Posts
Putin
offers Obama a gamit the latter cannot refuse
8
May, 2014
I
have to admit that today's move by Putin caught me completely
off-guard. My first impression was that by asking the folks in the
Donbass to postpone the referendum, Putin was basically tossing aside
a valuable bargaining chip. Even more disturbing was his apparent
backing for the upcoming May 25th presidential election.
Let
me also say, however, that the notion of Putin "caving in"
never even crossed my mind if only because categories such as "caving
in" are simply not applicable in the real world of international
politics - they are only good for the taking heads on the Idiot Tube
and their zombified audience.
But
if Putin was not "caving in" - what in the world was he
doing? I submit that what Putin did is give us his reply to
yesterday's quiz. Remember what I wrote?
Let
us assume that Russia does not intervene and that, with time and
effort, the nationalists regain control of most of the eastern and
southern Ukraine. Let is further assume that the referendum wanted by
the Russian-speakers is either not held or ignored, while the
Presidential election goes ahead and that Poroshenko or Tymoshenko
get's "kind of elected" in a farcical election which,
however, the USA and its EU protectorate will immediately recognize
as "legitimate".
This
is *exactly* the option chosen by Putin today. To see why, we have
to look at this not from Moscow's perspective, but from Kiev's
perspective. From the point of view of the junta this outcome looks
something like this:
"So
we have managed to get most of the East and South more or less under
control. We have stopped the "terrorist's" referendum and
we got our leader Oligarchenko elected President in an election fully
backed the US and Europe. What do we do next?"
This
is when things get really interesting for a number of reasons. For
one thing, the economy is completely dead and nobody, really nobody,
has any idea as to what to do about it. Second the degree of hatred
between the western Banderastan and the eastern Donbass is at an
all-time high and nobody has any idea as to how to make all these
people coexist together. Third, and there are a lot of signs in Kiev
and elsewhere that this is already beginning to happen, social unrest
triggered by the economic collapse is going to go from bad to worse
with each passing week. Fourth, now that the neo-Nazi thugs do not
have a "patriotic" job to do anymore - what kind of
"activities" will keep them busy next?
There
is a well-known experiment in psychology: you put two rats into a
cage and you start giving them electrical shocks (though a grid in
the cage floor). You know what they do? They immediately attack
each other. Pain makes them do that - they strike out at the only
enemy they see.
So
just imagine the utter chaos which will take place this summer all
over the Ukraine.
Now
add to that the fact that the Ukraine will desperately need Russian
energy for which it is both unable and unwilling to pay.
To
me, this picture does not look only bleak, it look apocalyptic.
Now
consider the very same picture from the US and EU's point of view.
First,
it is pretty darn obvious that they, the US & EU, "own"
the Ukraine (not Russia). They overthrew Yanukovich, they backed the
neo-Nazis, they promised wealth and freedom to the Ukrainians if they
sign the agreement with the EU and they put their full political
weight behind President Oligarchenko and his government. Frankly,
their best hope was to blame any and all problems on Russia, its
"agents" in the Donbass and Moscow's support for the
"terrorists". But now that this pretext is gone - whom
shall they blame next?
Maybe
each other?
I
can already hear the outraged comments about how all this is just a
cynical rationalization for the fact that "Russia has betrayed
the Russian-speakers in the southeast". So let's talk about
them.
I
don't know about you - but I am personally unimpressed to say the
least about the numbers of men who turned up to fight against the
junta. Yes, some did and they are fighting hard but, again, this is
not South Ossetia by a long shot. I did see small groups of
determined men fighting back, but I did not see large hordes of
infuriated miners organizing a mass demonstration or, even less so,
attacking the junta's forces. Did you?
So
where the hell is everybody? Sitting at home and waiting for the
outcome?
Furthermore,
and several commentators have pointed this out, it is rather dubious
that the resistance leaders have the organizational skills to
simultaneously fight the junta and organize a referendum.
Add
to this a very real possibility that a non-trivial part of the
population is rather lukewarm, undecided or otherwise wishy washy
about staying in the Ukraine or not - and you have all the
ingredients of an embarrassing PR disaster.
My
personal (and highly subjective) feeling is that most folks in the
Donbass would prefer to live without a neo-Nazi regime and get their
pay in Rubles. But they also want some "Polite Armed Men in
Green" to make that happen for them. And that is something
Putin has no reason at all to agree to.
When
I though about submitting a quiz to you yesterday I had already
firmly decided for myself that non-intervention was a much better
option for both Russia and the Donbass. But when this evening I
heard Putin I was totally caught off-guard and disturbed. It
appeared to me that he was giving up important things for nothing and
my instinctive knee-jerk reaction was, as always, to suspect the
worst. But now that I had time to really think it over, what Putin
is doing makes sense. Not only is he choosing the "no
intervention" option (which I had expected him to do) - he is
pro-actively contributing to that outcome (which I did not expect him
to do at all). I had expected Russia to look "firm and stern"
and not to yield on anything in order to maximize the uncertainty and
anxiety of the US, EU and the freaks in power in Kiev. Also, I had
not expected Putin to give the western propaganda machine such an
fantastic opportunity to gloat, declare Russia a "paper tiger"
and declare victory for Obama. But now that I think about that I
find that a very sneaky move: let them gloat today - it will just
make their inevitable fall tomorrow even much more painful to cope
with.
In
chess, this is called a "gambit". You accept the loss of a
piece to win a positional advantage. Except that in chess your
opponent has the option to decline the gambit whereas in this case
the Empire has to accept it.
I
should have known better since Putin had already done exactly that
when the USA was about to attack Syria: he "gave up" the
entire Syrian chemical weapons arsenal in exchange for a disruption
in the AngloZionist Empire's momentum towards an attack on Syria. At
the time his gambit was also greeted by a chorus of "the
Russians caved in! they betrayed Assad!" and yet eight months
later nobody can deny that Syria is winning the war.
I
will tell you honestly that I hate gambits. In chess and in life.
And when offered a gambit in chess I usually decline it. To me this
is a profoundly counter-intuitive move.
I
suspect that Putin must be a much better chess player then I am.
The
Saker
Moscow's roadmap for Ukraine settlement sees mixed response
Moscow’s call on pro-federalization protesters in Ukraine to postpone the referendums was welcomed by the West and Kiev, yet they still do not recognize the need to halt the military op in southeast as a prerequisite for national dialogue and elections.
RT,
8 May, 2014
Moscow’s
call on pro-federalization protesters in Ukraine to postpone the
referendums was welcomed by the West and Kiev, yet they still do not
recognize the need to halt the military op in southeast as a
prerequisite for national dialogue and elections.
Ukraine
presidential hopeful Pyotr Poroshenko (UDAR Party) has welcomed
President Vladimir Putin’s statements, saying that the situation
significantly improved following the news from Moscow. “We
have an appeal to stop an illegal referendum, Russia accepting
presidential elections. I think this is great news for stabilizing
the situation in eastern Ukraine,” Poroshenko
told reporters in Berlin.
On
Wednesday, Putin called the
presidential election in Ukraine, now scheduled for May 25, “a
move in the right direction” adding
however it would mean nothing unless all citizens of Ukraine have a
full understanding of how their rights would be guaranteed
afterwards.
The
direct dialogue between Kiev and representatives of the southeastern
regions is the “key
element” of
settling the conflict, Putin said, supported on this by the OSCE
Chairperson-in-Office and Swiss President Didier Burkhalter. In order
to “create
the necessary conditions for this dialogue,” Putin
urged rescheduling of the referendum planned by anti-government
protesters to determine the future of southeastern Ukraine.
However,
for a dialogue to succeed, a ceasefire and halt of any violence
should take place by all the military, paramilitary and illegal
radical armed groups, Putin added. “Russia
urgently appeals to the authorities in Kiev to cease immediately all
military and punitive operations in southeast Ukraine,”
Russia is not responsible for the deepening crisis in Ukraine, Putin reiterated, reciting concrete steps it made to de-escalate tensions.
“We have been told that our troops by the Ukrainian border are a concern – we have withdrawn them. They are now not near the border, but at locations where they conduct regular drills at ranges,” he said.“This can be easily verified using modern intelligence techniques, including from space, where everything can be seen.”
“We helped to secure the OSCE military observers’ release and I think also made a contribution to defusing the situation,” he added.
The President of the European Council, Herman Van Rompuy, noted on Wednesday evening that a“genuine national dialogue and the cessation of acts of violence and provocations are essential elements in advancing towards a political solution.”
“I take note of President Putin's recent statements signalling a willingness to de-escalate the situation, including his call to refrain from holding a referendum in the Eastern part of Ukraine and the stated withdrawal of Russian troops from the borders of Ukraine,” Rompuy said.
The United States however claimed that, although being a step forward, is not enough and Russia should try harder to deescalate tensions in Ukraine.
“It is a helpful step but again there is far more the President Putin and the Russians can do to deescalate the situation and to ensure safe elections,” US State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki told journalists on Wednesday evening, without elaborating on which other moves she was expecting from Russia.
Shortly afterwards Ukraine’s foreign ministry issued a statement welcoming the “important role of the OSCE in international efforts aimed at de-escalating the situation” but saying that Moscow was hiding“support for terrorist actions against Ukrainian citizens” behind the façade of “good faith gesture.”
“A full-scale national dialogue… is an absolute priority of the Government of Ukraine,” the ministry’s statement reads.“However, a dialogue with terrorists is impermissible and unconceivable. Protection of peoples’ lives and elimination of terrorism which undermines any possibility of the dialogue is the goal of the anti-terrorist operation being conducted in certain locations in the east of our country.”
The OSCE was ready to take responsibility for coordinating the “roadmap” to resolve the crisis and negotiations with the US and the EU would be taking place soon, Burkhalter said earlier. But Ukraine’s FM stated that discussion of the peaceful settlement in Ukraine “without Ukraine” is “senseless and unacceptable.”
Representatives of the southeast in the meantime said they were ready for negotiations with Kiev and would on Thursday discuss possible rescheduling of the referendum.
But neither those in power in Kiev, nor the United States seem to be interested in accepting any kind of roadmap that could bring about peaceful solution to the crisis, Lawrence Freeman of the Executive Intelligence Review magazine told RT.
“You have to keep in mind that the US State Department and in particular Victoria Nuland, who has been behind this coup since the end of last year, these are people who are actually running the show. And they want to force a confrontation. They’ve been lying about the entire situation since February 21-22… have not been telling the truth about who is actually responsible for the confrontations in Kiev and in Eastern Ukraine,” Freeman said.
The roadmap proposed by President Putin and the OSCE chief, Freeman believes, is the best way of”avoiding the confrontation” some would like to have with Russia.
“I think President Putin is actually strategically handling the situation quite well. Because he knows that there are people who would like to use this conflict to escalate to major war. So he is outmanoeuvring the actual people behind this,” Freeman said.
If authorities in Kiev are really worried about Ukraine’s future as a country and its territorial integrity, Freeman says they have no other choice but stop their full-scale military operation against the population in the southeast.
“They have to, if they want to have a country,” he said. “They cannot allow neo-Nazis and right-wing fascists to run the country, to be part of security and military operation. If they want to be a country – they can’t do that.”
Insane!
Obama is trying for a “heads we win; tails you lose”sort of
situation. But when it comes to chess, Putin is definitely superior
to the dim-witted Obama
Putin
Calls for De-escalation, US Pushes New Sanctions
Russian
president says soldiers near border will return to normal 'training
grounds' and requests contentious referendum votes in the east be
postponed
8
May, 2014
UPDATE (3:55
PM EST): White
House responds to Putin remarks with skepticism, new sanctions
Following
remarks by Russian President Vladimir Putin earlier in the day
indicating he had ordered his troops away from the Ukraine border,
White House spokesperson Josh Earnest told reporters,
"To date, there has been no evidence that such a withdrawal has
taken place." Adding, "We would certainly welcome a
meaningful and transparent withdrawal."
The
State Department echoed the White House's remarks. Spokesperson Jen
Psaki, as quoted by Guardian reporter
Paul Lewis, said that
Russia should “use its influence” to ensure the May 25 election
proceed peacefully. “It is a helpful step, but again there is far
more that President Putin and the Russians can do to de-escalate the
situation and ensure safe elections.”
Following
these comments, as the Guardian summarizes,
other media outlets report the introduction of new economic sanctions
by the White House against Russia on Wednesday:
The
White House will remove Russia from a program offering favorable
trade rates, meaning certain Russian goods are "now subject to
non-preferential import duty rates" ABC's
Kirit Radia reports.
President Obama told Congress he plans to remove Russia from the
program called the Generalized System of Preferences, according to
Reuters.
Russia
is "sufficiently advanced economically" and no longer needs
the special treatment, the White House said. … "Russia's
actions regarding Ukraine, while not directly related to the
President's decision regarding Russia's eligibility for GSP benefits,
make it particularly appropriate to take this step now," Caitlin
Hayden, spokeswoman for the National Security Council, said in an
email.
Additionally,
the Kremlin has now released a complete English translation of the
comments Putin made during his morning meeting with Swiss President
and OSCE head Didier Burkhalter, available here.
Earlier:
In
public statements on Wednesday, President Vladimir Putin announced he
will redeploy Russian troops away from the Ukraine border as a way to
calm tensions in the region and has asked Ukrainians in the east who
opposed the interim government in Kiev to at least postpone local
referendum votes they've called for this Sunday.
Directly
addressing the repeated claim by the U.S. and others that the
presence of Russian troops near the border has been a destabilizing
issue, Putin said: "We're always being told that our forces on
the Ukrainian border are a concern. We have withdrawn them. Today
they are not on the Ukrainian border, they are in places where they
conduct their regular tasks on training grounds."
Putin's
remarks came in a meeting in Moscow with Swiss president, Didier
Burkhalter, who is also the current chairman of the Organisation for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), the group that many see as
key to diplomatic efforts in Ukraine.
Regarding
the desire of many in eastern Ukraine to hold referendum votes on the
future of their political status relative to the new Kiev
goverment—which they see as illegitimate—Putin said: "We
call on the representatives of southeastern Ukraine, the supporters
of the federalization of the country, to postpone the referendum
planned for May 11."
Putin
said that the national vote backed by Kiev, scheduled for May 25, is
a "step in the right direction" but cautioned that without
certain safeguards to protect national unity such a vote could do
more harm than good.
“We
think the most important thing now is to launch direct dialogue,
genuine, full-fledged dialogue between the Kiev authorities and
representatives of southeast Ukraine,” Putin said. “We all want
the crisis to end as soon as possible, and in such a way that takes
into account the interests of all people in Ukraine no matter where
they live."
As of
midday Wednesday, neither the White House nor State Department had
responded to Putin's latest comments.
Early
reports from the city of Donetsk—which has been declared an
independent republic by those opposed to Kiev's rule—showed mixed
reactions to the news, as some in leadership seemed willing to accept
at least a mild version of Putin's request while others expressed
anger for what they perceived as a withdrawal of Russia's support for
their cause.
Shortly
after Putin's comments, Moscow
Times reporter
Ivan Nechepurenko tweeted:
Following #Putin's
statement leader of #Donetsk separatists
Pushilin told @MoscowTimes that
referendum can be postponed for a week max.
Received
less well by others, the Guardian spoke
with 58-year-old Natalia Medvedenko, also in Donetsk, who said: "So
Russia has abandoned us as well. Well we will just have to fight the
fascists on our own. But I still don't quite believe it."
Accusations
by the U.S. and its European allies that Russia has been secretly
pulling all the strings in eastern Ukraine have been repeatedly
rebuffed by facts on the ground. Though its clear that Russian
influence does exist, it remains unclear if the internal Ukrainian
tensions—which have become increasingly violent—can be
ameliorated at this point by political statements from either Moscow
or Washington.
However,
for many progressive-minded observers, it is only high-level and
mature diplomacy that can peacefully end the crisis in Ukraine. For
those individuals, Putin's gesture may come as a welcome development.
Writing for Common
Dreams on
Tuesday, Floyd Rudmin, a professor at the University of Tromsø in
Norway, argued that what's imperative in Ukraine is that at "some
point soon, reality needs to become the priority. No more
name-calling. No more blaming. If there are any adults in the room,
they need to stand up."
Independent
journalist Robert Parry, who has covered the events closely, says
the question for President Obama and
other U.S. officials is whether they can drop their continued
demonization of Putin's stance on Ukraine "and see the world
through the eyes of the ethnic Russians in Donetsk as well as the
pro-European youth in Kiev – recognizing the legitimate concerns
and the understandable fears of both."
And
Anatol Lieven, a professor in the War Studies Department of King’s
College London, at the beginning of the week wrote that
the only way to peace in Ukraine is for the key parties, both inside
and outside of Ukraine, to reject the idea that escalations of
violence are the only inevitability:
Contrary
to what is said in much of the Western media, most of Russia’s
allies in eastern Ukraine are not separatists. Rather, what many in
the Donbas fear is that a government in Kiev—one that is either
unelected or elected by a small majority, and which is under the sway
of extreme nationalist demonstrators—will be able to decide their
fate unilaterally. Thus, they are deeply opposed to the interim
government in Kiev, but many of them continue to envision being a
part of Ukraine in which they would have greater autonomy and
recognition of regional rights and interests, rather than full
independence. Until now, every opinion poll and election in the east
has also suggested this.
But
once a few hundred people have been killed, this reasonable position
will quickly be destroyed. To return power to a reasonable majority,
the international community must put forward the outline of a
constitutional settlement on which a majority of Ukrainians can
agree. It is hopeless to expect that the opposing sides themselves
will be able to abide by a compromise proposal on their own, without
outside help. The question then is whether Russia, the US, the EU,
and the various parties in Ukraine including Ukrainian government can
reach agreement on the outlines of a federal constitution, which the
UN Secretary General could then put forward. This will be an
immensely difficult task in the days and weeks ahead. But the
alternative could be catastrophic.
As
Rudmin concluded: "It will be difficult for Ukraine, EU, and
Russia to escape horrific outcomes unless concerted actions are taken
to change the course of events. People need to press their
governments to start acting for the well-being of the region’s
societies, and stop acting out historical bad habits and loyalty to
alliances."
What
Putin's remarks seem to reflect is at least some indications that
Russia's arm remains outstretched for a diplomatic solution. It
remains less clear, at this point, whether or not the United States
is willing to follow suit.
Vladimir
Putin: Press statements and replies to journalists’
questions
PRESIDENT
OF RUSSIA VLADIMIR PUTIN:
Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen.
I
want to start by welcoming once more our guest, the President of
Switzerland and current head of the OSCE, and I want to thank him for
the attention he is giving to settling this acute crisis in Ukraine.
None of us are indifferent to what is happening there. The situation
has us all very concerned.
Let
me repeat once more that in Russia’s view, the blame for the crisis
that emerged in Ukraine and is now taking the worst direction in its
developments lies with those who organised the coup d’etat in Kiev
on February 22-23, and have not yet taken the trouble to disarm
right-wing radical and nationalist groups.
But
no matter what the case, we must look for ways out of the situation
as it is today. We all have an interest in ending this crisis,
Ukraine and its people above all. Thus I say that we all want the
crisis to end as soon as possible and in such a way that takes into
account the interests of all people in Ukraine no matter where they
live. The discussion with Mr President showed that our approaches to
possible solutions to the crisis have much in common.
Russia
urgently appeals to the authorities in Kiev to cease immediately all
military and punitive operations in southeast Ukraine. This is not an
effective means of resolving internal political conflicts and, on the
contrary, will only deepen the divisions.
We
welcome the release of Mr [Pavel] Gubarev, but we hope to see all the
other political prisoners released too. We think the most important
thing now is to launch direct dialogue, genuine, full-fledged
dialogue between the Kiev authorities and representatives of
southeast Ukraine. This dialogue could give people from southeast
Ukraine the chance to see that their lawful rights in Ukraine really
will be guaranteed.
In
this context, we appeal too, to representatives of southeast Ukraine
and supporters of federalisation to hold off the referendum scheduled
for May 11, in order to give this dialogue the conditions it needs to
have a chance.
Let
me stress that the presidential election the Kiev authorities plan to
hold is a step in the right direction, but it will not solve anything
unless all of Ukraine’s people first understand how their rights
will be guaranteed once the election has taken place.
In
this respect, I hold the same position as Mr President, because we
both believe that direct dialogue between the Kiev authorities and
representatives of southeast Ukraine is the key to settling this
crisis.
But
one of the essential conditions for getting dialogue underway is an
unconditional end to the use of force, whether with the help of the
armed forces, which is completely unacceptable in the modern world,
or through the use of illegal armed radical groups. Russia is ready
to contribute as it can to resolving the Ukrainian crisis and playing
an active and positive part in the Geneva process.
QUESTION:
President Putin,
The
Ukrainian government has made recent statements to the effect that
they are ready to begin broad decentralisation in the country. First
of all, does this decentralisation suit you?
Second,
we hear that the violence must end and we must settle the conflict.
We already heard similar words in Geneva.
My
question therefore is what concrete steps can you take, because the
experts all say that Moscow holds the key to resolving the conflict.
How can you influence people in eastern Ukraine, the so-called
separatists? What concrete steps are needed to de-escalate the
conflict?
VLADIMIR
PUTIN:
First, the idea that Russia holds the key to resolving the problem is
a trick thought up by our Western partners and does not have any
grounds in reality. No sooner do our colleagues in Europe or the US
drive the situation into a dead end, they always say that Moscow
holds the keys to a solution and put all the responsibility on us.
The
responsibility for what is happening in Ukraine now lies with the
people who carried out an anti-constitutional seizure of power, a
coup d’etat, and with those who supported these actions and gave
them financial, political, information and other kinds of support and
pushed the situation to the tragic events that took place in Odessa.
It’s quite simply blood-chilling to watch the footage of those
events.
Russia
will take every necessary step of course and do everything within its
power to settle the situation. I can understand the people in
southeast Ukraine, who say that if others can do what they like in
Kiev, carry out a coup d’etat, take up arms and seize government
buildings, police stations and military garrisons, then why shouldn’t
they be allowed to defend their interests and lawful rights?
As
for whether proposed measures suit Russia or not, we are not a party
to this conflict; the parties to the conflict are in Ukraine itself.
We were told repeatedly that our forces by the Ukrainian border were
a source of concern. We have withdrawn our forces and they are now
not on the Ukrainian border but are carrying out their regular
exercises at the test grounds. This can be easily verified using
modern intelligence techniques, including from space, where
everything can be seen. We helped to secure the OSCE military
observers’ release and I think also made a contribution to defusing
the situation.
You
asked what we can do now. As I said, what is needed is direct,
full-fledged and equal dialogue between the Kiev authorities and the
representatives of people in southeast Ukraine.
I
spoke recently with German Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel, who
proposed organising this dialogue in the form of a round table. We
support this. I think it is a good idea and we will do everything we
can to help make it happen. We must do everything possible to ensure
that people in southeast Ukraine understand, feel and believe that
after the Ukrainian presidential election on May 24 or 25 their
lawful rights will be reliably guaranteed.
This
is the real issue, not the presidential election, but ensuring that
people in the southeast know that they won’t be abandoned and
deceived. This is the crux of the matter, and it is for this that we
need the dialogue we have been talking about today.
QUESTION:
How
realistic is a second round of talks in Geneva, Geneva-2? And how
realistic is it to launch internal talks between the different groups
in Ukraine in a situation when the parties have diametrically opposed
positions to a degree never seen before in Ukraine’s history?
VLADIMIR
PUTIN: I
don’t know how realistic a Geneva-2 round of talks or even internal
political talks in Ukraine itself would be. I simply believe that if
we want to find a long-term solution to the crisis in Ukraine, open,
honest and equal dialogue is the only possible option.
Thank
you.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.