Fighting for Russia against the New World Order.

Showing posts sorted by relevance for query ukraine. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query ukraine. Sort by date Show all posts

Azov Sea Flashpoint: Russia, Ukraine Teetering On The Brink Of War

Azov Sea Flashpoint: Russia, Ukraine Teetering On The Brink Of War

The US State Department is urging Ukraine toward confrontation with Russia.


Authored by Peter Korzun via The Strategic Culture Foundation:

Ukraine has increased its military presence in the Azov Sea region. Ukraine’s National Security and Defense Council met on Sept. 7 and agreed to take a variety of steps to boost the country’s combat capabilities in the area, including the creation of a missile-equipped naval infantry group to counter potential amphibious attacks and naval shore bombardments. Ukraine’s Gurza-M-class armored artillery boats have been brought in to boost the naval component of the forces deployed in the region.

Russia and Ukraine enjoy free use of the Sea of Azov under the 2003 “Agreement between the Russian Federation and the Ukraine on cooperation in the use of the sea of Azov and the strait of Kerch.” The document is in place but it does not specify any precise border. The parties agree that the Sea of Azov and the Strait of Kerch are the internal waters of both Ukraine and Russia.
Talks have dragged on for a long time but have failed to produce a solution. Ukraine does not want to recognize Russia’s rights, which are based on the fact that Crimea has joined the Russian Federation. Moreover, Ukrainian authorities insist on their right to detain any ship traveling to or from Crimea without Kiev’s permission
.
Ukraine is calling for the imposition of international sanctions against Russian Black Sea ports, due to what it calls the “blockade” of the Sea of Azov. It has already imposed punitive measures unilaterally. Tensions have heightened since March, when ships were detained and searched.  On March 24, Ukrainian border guards stopped the Russian-flagged, Crimean-registered Nord fishing vessel in the Sea of Azov. The ship was hijacked. The crew members reported being interrogated and abused by Ukrainian authorities who held them accountable under domestic laws, not recognizing the crew as Russian citizens. The detained sailors were finally set free to return to Crimea without passports. Ukraine violated a number of international agreements and this marked the beginning of a campaign of provocative actions that has been waged ever since. Last month, the Russian Mekhanik Pogodin tanker was detained in the Ukrainian port of Kherson. Russia compared the move to the activities of Somali pirates.

The US is taking sides in order to ratchet up the tensions.  The State Department has taken a deliberately provocative stance, urging Ukraine toward confrontation. Without bothering to study the details, it simply puts the blame on Russia as usual for anything that goes wrong. Washington is goading Ukraine into seeking a military solution, including such unrealistic but dangerous ideas as using the warships of NATO’s standing force to protect its shipping lanes, mining the Azov Sea, or  using fast-moving attack vessels to encircle a large Russian naval asset from all directions like a wolf pack. This tactic was invented by German Admiral Karl Dönitz during WWII, when “wolf packs” of U-boats were used to attack capital ships.  The very fact that such ideas have been generated and are floating around shows how unwise it is to abet Ukraine by throwing unconditional support behind it.
Stephen Blank of the American Foreign Policy Council, a leading US expert on Russia, believes that the US administration “should send anti-ship missiles available from or through the US-AGM-84 Harpoon Block II, AGM-158C LRASM A, and the Norwegian Naval Strike Missile” as well as “a viable launch platform and a targeting system, particularly a radar.” The author thinks this should be done right now, without delay. His article was published on Sept. 7 by the Atlantic Council, the prestigious think tank that advises the State Department and enjoys great influence among those who shape US foreign policy.  In another article, Mr. Blanc calls for supplying Ukraine with platforms — older ships that have been decommissioned or are about to retire.  Last month, Mykola Bielieskov, the Deputy Executive Director at the Institute of World Policy, called for fast-track shipments to Ukraine of the Harpoon Block II ER+ anti-ship missile, enabling it to attack Russian vessels. The idea of providing Ukraine with Island-class coast guard ships is under consideration by the US government. On Sept. 1, Kurt Volker, US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations, stated that the US administration “is ready to expand arms supplies to Ukraine in order to build up the country’s naval and air defense forces.”

The powers that be have failed to keep their promises and improve the lives of ordinary people in Ukraine. The presidential election will be held in March 2019. A threatening Russian bogeyman is needed to explain away the failures. The country’s economy and finances are in the doldrums and corruption is staggering.   None of the problems have been solved and the West is getting tired of Ukraine. The fairy tale about Moscow’s “aggressive foreign policy” comes in handy right when the Ukrainian rulers need a scapegoat.

Nobody needs an armed conflict in the Azov Sea region. A number of countries are interested in protecting the right of free passage, enabling vessels to arrive at their destination ports  without risk or delay. The region does not have to be a flashpoint. Russia and Ukraine could sit down at a round table to discuss controversial issues, as the 2003 agreement stipulates the parties should do in order to settle their disputes, should they have any, but that’s not what the State Department is calling for. The only option the US administration is considering is that of providing Ukraine with arms to fight Russia and then egging Kiev on to escalate the tensions. And those are already dangerously running high. A spark can ignite a big fire at any time if the problem is not addressed in a positive way without saber rattling. It’s a pity the US is playing such a destructive role. The time is right for Russian and Ukrainian experts and officials to set their differences aside and start talking to find a peaceful solution to this urgent problem.

Source: http://theduran.com/azov-sea-flashpoint-russia-ukraine-teetering-on-the-brink-of-war/
Share:

Ukrainian region bans 'Russian-language cultural products' in public spaces

A region in western Ukraine has decided to ban public displays of pretty much anything in Russian, claiming the move is necessary to preserve unity in the country. The authors want the ban to go nationwide. 
 
The Lvov region's legislature voted on Tuesday to impose a moratorium on the "public use of Russian-language cultural products in all forms," with 58 votes in favor, exceeding the 43 necessary.
The "moratorium" is to remain in place until there is "a full de-occupation of Ukrainian territory," practically making it a permanent ban.
 
In addition to banning Russian songs, films, books and… whatever else, the lawmakers said they would recommend a similar ban to the national parliament. They said rooting out the Russian language was necessary "to protect the Ukrainian information space from hybrid action by the aggressor-state [Russia] and reverse the consequences of many years of Russification."

Related: Washington Was Behind Ukraine Coup: Obama admits that US “Brokered a Deal” in Support of “Regime Change”

The ban is the latest in a long string of attacks on the Russian language in Ukraine, where it continues to be the largest minority language, used by millions in daily life, despite years of antagonism with Moscow.

Last year, the government imposed harsh quotas on broadcasters, requiring no less than 75 percent of their content to be in Ukrainian. Dozens of Russian books, films, and TV series have been banned for things like showing Russian law enforcement officers in a positive way (therefore, there are no more Russian crime dramas in Ukraine).

People using Russian may also face harassment in Ukraine. Speaking Russian in the Ukrainian parliament is usually met with angry shouts from "patriotic" MPs and discouragement from whoever is presiding at the session. One representative last year was simply barred from ending his speech, even though he was not fluent enough in Ukrainian to meet to the demands.


 There is also a lot of pressure to abandon the Russian language on the public level. More outspoken figures like writer Larisa Nitsoy or former MP Irina Farion regularly share their latest outrage over how schools teach children too much math and physics and too little Ukrainian literature, or say that speakers of Russian should not have access to education or jobs in Ukraine. But there are those with less extreme rhetoric working to make Russian undesirable.

The language issue has been divisive for Ukrainian society for decades. When the Bolshevik government attempted to undermine Ukrainian nationalism and separatism in the wake of the revolution, it added a large portion of historically Russian land. The integration was not all smooth, especially since people living in what is now eastern Ukraine were forced to learn Ukrainian, read the Ukrainian-language press, and otherwise change their ways. The result of that period of Ukrainization was far from conclusive.

After splitting from the Soviet Union and becoming an independent state, Ukraine faced similar problems as its government tried to establish a new national identity for its people.
 
Over the years, Ukrainian gradually gained ground, but the change was too slow for the nationalist segment of the nation. And of course, neighboring Russia was a major influence on culture in Ukraine, keeping Russian alive.

The 2014 armed coup in Kiev and subsequent conflict with Russia brought the nationalist agenda to the forefront in Ukraine. In fact, one of the first acts of the new leadership was to scrap a language law which guaranteed a special regional status for Russian. This was a major factor in the pushback that arose in the east of the country, which led to a rebellion and the current frozen conflict.
The pursuit of language superiority brought Ukraine into conflict with other neighbors last year when it passed a new education law, under which the right of Hungarian, Romanian, Bulgarian, and Russian minorities to have their children taught in their preferred language was seriously undermined.

The countries involved were outraged, with Hungary going as far as pledging to undermine any attempt by Ukraine to have closer ties with NATO. So far, Bucharest has been delivering on its threat.

Source: https://www.rt.com/news/438852-ukraine-russian-culture-banned/
Latest news:


Share:

Russia presents audio recording proving Ukraine’s complicity in MH17 tragedy

The Russian Defense Ministry has presented an audio recording proving Ukraine’s complicity in the MH17 disaster in 2014, the Defense Ministry’s spokesman Igor Konashenkov told the media

 

MOSCOW, September 17. /TASS/. The Russian Defense Ministry has ascertained that the videos showing the movement of a Buk missile system from Russia to Ukraine, presented by the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) probing the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 crash in eastern Ukraine, were fabricated, ministry spokesman Major General Igor Konashenkov told reporters.

According to him, Russian experts thoroughly scrutinized those videos and came to the conclusion that they had been fabricated.

Read also Dutch journalists discover large pieces of wreckage at MH17 crash site

The Russian Defense Ministry has held a press conference devoted to the MH17 crash, presenting a detailed analysis of those videos and proof of their fabrication

The Defense Ministry also presented an audio recording proving Ukraine’s complicity in the MH17 disaster in 2014, Major General Igor Konashenkov, spokesman for the ministry, told the media.

General Konashenkov said the audio recording of a conversation between Ukrainian military servicemen was made back in 2016 in the Odessa Region during the Rubezh-2016 exercise and published in the Ukrainian mass media.

"If so, we’ll … [a synonym of the verb ‘shoot down’ - TASS] another Malaysian Boeing," one of the Ukrainian military servicemen said in the conversation.

How the projectile was identified as Ukrainian

The missile, which downed Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, was made in the town of Dolgoprudny outside Moscow in 1986, delivered to a military unit deployed to Ukraine and was never brought back to Russia, Chief of the Russian Defense Ministry’s Missile and Artillery Department Lieutenant General Nikolai Parshin told reporters.

According to him, the missile fragments presented by the Joint Investigation Team (JIT) looking into the MH17 crash carried the numbers of the missile’s nozzle and engine. "Once we had the nozzle and engine numbers, we were able to find out the missile’s number," he specified.

"There are documents in the archives of the Dolgoprudny Research Institute, which made it possible to find out the missile’s tail number. It came out that the missile was assembled on December 24, 1986, and delivered by rail to the military unit number 20/152, officially named the 223rd Air Defense Missile Brigade. It was deployed to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic’s Ternopol Region, which was part of the Subcarpathian Military District," he added.

According to the general, the military unit was never withdrawn to Russia

MH17 crash

The Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17, a Boeing-777 passenger plane travelling from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur, was shot down on July 17, 2014, over Ukraine’s eastern region of Donetsk. The crash killed all the 283 passengers and 15 crewmembers. There were nationals of ten states among the dead. The Joint Investigation Team (JIT) looking into the crash is comprised of representatives from the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, Malaysia and Ukraine.

On May 24, the team provided an update on the criminal investigation, claiming "the Buk-TELAR that was used to down MH17, originates from the 53rd Anti-Aircraft Missile brigade... a unit of the Russian army from Kursk in the Russian Federation."

Russia’s Defense Ministry rejected all the allegations and said that none of the missile systems belonging to the Russian Armed Forces had ever been taken abroad.

Nevertheless, on May 25, Australia and the Netherlands issued a statement saying that they "hold Russia responsible for its part in the downing of flight MH17." The two countries called on Russia to hold talks in order to find an appropriate solution and warned that the case could be submitted to an international court or organization.


Source:http://tass.com/world/1021855
Share:

Jon Hellevig: Succumbing to US Bullying Made Ukraine Poorest Country in Europe

TEHRAN (Tasnim) – A Finnish political economist and author highlighted predicaments of nations that refused to adopt strategies of resistance against US unilateralism, saying Ukraine, for instance, became “the poorest” country in Europe after succumbing to Washington’s bullying.    


Succumbing to US Bullying Made Ukraine Poorest Country in Europe: Finnish Analyst
“Look at Ukraine; they succumbed to USA bullying and propaganda and now their country has become the poorest in Europe although it used to be the industrial powerhouse of the Soviet Union,” Jon Hellevig said in an interview with the Tasnim News Agency.

“And look at Germany, France, and the whole European Union. Subjugated to the USA, they are being ruined with a stagnant economy for more than a decade and deep social and cultural crises,” he added.

Jon Krister Hellevig is a Finnish lawyer and businessman who has worked in Russia since the early 1990s. Hellevig was a candidate in the European parliament election in 2014. He is the managing partner of the Moscow-based law company Hellevig, Klein & Usov. Hellevig has written several books, including Avenir Guide to Russian Taxes (2002, 2003, 2006 English and Russian editions); Avenir Guide to Labor Laws (2002, 2003, 2006 English and Russian editions). Expressions and Interpretations, a book on the philosophy of law and the development of Russian legal practices; Hellevig takes actively part in public discussion of current affairs and social structure contributing with articles and commentary in the media. He regularly lectures at international seminars on various topics.

Following is the full text of the interview:

Tasnim: International developments are full of examples of how regional and trans-regional countries have successfully adopted strategies of resistance against oppression and unilateralism that have borne good results. As you know, countries like Iran, Syria, Yemen, Venezuela, and Palestine have protected their national sovereignty against foreign threats and achieved many gains through this strategy. In contrast, some countries have adopted a strategy of appeasement or reconciliation when being hectored and bullied by world powers. Given the experiences of these resistance countries, what do you think about their approach and the concept of resistance?

Hellevig: Naturally, resistance is the only choice, come what comes. At the same time, the resistance strategy must be smart and strive to build bridges to other countries outside the enemy.
Tasnim: Do you think countries that currently toe the line of major powers like the US ought to emulate these experiences of resistance countries to protect their independence and stand against unilateralism?

Hellevig: Obviously they should. It’s a question of both the material and moral well-being of the people and their very existence in the long-term. Look at Ukraine; they succumbed to USA bullying and propaganda and now their country has become the poorest in Europe although it used to be the industrial powerhouse of the Soviet Union. And look at Germany, France, and the whole European Union. Subjugated to the USA, they are being ruined with a stagnant economy for more than a decade and deep social and cultural crises. The traditional way of life of those European countries is rapidly being destroyed with their social structures torn apart. In fact, the very existence of those nations is now at risk.

Tasnim: In an op-ed article written for Tasnim, the Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council, Ali Shamkhani, warned the European countries of the risks of inaction regarding the US administration’s unilateral policies, saying the current EU leaders will be held accountable for Europe’s future challenges. Shamkhani criticized Europe for becoming an unimportant and passive actor that accepts humiliation at the hands of the US and has to live with the destructive effects of Washington’s unilateralism that have affected several international treaties. What is your take on that? Isn’t it better for the EU to stand up to US bullying and unilateralism?

Hellevig: The European Union and its main constituent countries are not independent nations as they have been taken over by US-led globalists. Their armies belong to the US umbrella organization NATO, their intelligence services are CIA branches, their media is owned by the globalists, their capitalists are totally at the mercy of the US market and its bullying terms, etc. Given these circumstances, independent-minded politicians do not have a chance to come to power, not in the individual states nor the totally undemocratic European Union.

The problems are fortunately building up in the European Union and with President Trump’s erratic policies the relationship is becoming increasingly fraught. But things must get much worse before the European people will mature to free themselves from the globalist yoke. I am afraid, it will take an enormous financial and economic crisis to bring that about. But this crisis will come for sure, sooner or later. Paradoxically, an attack on Iran might be the final trigger for that. And this is what holds the Americans at bay from Iran, at least for the time being. On the other hand, the US economy is so bad with enormous asset bubbles in every field of the economy, stock markets, housing etc., massive budget and trade deficits and skyrocketing debt. Therefore, there might be some people in the USA who could possibly consider war and ensuing financial crisis as a means to extract the country from those problems, to let everything crash and start the global economy anew from ground zero.

Source: https://www.tasnimnews.com/en/news/2019/07/10/2050611/succumbing-to-us-bullying-made-ukraine-poorest-country-in-europe-finnish-analyst
Share:

Russia Gives Up on Trump and the West



By the end of his second term, President Ronald Reagan, who had called the Soviet Union an “evil empire,” was strolling through Red Square with Russians slapping him on the back.

Bliss was it in that dawn to be alive. And how have we husbanded the fruits of our Cold War triumph? This month, China’s leader-for-life Xi Jinping stood beside Vladimir Putin as 3,000 Chinese troops maneuvered with 300,000 Russians, 1,000 planes, and 900 tanks in Moscow’s largest military exercise in 40 years. It was an uncoded message to the West from the East. Richard Nixon’s great achievement of bringing in Peking from the cold, and Reagan’s great achievement of ending the Cold War, are history. Bolshevism may be dead, but Russian nationalism, awakened by NATO’s quick march to Russia’s ancient frontiers, is alive and well. Moscow appears to have given up on the West and accepted that its hopes for better times with President Donald Trump are not to be.

U.N. Ambassador Nikki Haley is berating Russia for secretly trading with North Korea in violation of U.N. sanctions, saying, “Lying, cheating, and rogue behavior have become the new norm of the Russian culture.”

Cold wars don’t get much colder than defaming another country’s culture as morally debased.

The U.S. has also signaled that it may start supplying naval and anti-aircraft weaponry to Ukraine, as Russia is being warned to cease its inspections of ships passing from the Black Sea through the Kerch Strait into the Sea of Azov.

The three-mile-wide strait lies between Crimea and Kerch Peninsula. In Russia’s eyes, both banks of the strait are Russian national territory.

With U.S. backing, Ukraine has decided to build a naval base on the Sea of Azov to “create conditions for rebuffing the aggressive actions of the Russian Federation in this region.”

Kiev has several patrol boats in the Sea of Azov, with a few more to be transferred there in coming months. Russia’s navy could sink those boats and wipe out that base in minutes.

Are we going to send our Navy across the Black Sea to protect Ukraine’s naval rights inside a sea that has been as historically Russian as the Chesapeake Bay is historically American?

Poland this week invited the U.S. to establish a major base on its soil, for which the Poles will pay $2 billion, to be called “Fort Trump.”

Trump seemed to like the idea, and the name.

Yet the Bush II decision to install a missile defense system in Poland brought a Kremlin counter-move: the installation of nuclear-capable Iskander cruise missiles in Kaliningrad, the former German territory on Poland’s northern border annexed by Stalin at the end of World War II.

In the Balkans, over Russian protests, the U.S. is moving to bring Macedonia into NATO. But before Macedonia can join, half of its voters have to come out on September 30 to approve a change in the nation’s name to North Macedonia. This is to mollify Greece, which claims the birthplace of Alexander the Great as it own.

Where are we going with all this?

With U.S. warships making regular visits into the Eastern Baltic and Black Sea, the possibility of a new base in Poland, and growing lethal aid to Ukraine to fight pro-Russian rebels in the Donbass and the Russian navy on the Sea of Azov, are we not crowding the Russians a bit?

And are we confident the Russians will always back down?

When Georgia, believing it could kick Russian peacekeepers out and re-annex its seceded province of South Ossetia, attacked in August 2008, the Russian army came crashing in and ran the Georgians out in 48 hours.

George W. Bush wisely decided not to issue an ultimatum or send troops. He ignored the hawks in his own party who had helped goad him into the great debacle of his presidency: Iraq.

So what exactly is the U.S. grand strategy with regard to Russia?

What might be called the McCain wing of the Republican Party has sought to bring Ukraine and Georgia into NATO, which would make the containment of Russia America’s policy in perpetuity.

Are the American people aware of the costs and risks inherent in such a policy? What are the prospects of Russia yielding always to U.S. demands? And are we not today stretched awfully thin?

Our share of the global economy is much shrunk from Reagan’s time. Our deficit is approaching $1 trillion. Our debt is surging toward 100 percent of GDP. Entitlements are consuming our national wealth.

We are committed to containing the two other greatest powers, Russia and China. We are tied down militarily in Afghanistan, Iraq, Syria, and Yemen, with the War Party beating the drums for another larger war with Iran. And we are sanctioning adversaries and allies for not following our leadership of the West and the world.

In looking at America’s global commitments, greatly expanded since our Cold War victory, one word comes to mind: unsustainable.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever. To find out more about Patrick Buchanan and read features by other Creators writers and cartoonists, visit the Creators website at www.creators.com.

Source: https://www.theamericanconservative.com/buchanan/russia-gives-up-on-trump-and-the-west/
Share:

BBC Ordered to Pay Damages for Fake News About Trump and Ukraine President



The BBC was ordered to pay damages after the far-left outlet published fake news claiming Ukraine President Petro Poroshenko “authorized” an illegal payment of $400,000 to Michael Cohen for additional face time during a June 2017  meeting with President Trump.

“We apologize to Mr. Poroshenko for any distress caused and have agreed to pay him damages, legal costs and have participated in a joint statement in open court,” the BBC’s said in a written apology  published Thursday.

In the May 2018 piece, the disgraced BBC made the absurd claim that Poroshenko, who already had a meeting set up with Trump, paid this $400,000 to extend the meeting.


Think about how well this utterly deranged piece of fake news fits into the overall media’s Russia Collusion Hoax.
  1. Poroshenko is an aggressive opponent of Russian President Vladimir Putin, so naturally the only way he could get serious face time with Trump (aka Putin’s Stooge) is through a six-figure bribe.
  2. Michael Cohen was still the president’s personal lawyer at this time, which means the media were desperate for us to see Cohen as Trump’s world-traveling bagman, because that would lend credibility to the phony dossier’s lie about Cohen visiting Prague to pay off the hackers who got Hillary’s emails.
  3. The story openly insinuates Trump is both in Putin’s pocket and accepting bribes.
In a way you have to admire the slickness of it — the triple bank-shot of hysteria the BBC hoped to sink.
But it is also preposterous. Who in their right mind would believe a billionaire like Trump would risk his presidency (and prison) for a lousy $400,000, or use Cohen to arrange it?
Just as preposterous, though, is the whole idea Trump was a traitor who stole a presidential election, and we were hit with that media-lunacy 24/7 for two years.
More from the BBC:
In our News at Ten bulletin and in an online article published on May 23, 2018, we incorrectly reported that Petro Poroshenko, the President of Ukraine, had procured or authorised a corrupt payment of $400,000 to be made to Michael Cohen, the personal lawyer of Donald Trump, to extend a brief meeting between Mr. Poroshenko and President Trump, that had already been agreed, into more substantial talks.
No word yet on the amount of damages paid by the BBC, but it is good to see some justice done. The idea a news outlet can smear anyone they like, hide behind freedom of the press, and suffer no consequence is outrageous.

Let’s hope Nick Sandmann is delivered a similar form of justice very, very soon.

Poroshenko, who is running for re-election, sued the BBC over the report. Election Day is March 31.

Source: https://www.breitbart.com/the-media/2019/03/29/nolte-bbc-ordered-to-pay-damages-for-fake-news-about-trump-and-ukraine-president/
Share:

Murder of Donbass leader committed with help of Western intelligence services - DPR acting head

Murder of Donbass leader committed with help of Western intelligence services - DPR acting head

Murder of Donbass leader committed with help of Western intelligence services - DPR acting head
The assassination of Aleksandr Zakharchenko, the leader of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic, was committed with the help of western intelligence services, the republic’s acting head said. 
 
One person has been detained as part of an investigation into the murder of Aleksandr Zakharchenko, the acting head of the DPR Denis Pushilin said on Saturday.

Pushilin stated that the detained person is “an agent of Ukraine’s Security Service (SBU)”, adding that SBU was involved in Zakharchenko's assassination. DPR investigators analyzed the remains of the explosive device that killed Zakharchenko and identified technology that hadn’t previously been used by SBU, he said.

 
“This gives us an understanding that the terrorist attack was committed with the assistance of Western intelligence services,” he added.

Earlier in September, Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) accused Ukrainian intelligence services of being behind the explosion that killed Zakharchenko.

Moscow condemned the murder of the 42-year old, saying that the incident may jeopardize the peace process in the east of the country. “Given the current situation, it’s impossible to talk about the nearest meetings in the Normandy format like many of our European partners would have wanted,” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said. “It is a serious situation that must be analyzed. We are doing it right now.”

Zakharchenko was killed by an explosion in a cafe in the eastern Ukrainian city of Donetsk in late August. He had headed the DPR since November 2014, when a crisis broke out in Ukraine following a coup d’etat that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych.

READ MORE: 'The city is orphaned': 120,000 mourners bid farewell to murdered Donbass leader in Donetsk (PHOTOS)

Hours after Zakharchenko’s killing, the SBU released a statement, rejecting all allegations of its involvement in the incident. According to the service’s spokeswoman, the blast was probably caused by infighting in the Donetsk Republic.

Source: https://www.rt.com/news/438513-donbass-leader-assasination-donetsk/
Share:

[Video] 'Lavrov's patience tested one time too many': Russian FM blasts Western policy in UN speech

If the US cares as much about the concept of sovereignty as President Donald Trump claims, it should stop interfering in the affairs of other countries, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov says.

Statements by top US officials clearly show which country is actually interfering in the affairs of other nations, Lavrov said during a press conference on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on Friday.

Related: Russia Warns West Against New Strikes in Syria Under Far-Fetched Pretexts

The foreign minister cited Kurt Volker, the US special representative for Ukraine, as an example.
“It would be fine if Volker talked about reconciliation in Ukraine. All he talks about is how Russia is to blame for everything,” Lavrov said.

“And then he takes the liberty of saying things like ‘Russian people deserve freedom’ – that’s the US special representative for Ukraine speaking – ‘And the Ukrainian experience should inspire Russian people.’”
"You can probably figure out from this who is calling for meddling and who isn’t."
If the US actually took seriously its own statements about countries worldwide being sovereign, it would be a very welcome development, the Russian foreign minister stated, reflecting on Trump’s speech at the UN General Assembly.


“Trump, among other things, stated that he firmly backs the sovereignty of each nation in the world; I strongly support this,” Lavrov said.

Related: How the UN Joined America’s War Against Syria by Eric Zuesse

“If the US is adhering that much to sovereignty as the basic principle, one maybe shouldn’t tamper with the affairs of other countries.”

Related: Trump to U.N.: "We Reject the Ideology of Globalism"

Source: https://www.rt.com/news/439906-lavrov-us-sovereignty-meddling/




Share:

My Musings on Georgia's Anti-Russian antics by Prof. Vladimir Golstein


My Musings on Georgia's Anti-Russian antics by Prof. Vladimir Golstein

We know that politicians play their games and use their strategies, smokescreens, and spinning to get what they want. If Russophobia pays, why not use it? That's what they do in Poland, and Ukraine, and United Kingdom, and Baltic States. If it works for local consumption only, fine.

Russian government probably uses it too -- what's the best way to unite the nation than to show that it is under siege. So I am not surprised that Russian press milks the images of angry Georgians for their own purposes. 

But both sides, while pursuing their myopic political goals are playing with the national feelings of Russians, something that I find unacceptable.

With the sloppy way perestroika was accomplished, Russians felt utterly humiliated. Just few facts for those who have neither memory, nor understanding.

1991, and then again in 1998 --The collapse of the ruble, which twice wiped out all people's savings. People with say, comfortable 10 thousand rubles on their accounts (which was a price of a good car) ended up with $20 bill for that. Then New Chechen war and its losses.

1998. 80% of Russian farms went bankrupt. 70 thousand factories closed. Epidemic of unemployment. 72 mil Russians (half of the country) fell below the poverty line.

In 2006 Russian government estimated that that there were 715 thousand homeless kids, while UNISEF raised this number to 3 mil. Suicide rate doubled, violent crime rate increased fourfold, and consumption of alcohol doubled in comparison with the Soviet period.

1999. NATO bombs the hell out of Serbia, and all Russians can do is to watch it in helpless anger, Eltsin's excursion into Pristina notwithstanding.

Add to that a total change in ethnic make up of Russian cities, where all of the sudden all the markets belong to Azeris, plenty of other businesses are run by Chechens and Georgians, and so on. Yet, Russians just stoically put up with that, like a chained bear, continue to swallow the baiting, that comes both from these ethnic minorities inside the country, and outside it.

People who die at sixty with zero money to their name have to hear that they are occupants, that they are slaves, pigs, soviet deplorables, and all other crap that the westernized liberals along with assorted nationalists from Ukraine, Georgia or Estonia, keep on throwing at them.

Related: CIA instructs its puppet regime in Georgia to makes provocations against Russia

What should be truly surprising is that there are so few ethnic and other sorts riots. Any other powerful group, would be rioting non stop. Luckily, the economics has improved since then, and plenty of Russians can feel justifiable proud of what their country has accomplished. Yet, the sense of national insult, national humiliation has remained. At least among the people who've survived these awful years.

So if Georgians or any other fool wants to play with fire, let them. But I don't recommend it. Pushkin had warned the authorities of a Russian revolt: senseless and merciless, long time ago.
Share:

NATO Ready to Continue Dialogue on INF Treaty With Russia

Earlier in the day, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that he did not rule out the possibility that the issue of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty would be addressed at the upcoming talks between Russian President Vladimir Putin and his US counterpart Donald Trump.
NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said after the NATO-Russia Council (NRC) meeting in Brussels on Wednesday that the alliance was ready to continue a dialogue on the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with Russia.

"Allies and Russia… shared views on the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty," NATO said in a statement following the NRC meeting.




READ MORE: NATO, Russia 'Will Likely' Discuss INF Treaty Amid Bloc's War Games in Europe

In addition, Stoltenberg noted that all allies agreed that the INF treaty has been crucial to Euro-Atlantic security.

"We all agree that the INF Treaty has been crucial to Euro-Atlantic security… Allies urge Russia again… to ensure full compliance with the INF Treaty without delay. While we stand ready to continue dialogue on this issue with Russia, as an Alliance we are also committed to take effective measures to continue to ensure the safety and security of all Allies," Stoltenberg said.

Russia, on its part, said that INF treaty is important as a factor in maintaining European and global stability, Permanent Mission to NATO noted.  
 The NATO-Russia Council, which brings together the 29 Allies and Russia, met in Brussels on Wednesday to exchange views on a wide range of topics, including issues related to military activities, reciprocal transparency and risk reduction; the situation in and around Ukraine;

Afghanistan; and hybrid challenges. According to the statement released by NATO press service, NATO and Russia provided briefings on major exercises "in the spirit of transparency."

The council was established on May 28, 2002 and was effectively suspended by the alliance in 2014-2016 over the situation in Ukraine. The latest NATO-Russia Council meeting was held in late May at NATO headquarters in Brussels.

Source: https://sputniknews.com/world/201810311069397982-nato-russia-inf-treaty-cooperation/?fbclid=IwAR2vBB6Wqzap1_27RCI0AKNMm5KTg-i_Wpl5kPomKv3DYvfNdVmteYL1vBE
Share:

Dr. Paul Craig Roberts: "Truth Is Evaporating Before Our Eyes"


On September 17, I posted my column, “Evidence is no longer a Western value.” I used as an example the blame that has been put on Russia for the shot down Malaysian airliner. No evidence whatsoever exists for the accusation, and massive evidence has been presented that the airliner was shot down by the neonazis that seized power as a result of the Washington-organized coup in Ukraine.

Blame was fixed on Russia not by any evidence but by continuous evidence-free accusations that began the moment the airliner was shot down. Anyone who asked for evidence was treated as a “Putin apologist.” This took evidence out of the picture.

Wherever we look in these times, we see evidence-free accusations established as absolute facts: Saddam Hussein’s “weapons of mass destruction,” “Iranian nukes,” “Russian invasion of Ukraine,” the Trump/Putin conspiracy that stole the 2016 US presidential election, Syrian use of poison gas. Not a scrap of evidence exists for any of these accusations, but the truth of the accusations is established in many minds worldwide.

Related: [Video] Deep State Is A Parallel Government Working Against America

Science gave the world the principle of evidence-based fact, which did away with the burning of witches and political decisions based in superstitution. Truth became a force.

But truth can get in the way of agendas, and as elites recovered their power from the social, political, and economic reforms of a previous era, truth was divided into categories and cut so fine that it disappeared. For the elite truth became identical to their economic interests, and Identity Politics stripped truth of its universal meaning and reduced truth to self-pleading race and gender truth.
The result is that today truth is established not by evidence but by repetition of accusations and falsehoods.

This made it easy to destroy people and countries by lies alone. Who remembers Dominique Strauss-Kahn, the head of the International Monetary Fund and at the time the likely future president of France? Strauss-Kahn was out of step with Washington which wanted its puppet Sarkozy reelected. Strauss-Kahn came to New York and was accused by a hotel maid of sexual assault. He was arrested and jailed. The New York district attorney and media whores pronounced him guillty.

Roger Stone: Deep State Prepared To Remove Trump By Any Means Necessary

 Simultaneously, on cue, a French woman made the same claim. Case closed. No evidence. Just claims. Then it emerged that the hotel maid had just had very large sums of money far above her income level deposited to her bank account. Even more damning, it was revealed that Sarkozy knew of Strauss-Kahn’s arrest before the police announced it. The case fell apart, and the New York district attorney publicly apologized. But Strauss-Kahn had been forced to resign as Director of the IMF and was out of the French presidential election. So Washington won.

Today it is a common, routine tactic for both US political parties to produce a woman to bring accusations of sexual harassment, abuse, or assault against any heterosexual male appointee or nominee that either party regards to be out of step with its agenda. It happens so regularly that no sentinent person can possibly believe the woman. Sexual assault has been reduced to one of the dirty tricks of politics.

As hard as false accusations can be on individuals, they destroy entire countries. Just consider the destruction of Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, currently Yemen, and Washington has not given up on the same fate for Syria and Iran. Based on nothing but Washington’s endlessly repeated false accusations, millions of peoples have been murdered, maimed, orphened, widowed, displaced, and sent as refugees overrunning Europe.

There is not a scrap of evidence anywhere that justifies Washington’s enormous crimes against humanity. Yet, these crimes that in a truth-conscious world would have resulted in several entire governments of the United States standing accused in the International Criminal Court, or the War Crimes Court, or whichever court, and perhaps in all of them, are ignored, because accusation alone against the destroyed countries and peoples sufficed to justify Washington’s war crimes against humanity.

Related: [Video] Deep State Blocks Key FISA Docs Release!

What I have described is a truth-free world. There is no place for truth in the world that the West has created. The Western hostility to truth is overwhelming. As I write truth-tellers are being banned from Facebook, Twitter, and PayPal. Google makes their sites almost impossible to find. Throughout the Western World truth has been redefined as “Conspiracy Theory.”

Elites such as George Soros and innumerable tax-financed government agencies, such as the National Endowment for Democracy, spend taxpayers’ money discrediting those who tell the truth. Many in governments want truth-tellers locked up as enemies of the state, by which they mean “enemies of the self-interests of the ruling elites.”



You don’t need to believe me. Here are four books written by honorable persons, meticulously documented, full of evidence that make it clear that American elites have no respect whatsoever for truth. Truth is something that is in their way.

One of the books is Charlie Savage’s Takeover. Savage shows how Dick Cheney used the George W. Bush regime and 9/11 to destroy the separation of powers and the civil liberties in the US Constitution. When you read Savage’s book you will discover that the America that you think is here is not here. In its place is a dictatorship available to any president clever enough to use it. Savage’s book is one of the best pieces of investigative reporting that I have read.

The Roman system of government never recovered from Caesar crossing the Rubicon. I doubt that the US Constitution will ever recover from Dick Cheney.

Two of the books are by David Ray Griffin, one of the last and most determined of American protagonists for truth. In his book, Bush and Cheney: How They Ruined America and the World, Griffin makes, a decade after Savage, the same case against Dick Cheney. When two independently minded researchers reach the same conclusion, you can bet it is on the money. If the world survives Washington’s orchestrated conflict with Russia, Cheney will go down in history as the person who destroyed American constitutional government.

In this same book, Griffin also examines the official 9/11 story and exposes it as a total fabrication with no connection to any truth whatsoever. He takes up this case in his current, just released book with Elizabeth Woodworth, 9/11 Unmasked: An International Review Panel Investigation.
Anyone who is still brainwashed by the official 9/11 story can immediately free themselves from their deception by reading this book. There is no longer any doubt that 9/11 was an inside orchestrated event for the purpose of unleashing two decades, with more to come, of American aggression in the Middle East.

Related: [Video] FBI Ignores Trump’s Order To Release Documents Unredacted

Griffin does not leave a single official statement about 9/11 standing as not a single official claim is based on any factual evidence whatsoever.

For seventeen years the world has been fed a pack of total lies based on nothing but accusations and in the face of massive evidence produced not by some collection of political hacks sitting as a 9/11 Commission, but by thousands of experts. Yet for seventeen years false accusations prevailed over heavily documented facts presented by disinterested experts called “conspiracy theorists” by those intent on covering up their crimes.

The fourth book is Mary Mapes’ Truth and Duty. Mary Mapes is the CBS producer whose team carefully prepared for Dan Rather the 60 Minutes report on George W. Bush’s failure to perform his Texas Air National Guard duty. Her story was absolutely correct, but she and Rather were destroyed by accusation alone. The Republicans set in attack mode the right-wing bloggers, and soon the official media joined in for the purpose of elevating their ratings at CBS’s expense.

CBS was vulnerable, because it was no longer independent but a part of Viacom’s empire. Mapes was already in trouble, because she had broken the Abu Ghraib torture story just at the moment that Bush and Cheney declared: “America doesn’t torture.” As the Cheney/Bush regime put pressure on Viacom, a corporate executive told Mapes: “You don’t have any idea how many millions of dollars Viacom is spending on lobbying in Wasington, and nothing you’ve done in the past year has helped.”
There you have it. The Viacom executives had no interest whatsoever in the truth, only in what advanced their lobbying interests in Washington. Mapes, a truth-teller had to go, and she did. And so did Dan Rather.

Today in America no member of the print and TV media or NPR dares to get within a hundred miles of the truth. It would be a career-ending event.

Without a media dedicated to truth, there can be no control over government.


Ask yourselves where you can read articles like this. If you do not support the remaining portals of truth, you will find yourselves bound, like the Elven-kings, Dwarf-lords and Mortal Men in J.R.R. Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, “in the darkness” by the elites’ ability to control the explanations that comprise your reality.

Identity Politics has destroyed the very conception of truth independent of race and gender. Science itself becomes discredited as does civilization:
Never in history have humans been so near to losing all comprehension of reality as in today’s world in which there is no respect for truth.

Source: https://www.paulcraigroberts.org/2018/09/24/truth-is-evaporating-before-our-eyes/
Share:

Mr. Lucas, Don’t Take Your Readers for Fools! by Prof. Vladimir Golstein

Mr. Lucas, Don’t Take Your Readers for Fools! by Prof. Vladimir Golstein


So Edward Lucas, the columnist at The Times, the long time contributor to the notoriously Russophobic Economist and the author of 2008 The New Cold War: Putin’s Russia and the Threat to the West, where he fully exhibits his own paranoia about the dangers of Putin’s Russia, has came up with a new theological and cultural diagnosis. Paranoia is the religion of Putin’s Russia. Not communism, not capitalism, not Orthodoxy, not atheism. Just plain old paranoia.

Why, and how? Argument number #1 is that RT has put him on the list of ten top Russophobes. Lucas’ complaint: the list is haphazard and flimsy. Fine, any list is haphazard and flimsy – it just points to some people or organizations that like to come up with ridiculous charges and accusations, not dissimilar from his own “academic” investigations. So what? Having never produced anything academic himself, Mr. Lucas can’t expect any academic study from RT, can he?


Argument #2. Mr. Lucas had found an academic study to his liking — Ilya Yablokov’s Fortress Russia — that discovered that Russian conspiracy theorists, who were on the margins in the 1990s have come to the forefront in the current situation. Yablokov has studied Russian TV and found its style paranoid. Yablokov’s conclusion: the US is a paranoid Empire to be sure, but mainstream TV does not usually cater to it, as opposed to the mainstream Russian TV. Maybe, even though CNN and Fox would surely provide serious competition.

Without any desire to defend the rather combative style of Russian TV talk shows where guests clash, fight, and play the roles assigned to them by the hosts, I am certain that these shows do address real foreign policy concerns. Any detached observer looking at the map and seeing NATO bases all around Russia is bound to ask questions. Any detached observer listening to Western news and hearing the endless bacchanalia of Russia this, Russia that, is bound to get nervous. Any detached observer, having witnessed endless the West’s bombing campaigns, wars, invasions, regime changes, mass migrations and destruction, is bound to get a bit edgy about western intentions. And it would not be paranoia. It would be plain common sense.

Creating Russophobia: From the Great Religious Schism to Anti-Putin Hysteria

And what about Russian history? Hasn’t the country been invaded again and again throughout its history? The latest invasion, that of Nazi Germany, is still remembered by all Russians, since one can hardly find a family that did not lose someone in that awful war. Last time Germans and Ukrainians got together, my relatives were brutally murdered in Kiev, mowed downed – along with thousands others in Babi Yar. So even living in the United States, I do get nervous when Ukrainians, helped by their European admirers, burn people in Odessa. Genetic memory is a stubborn thing, you know. So can you really blame Russians for getting a bit anxious about the events in Ukraine, Mr. Lucas, or as the happy denizen of the murderous British Empire, that one that killed, burned, shot, and starved others, you can’t imagine what fears of prosecution are actually all about?

Wait a minute, says Mr. Lucas. “German Unification, EU and NATO enlargement, Ukrainian independence”: These recent events on the borders of Russia — are haphazard. There never was a master plan. Well, if it looks like a duck, and acts like a duck, it has to be a duck. In fact, there are rarely master plans for anything, unless we are talking about Hillary’s campaign to justify her spectacular loss of 2016 presidential campaign. What we’re witnessing, however, is the plain old confluence of interests and appetites that results in wars, sanctions and invasions. Just read some basic history, Mr. Lucas, before you present yourself as the heroic conspiracy theories slayer.


Argument # 3. Russians do a lot of mischief to themselves: corruption, bribes, oligarchs. That’s for sure. But so what? Russian corruption is bad, and one hopes that Russians will get rid of it. But it does not mean there are no countries that want to invade and loot the place, and squeeze away local oligarchs. Even paranoid people have enemies, as the maxim goes. There’s plenty to steal in Russia. Do you think, Mr. Lucas, that western oligarchs want to leave it all to Russians? Don’t underestimate your own sponsors. They don’t like it.

Furthermore, oligarchs and corruption are rampart in Great Britain and US, and still these countries are running on paranoia and arming themselves to the teeth. And what about Poland, the Baltic States, Ukraine – the countries that do indeed thrive on paranoia? But their paranoia fits western narratives, so it’s “our kind of paranoia.” As opposed to Russian paranoia, which is obviously a wrong kind of paranoia. What about the paranoia of the trigger-happy Israel, which manifests itself in endless violence and military excursions against its neighbours? So Israel has Judaism for religion, Poles have Catholicism, but Russians have Paranoia. A strange doctrine, and new.


 And then, Lucas totally reverses himself, and says – that the west should not stoke Russia’s siege mentality by a military build up on its borders and endless provocations. Finally! Lucas dares to rise to the occasion and criticize the West … but we rapidly learn why. This righteous indignation is provoked by Trump’s and Bolton’s proposal to withdraw from the INF treaty. But even this criticism is turned on its head. This new arms race is bad, because it will help Russia to “crack down, lash out and make it look more important than it is.”

In other words, NATO countries should not place their war-heads in Roumania or Poland, they should not claim that they could actually win a nuclear war (something that only American theoreticians, including former Secretary of Defense, Ash Carter, do) – they should not do any of those things because these actions will make Russians think that they are more important than they are. That would be a really dangerous case of paranoia. Much more dangerous than the destruction of life on earth as we know it.


But Lucas does not stop there; playing the role of Candide must be way too enjoyable. He claims that compiling the list of “Russophobes” is a “childish bad habit” – never mind the Magnitsky list, nor plenty of other lists compiled by the State Department, the Mueller investigation, social media police and numerous other western outlets, whose endless lists still can’t satisfy the lust for more and more sanctions against more and more individuals. Those lists are the sign of profound maturity, no doubt.
And in a true demagogic fashion, Lucas concludes: we’ve been paying too much attention to “nasty but grand Russians.” We should celebrate Russia’s “colossal contribution to world culture.” Oh, so Russia is important after all. How refreshing. Let’s wipe Russia off the map with nukes, and then enjoy Russian ballet at Covent Garden or Russian novels in their BBC adaptations.

Source: https://off-guardian.org/2018/10/25/mr-lucas-dont-take-your-readers-for-fools/?fbclid=IwAR0_JZK9AWAo587C45e5vKgiCS1lITZYsWv1ZcvrKPRCCLvhbD9kXzWTgos

Related: Guy Mettan’s Book on Russophobia Is a “Must Read” for Any Person Interested in Russia 
Share:

British Army Soldier Reacts to Spetsnaz (Russian Special Forces)


 In this Video Kevin Drake reacts to Spetsnaz (Russian Special Forces)...

My craziest reaction so far! At the end I also explain my channel changes and reasons why.

 Spetsnaz is an umbrella term for special purpose in Russian and is used in numerous post-Soviet states.

Historically, the term referred to special operations units controlled by the main military intelligence service GRU (Spetsnaz GRU). It also describes task forces of other ministries (such as the Ministry of Internal Affairs ODON and Ministry of Emergency Situations' special rescue unit) in post-Soviet countries. Russian special forces wear different berets depending on the branch of the armed forces they belong to.

These include:
• Ground forces and Airborne Troops (VDV) - Blue Beret
• Russian Navy and Russian Marines - Black Beret
• National Guard - Maroon Beret

As Spetsnaz is a Russian term, it is typically associated with the special units of Russia, but other post-Soviet states often refer to their special forces units by the term as well, since these nations also inherited their special purpose units from the now-defunct Soviet security agencies. The 5th Spetsnaz Brigade of Belarus or the Alpha Group of the Security Service of Ukraine are both such examples of non-Russian Spetsnaz forces.

 Special Forces of the Main Directorate of the General Staff of the Russian Armed Forces (Russian: Части и подразделения специального назначения (спецназ) Главного управления Генерального штаба Вооружённых сил Российской Федерации (СпН ГУ ГШ ВС РФ)), commonly known as the Spetsnaz G.U. or Spetsnaz GRU is the special forces (spetsnaz) of the G.U., the foreign military intelligence agency of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation.

 The Spetsnaz GRU was formed in 1949, the first spetsnaz force in the Soviet Union, as the military force of the Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU), the foreign military intelligence agency of the Soviet Armed Forces. The force was designed in the context of the Cold War to carry out reconnaissance and sabotage against enemy targets in the form of special reconnaissance and direct action attacks. The Spetsnaz GRU inspired additional spetsnaz forces attached to other Soviet intelligence agencies, such as the Vympel and Alpha Group of the KGB.

Following the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the Spetsnaz GRU remained intact until 2010, when it was reassigned to the Ground Forces.[2] In 2013, the Special Operations Forces of the General Staff were established.




Share:

Will US Elites Give Détente With Russia a Chance? By Prof. Stephen F. Cohen

The Trump-Putin meeting in Japan is crucial for both leaders—and for the world.


Despite determined attempts in Washington to sabotage such a “summit,” as I reported previously, President Trump and Russian President Putin are still scheduled to meet at the G-20 gathering in Japan this week. Iran will be at the top of their agenda. The Trump administration seems determined to wage cold, possibly even hot, war against the Islamic Republic, while for Moscow, as emphasized by the Kremlin’s national security adviser, Nikolai Patrushev, on June 25, “Iran has been and will be an ally and partner of ours.”

Indeed, the importance of Iran (along with China) to Russia can hardly be overstated. Among other reasons, as the West’s military alliance encroaches ever more along Russia’s western borders, Iran is a large, vital non-NATO neighbor. Still more, Teheran has done nothing to incite Russia’s own millions of Muslim citizens against Moscow. Well before Trump, powerful forces in Washington have long sought to project Iran as America’s primary enemy in the Middle East, but for Moscow it is a necessary “ally and partner.”

In normal political circumstances, Trump and Putin could probably diminish any potential US-Russian conflict over Iran—and the one still brewing in Syria as well. But both leaders come to the summit with related political problems at home. For Trump, they are the unproven but persistent allegations of “Russiagate.” For Putin, they are economic.


As I have also previously explained, while there was fairly traditional “meddling,” there was no “Russian attack” on the 2016 American presidential election. But for many mainstream American commentators, including the editorial page editor of The Washington Post, it is an “obvious truth” and likely to happen again in 2020, adding ominously that Trump is still “cozying up to the chief perpetrator, Russian President Vladimir Putin.” A New York Times columnist goes further, insisting that Russia “helped to throw the election” to Trump. Again, there is no evidence whatsoever for these allegations. Also consider the ongoing assault on Attorney General William Barr, whose current investigation into the origins of “Russiagate” threatens to conclude that the scandal originated not with Russia but with US intelligence agencies under President Obama, in particular with the CIA under John Brennan.

We should therefore not be surprised, despite possible positive national security results of the Trump-Putin summit in Japan, if the US president is again widely accused of “treason,” as he so shamefully was following his meeting with Putin in Helsinki in July 2018, and as I protested at that time. Even the Times’ once-dignified columnist pages thundered, “Trump, Treasonous Traitor” and “Putin’s Lackey,” while senior US senators, Democrat and Republican alike, did much the same.
Putin’s domestic problem, on the other hand, is economic and social. Russia’s annual growth rate is barely 2 percent, real wages are declining, popular protests against officialdom’s historically endemic corruption are on the rise, and Putin’s approval rating, while still high, is declining. A public dispute between two of Putin’s advisers has broken out over what to do. On the one side is Alexei Kudrin, the leading monetarist who has long warned against using billions of dollars in Russia’s “rainy day” funds to spur investment and economic growth. On the other is Sergei Glaziev, a kind of Keynesian, FDR New Dealer who has no less persistently urged investing these funds in new domestic infrastructure that would, he argues, result in rapid economic growth.

During his nearly 20 years as Kremlin leader, Putin has generally sided with the “rainy day” monetarists. But on June 20, during his annual television call-in event, he suddenly, and elliptically, remarked that even Kudrin “has been drifting towards” Glaziev. Not surprisingly, many Russian commentators think this means that Putin himself is now “leaning toward Glaziev.” If so, it is another reason why Putin has no interest in waging cold war with the United States—why he wants instead, indeed even needs, a historic, long-term détente.

It seems unlikely that President Trump or any of the advisers currently around him understand this important struggle—and it is a struggle—unfolding in the Russian policy elite. But if Trump wants a major détente (or “cooperation,” as he has termed it) with Russia, anyone who cares about international security and about the well-being of the Russian people should support him in this pursuit. Especially at this moment, when we are told by the director of the United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research that “the risks of the use of nuclear weapons…are higher now than at any time since World War Two.”

This commentary is based on Stephen F. Cohen’s most recent weekly discussion with the host of The John Batchelor Show. Now in their sixth year, previous installments are at TheNation.com.

Stephen F. Cohen is a professor emeritus of Russian studies and politics at New York University and Princeton University. A Nation contributing editor, his new book War With Russia? From Putin & Ukraine to Trump & Russiagate is available in paperback and in an ebook edition.
Share:

President Putin Calls For Defending Internet Free Speech


 In stark contrast to attempts in numerous western countries to stifle free speech online, Russian President Vladimir Putin defended Internet freedom during a conference earlier today.

Putin told the Russian Internet Governance Forum, “I am confident that we should continue to follow the principle of the freedom of the Internet, creating conditions for a wide exchange of information and the implementation of business initiatives and startups.”
The Russian leader said that it was important to balance free speech online with concerns about tackling cyber-crime and illegal content.

Putin’s position is at odds with many western leaders, who have elevated concerns about “fake news” and people’s feelings being hurt over free speech.

Related: BBC Ordered to Pay Damages for Fake News About Trump and Ukraine President

In addition to the widespread banning and deplatforming of numerous dissident speakers over the course of the last year, Internet regulation by the state is also intensifying in the west.

According to reports, the UK is about to impose what some are calling “the toughest Internet laws in the world” in the name of stopping cyber-bullying and the spread of “disinformation”.

The European Union also recently passed Article 13, which some fear could lead to the banning of memes.
In the not too distant future, the Russian Internet, where for example you can criticize transgenderism without the risk of being arrested (unlike in the UK), might be more free than anywhere in western Europe.
I can think of nothing more humiliating than that.

Source: https://summit.news/2019/04/08/vladimir-putin-calls-for-defending-internet-free-speech/
Share: