12:05
Trolleybus
comes under shelling in Donetsk, 5 killed - reports
A
trolleybus has come under shelling in Donetsk’s Matrosova Avenue,
TASS reported, citing a spokesman for the Emergencies Ministry of the
self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic. Five people in the
trolleybus were killed, officials in the republic say, according to
media. Initial reports said two people were killed.
14:36
Donetsk,
Lugansk representatives leaving Minsk, contact group meeting on
Ukraine canceled
The
representatives of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s
Republics, Denis Pushilin and Vladislav Deinego, said they were
planning to leave Minsk on Friday, Tass reported. Pushilin earlier
said that he was unaware if negotiations between the Contact Group on
Ukraine would take place in the Belarusian capital on Friday. A
senior Ukrainian Foreign Ministry official said that peace talks on
the conflict in eastern Ukraine must be attended by the leaders of
the Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics.
18:03
E.
Ukraine militia ‘ready to withdraw’ heavy artillery from
separation line
The
self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk People’s Republics are ready to
pull back heavy artillery from the line separating militia-held
territories from those under Kiev’s control in compliance with the
Minsk agreement, according to a joint statement made by top officials
of the republics on Friday. The statement said they will withdraw
weapons if Kiev is ready to do to the same, adding that the only
thing remaining is to “set the date.” The statement was made
during talks between Denis Pushilin and Vladislav Deynego, the
Donbass representatives at the Minsk negotiations. The Minsk document
adopted by Kiev and the opposition in September also includes a
ceasefire in eastern Ukraine.
Ukraine
envoy to UN says Russia new humanitarian convoy will be regarded as
invasion
31
January, 2015
UNITED
NATIONS, January 30. /TASS/. Kiev will regard the dispatch of a new
motor convoy loaded with humanitarian aid to Ukraine as invasion,
Ukraine’s Permanent Representative to the United Nations Yury
Sergeyev said on Friday.
Cargoes
dispatched by Russia infiltrate Ukraine "without Kiev’s
permission," to speak nothing of "participation of the
International Committee of the Red Cross," Sergeyev said.
"If
a new convoy arrives, I think the twelfth, it will be regarded as
invasion," the Ukrainian diplomat said.
Earlier
in the day, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that a next truck
convoy with relief aid for Donbass residents would set off for the
region on Saturday, January 31.
The
convoy comprising 176 vehicles, with 157 trucks out of them, is
expected to deliver nearly 1,500 tonnes of humanitarian cargoes,
mainly foodstuffs (920 tonnes) along with medications and fuel and
lubricants.
Russia’s
Emergencies Ministry organised eleven convoys with humanitarian aid
to Ukraine in co-operation with international and public
organisations from August 2014 to January 15, 2015, and delivered a
total of 14,800 tonnes of humanitarian cargoes to Ukraine’s Donetsk
and Lugansk regions.
Uglegorsk
has been released from Occupants
30
January, 2015
It
was reported by the militiaman from the DPR. The militiaman from the
DPR Evgeniy Kryzhin was at positions in Enakievo, he reported about
this on his page in Facebook. ‘Uglegorsk is ours. It was stormed by
militias from our squadron also. 2 militias were wounded’, wrote
he.
How
it was earlier reported, the reinforcement of fighters from Azov
arrived to Ukrainian occupants.
According
to the dates of fire-fights have been going on, the Army of the DPR
finished the cleaning up.
And
Hell was following them…
(Translated
by Eugene)
I
don’t know who exactly (Turchinov? Poroshenko?) commanded the
Ukrainian army to disrupt the truce. But I am sure that this decision
was taken in Washington.
It
is not an accident that this suicidal provocation was preceded by the
visit of G. Soros to Kiev. This elderly “philanthropist” who,
together with the US Department of State, sponsored all post-soviet
fascist regimes (from Saakashvili’s Georgia to Poroshenko’s
Ukraine), was most qualified to assess the financial state of the
regime in Kiev and to decide whether it still makes sense to continue
prolongation of the agony by monetary injections. His public
statement, reprinted by media on January 14, left no doubt - the
patient is dead, the corpse is stiff, its resuscitation is
meaningless.
Surely,
Kiev has understood that if they scrape the bottom of the barrel and
if Europe exerts itself then it is possible to collect money for
further agony. But Soros clearly said about the necessity to find $50
billion just for 2015. While in 2014 (when the ignoramuses still
hoped for the stabilization of the Kiev regime) US, EU and IMF
together could scrape up only $20 billion, supposed to be stretched
over 3 years. In fact, in 2014 Kiev got only $7.5 – 8 billion in
credits. Clearly, in such conditions it is unrealistic to find $50
billion in a year. Soros himself told that he hopes only for a
miracle.
Right
after Soros’ unambiguous demand for the EU to finance Ukraine, the
European media coverage of the Ukrainian crisis changed drastically,
and it became clear that there will be no miracle. The European mass
media (including German TV) and NGO’s (including Human Rights
Watch) suddenly "saw the light" and found that the Kiev
regime is at war with civilians, violating the laws and customs of
war. Just a little bit longer and Europe will “realize” that Kiev
is taken by a fascist junta that tramples its own constitution, and
introduce sanctions against Russia for Kremlin’s economic
cooperation (supply of coal and gas) with the Nazi regime.
Europe
is not going to give money. USA are not going to help either (if they
wanted to do that, the IMF would not procrastinate for six months but
allocated tranche after tranche, instead). Under these conditions,
supporting Ukraine’s mythical stability, as Washington was doing
since the end of last summer, is absolutely meaningless. Back in
August-September of 2014, Ukrainian politicians were divided into two
groups: the majority – those who were ready to overthrow
Poroshenko, expecting to receive some dividends from the next coup,
and the minority taking a neutral position. Poroshenko himself had
neither his own support group nor power prop. He is still the
president only thanks to the US, which banned the coup at the time.
Washington
knew perfectly well that Poroshenko is trying to negotiate with
Moscow on the peaceful settlement (because only peace could give
Poroshenko a chance to protect not just his presidential chair, but
his life itself). United States needed a war and, seemingly, they did
not want to keep the frightened and confused Petro Alexeyevich at the
helm. But Americans were misled by Russian diplomacy. Peace was (and
remains) beneficial for Russia, because it forces the United States
and its European allies to keep the failed Ukrainian project alive
and, therefore, to spend their scarce resources. The Ukrainian coup,
intended to make from Kiev not only an eternal source of enmity
between Russia and the EU, but also a black hole devouring Moscow’s
resources, has not fulfilled any of its tasks -- a year after the
coup, Ukraine continues to devour the US resources.
But
since Ukraine is just one of many sites of global confrontation
between Moscow and Washington, the further concentration of efforts
on this site becomes unprofitable for the US. They cannot quit,
because then the site will be taken by Russia, which would be a
geopolitical defeat of Washington. Therefore, the site must be
destroyed. Let the winner occupy the ruins; if they could not
entangle him by the whole Ukraine, let he be entangled by the rotting
and decaying corpse of Ukraine.
So,
since for Russia it is better if Ukraine is destroyed by the US as
late as possible, the Russian diplomacy pretended for almost a year,
portraying weakness, confusion, and readiness to surrender. In
anticipation of the fall of Russia, which would solve all their
problems, the United States decided not to finish Ukraine. Why? If,
after the victory over Russia, the problem of supporting the Kiev
regime at the expense of Moscow would be solved by itself.
But
everything good comes to an end sooner or later. By the beginning of
December it became clear that Washington can push Russia as much as
it likes, but it cannot make Russia fall, without falling itself even
sooner. Taking into account the need to reduce the geopolitical
frontline, to concentrate resources on the remaining priority areas,
to leave the lost grounds, the question resurfaced again – what to
do with Ukraine? As soon as it became clear that Soros is not going
to find the necessary finances for Kiev, the fate of the country,
politicians, the public and even the “creative class” accustomed
to be immune to problems, was sealed. And the war reignited with
renewed ferocity.
US
knew perfectly well how unfit for action the Ukrainian army was and
how the armed forces of DPR/LPR have strengthened during the peaceful
respite. You don’t have to sit at the Chiefs of Staff Committee to
estimate from open sources that with such intensive fights, which
began on January 18th and continuing across the frontline, the
Ukrainian army will run out of strength to conduct active operations
in three to four weeks, and in one to three more weeks it will begin
to fall apart. By the way, the Ukrainian artillery will be the first
to disappear from the battlefield. Judging by the intensity and
dynamics of the artillery fire of the parties, the Ukrainian army was
behind DPR/LPR even on the volume of stored ammunition. While the
republics clearly had a constant resupply, the Ukrainian army could
not replenish consumable ammunition just as rapidly. After the
Ukrainian artillery lost the opportunity of equal fight with the
artillery of DPR/LPR, grinding of Ukrainian reserves was a matter of
short time, and after the exhaustion of reserves the collapse of the
front would became inevitable. Making up for the losses by means of
mobilization was impossible, even if they could mobilize everyone. In
the best case, the recruits would have been at the collection points,
when the front already collapsed.
Americans
knew all that, but still pushed the Ukrainian army into a senseless
attack, which could not even start in earnest. That is the army was
doomed to destruction and the front was destined to collapse. Why did
the United States need that? Because, as we mentioned above, the US
does not need the unattainable victory in Ukraine, they need the
destruction of Ukraine, but by someone else's hands and with the
greatest possible benefit for themselves.
Three
to four weeks of intense fighting would not only bleed the Ukrainian
army, but would also inflict substantial losses on the armed forces
of DPR/LPR. From the first days, the militia admits its own losses of
dozens if not hundreds killed and wounded, while noting that the
losses of the Ukrainian army are much higher. Let us not forget that
the armed forces of DPR/LPR currently do not exceed 30-40 thousand
soldiers, even by the most optimistic estimates. Taking into account
that 10-15 thousand are logistical and security units, there cannot
be more than 20-25 thousand of combat troops. This means that even
the loss of 3-5 thousand -- and this number of dead and wounded in
three to four weeks of intense fighting is quite possible --
dramatically reduces the combat capability of the militia forces.
So,
by the mid-late February the Ukrainian army would have to fall apart
and start a disorganized retreat, but the scarce militia forces,
having suffered serious losses, would be unable to take the territory
left by the withdrawing Ukrainian troops. This would create vast
power-vacuum areas between DPR/LNR and Kiev, where the militia and
some residual government troops would alternate to each other as in a
layered cake. To the extent that different streets of the same
locality could be held by different armed groups. In addition, while
the DPR/LPR armed forces are organized as more or less regular
structures with a unified chain of command, the army of Kiev keeps
sliding to irregular formations, which, with the death of the last
regular units, would finally transform to a bunch of Nazi gangs and
outright criminals partially diluted by completely kooky “veterans
of the anti-terrorist operation”.
In
this situation, Nazi battalions concentrated in the major cities of
the southeast in order to maintain the power in Kiev, will grow more
irritated and the Kiev propaganda will become more nervous. This
would increase the bitterness towards the power that "betrayed
us” as well as pro-Russian activists -- "the 5th column that
stabbed us in the back". Any pretext will be enough to inflame
the whole country. However, in order to paralyze the world community
and to disable its instantaneous and consistent reaction, the pretext
for the repeat of the Ruanda scenario (mutual senseless massacre)
must be beyond belief and, at the same time, radically change the
current political situation.
That
is, it is not enough to organize a loud act of terror or a series of
such acts on behalf of “pro-Russian partisans” or “FSB (GRU,
SVR) agents”. This provocation must move the Nazi community and
channel its efforts in the desired direction. Besides, the Ukrainian
government must be (or look) paralyzed. Finally, this event should be
sufficiently bloody, sufficiently immoral and touch those strata of
the society, which are perceived by the Nazis as their own. These
conditions cannot be satisfied with a single yet spectacular act of
terror (such problems cannot be solved even by an explosion at
Chernobyl).
Clearly,
first of all they would need death of a major political figure or
figures, so that allegedly (or really) paralyzed Ukrainian government
could not take measures to restore the order, even if it wanted to.
Poroshenko is a perfect sacral victim (especially because he is a
traitor to the Americans), but in place of the "young prodigy"
Yatsenyuk I would have not relaxed as well. After liquidation of
Ukraine, Yatsenyuk becomes useless and even dangerous as he can
testify to some sort of "International Tribunal for the Former
Ukraine." For a country without economy this symbolic economist
is just as useless as the great banker Yuschenko. Credits are not
coming with or without Yatsenyuk. To die heroically is the only
benefit that he can bring to the US. If someone blows up the
parliament during a plenary session with both Poroshenko and
Yatsenyuk in attendance, could you guess who will be declared guilty
even before any investigation? Especially if some "people's
avengers" would claim the responsibility afterwards?
Of
course, the Nazis from battalions spit on Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk,
but their battalion commanders will be there as well: Yarosh and
sotnik Parasyuk and cossack Gavrylyuk – it would be so indecent not
to avenge them. Moreover, if this seems not enough, they could carry
out a series of terrorist attacks in the hospitals where the "heroes
ATO" are treated. Imagine how barbaric killings of defenseless
"heroes" will be presented by the Ukrainian media. They
will not even need a training manual from the American Embassy; they
will interpret everything correctly by themselves.
Well,
and as "the cherry on the cake" one can explode the cascade
of the Dnieper hydropower plants. This would solve several US
problems at once. First, the real damage as a result of flooding will
not be as great, but cameras positioned in advance in the right
places will show pictures more terrible than during the tsunami in
Thailand, and "experts" (incidentally, also on their own
initiative) will immediately proclaim millions of potential victims.
Second, this will immediately cut off the left bank of the Dnieper
River from the right one. The dam will be blown, and bridges
destroyed. That is, the militia will not able to cross the Dnieper
without the help of the Russian Army. Third, if all this (from the
elimination of the political elite to the man-made technological
disasters) happens in three to five to ten days and if it becomes
possible (sure it does, otherwise, why are we feeding CIA?) to accuse
Russia and DPR/LPR of participation or at least of indirect
sponsorship of the terrorists, the consolidated international
community will not take quick control of Ukraine. Any participation
of Russia will be blocked by the West accusing Moscow of complicity
in the crime, but Western forces themselves could not stabilize the
situation (even if the US and the EU decided to act without a UN
resolution, they will not have the required operational capacity and
available troops). Fourth, while the US needs that, even Turchinov
can legitimately represent Kiev and lead the remnants of the
government, which is dispensable as well.
The
further course of events is also clear. The Nazis go to avenge their
“brothers in arms”. The battalions spread out across the country,
checking addresses from databases provided be fellow Nazis from the
SBU and parts of the Ministry of Interior. The militia will still be
able to quickly lend a helping hand to Kharkov, Left Bank districts
of Dnepropetrovsk and Zaporozhye, to punch a land corridor to the
Crimea. But without Russia’s help they cannot go further - there
are no bridges. Left bank guerrilla groups are stronger. Of course,
they will resist in Odessa, possibly even in Kiev, but the forces are
not equal. The mere fact of partisan resistance on the right bank
will deprive the junta of the support of the Ukrainian "creative
class". Nobody needs them in the US, because they cannot work,
but like to eat well. Nobody will feed them for their "Ukraineness"
(who needs Ukraineness without Ukraine?). Each of them doesn’t know
much, but taken together their testimonies would allow to piece
together the full picture. And if in the course of Ukrainian excesses
they will be killed in their own homes, so be it. "Tutsi"
kill "Hutu", "Hutu" kill "Tutsi" - this
is a sad feature of civil wars.
Thus,
pushing Ukraine from Somalization to Ruandization, the United States
are fully capable to minimize the effect of Russia’s victories,
cover the traces of their own crimes with blood and, most
importantly, make their participation in the coming settlement not
just necessary, but inevitable, thus preserving their positions on
the European continent and their control over the frightened EU.
We
considered just one scenario of the possible provocation that would
allow Washington to solve the problem of burning down the Ukrainian
stand. In fact, there are hundreds of similar scenarios. All of them
are real, and some of them must be already developed by the
Americans. Otherwise, the security services, the military and the
State Department are paid for nothing. The number of crimes already
committed by Washington and Kiev suggests that the above scenario is
not something extraordinary, on the contrary – it is well within
the logic of the previous actions. In February 2014, a hundred of
“Maidan” victims stimulated the coup; three hundred victims in
the downed "Boeing" allowed to deploy the summer offensive;
tens of thousands of killed Ukrainians serve as a means to pressure
Russia. Then how the tens of thousands of victims are different from
the hundreds of thousands or even millions? Only by the fact that the
US did not have the need to organize a mass human sacrifice in
Ukraine yet. Now there is such a need.
Two
things can still save people:
Ukrainian
executors’ traditional inability to implement even single American
plan;
Putin’s
traditional ability to come up with a decent way out of most
desperate situations.
But
these things are beyond the scope of rational analysis. They are
matters of luck.
Rostislav
Ischenko, president of the Center for system analysis and
forecasting, exclusively for the “Current Comments”.
30.01.2015
Ukrainian crisis news. Latest news of Ukraine, Debaltsevo, USA,
Russia, Europe
NASA
