis are in a good position to make them pay a geopolitical price as well,” said F. Gregory Gause III, a Middle East specialist at Texas A&M’s Bush School of Government and Public Service (“Saudi Oil Is Seen as Lever to Pry Russian Support From Syria’s Assad“, New York Times)

The Saudis “think they have some leverage over Mr. Putin because of their ability” to manipulate prices?

That says it all, doesn’t it?

What’s interesting about this article is the way it conflicts with previous pieces in the Times. For example, just two weeks ago, in an article titled “Who Will Rule the Oil Market?” the author failed to see any political motive behind the Saudi’s action. According to the narrative, the Saudis were just afraid that “they would lose market share permanently” if they cut production and kept prices high. Now the Times has done a 180 and joined the so called conspiracy nuts who said that prices were manipulated for political reasons. In fact, the sudden price plunge had nothing to do with deflationary pressures, supply-demand dynamics, or any other mumbo-jumbo market forces. It was 100 percent politics.

The attack on the ruble was also politically motivated, although the details are much more sketchy. There’s an interesting interview with Alistair Crooke that’s worth a read for those who are curious about how the Pentagon’s “full spectrum dominance” applies to financial warfare. According to Crooke:

“…with Ukraine, we have entered a new era: We have a substantial, geostrategic conflict taking place, but it’s effectively a geo-financial war between the US and Russia. We have the collapse in the oil prices; we have the currency wars; we have the contrived “shorting” — selling short — of the ruble. We have a geo-financial war, and what we are seeing as a consequence of this geo-financial war is that first of all, it has brought about a close alliance between Russia and China.

China understands that Russia constitutes the first domino; if Russia is to fall, China will be next. These two states are together moving to create a parallel financial system, disentangled from the Western financial system. ……

For some time, the international order was structured around the United Nations and the corpus of international law, but more and more the West has tended to bypass the UN as an institution designed to maintain the international order, and instead relies on economic sanctions to pressure some countries. We have a dollar-based financial system, and through instrumentalizing America’s position as controller of all dollar transactions, the US has been able to bypass the old tools of diplomacy and the UN — in order to further its aims.

But increasingly, this monopoly over the reserve currency has become the unilateral tool of the United States — displacing multilateral action at the UN. The US claims jurisdiction over any dollar-denominated transaction that takes place anywhere in the world. And most business and trading transactions in the world are denominated in dollars. This essentially constitutes the financialization of the global order: The International Order depends more on control by the US Treasury and Federal Reserve than on the UN as before.” (“Turkey might become hostage to ISIL just like Pakistan did“, Today’s Zaman)

Financial warfare, asymmetrical warfare, Forth Generation warfare, space warfare, information warfare, nuclear warfare, laser, chemical, and biological warfare. The US has expanded its arsenal well beyond the traditional range of conventional weaponry. The goal, of course, is to preserve the post-1991 world order (The dissolution up of the Soviet Union) and maintain full spectrum dominance. The emergence of a multi-polar world order spearheaded by Moscow poses the greatest single threat to Washington’s plans for continued domination. The first significant clash between these two competing world views will likely take place sometime this summer in East Ukraine. God help us.

NOTE: The Novorussia Armed Forces (NAF) currently have 8,000 Ukrainian regulars surrounded in Debaltsevo, East Ukraine. This is a very big deal although the media has been (predictably) keeping the story out of the headlines.

Evacuation corridors have been opened to allow civilians to leave the area. Fighting could break out at anytime. At present, it looks like a good part of the Kiev’s Nazi army could be destroyed in one fell swoop. This is why Merkel and Hollande have taken an emergency flight to Moscow to talk with Putin. They are not interested in peace. They merely want to save their proxy army from annihilation.

I expect Putin may intervene on behalf of the Ukrainian soldiers, but I think commander Zakharchenko will resist. If he lets these troops go now, what assurance does he have that they won’t be back in a month or so with high-powered weaponry provided by our war-mongering congress and White House?

Tell me; what choice does Zakharchenko really have? If his comrades are killed in future combat because he let Kiev’s army escape, who can he blame but himself?

There are no good choices.

Check here for updates: VineYardSaker Ukraine SITREP: *Extremely* dangerous situation in Debaltsevo

Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Re: Russia's de facto invasion of Ukraine

Who is online