This just in: the UNSC has adopted resolution “imposes an arms embargo against the Houthi rebels in Yemen and the allied forces loyal to former President Ali Abdullah Saleh”. How crazy is that?!
An international coalition of thugs lead by the Saudis and al-Qaeda is conducing a large-scale aggression against Yemen and when the Jordanians propose to slap an arms embargo on the Houthis Russia simply abstains even though the Saudis are armed to their teeth by the USA? Worse, in a monumentally hypocritical statement the Russian UN Ambassador declared that “We insisted that the arms embargo needs to be comprehensive; it’s well known that Yemen is awash in weapons,” Churkin said. “The adopted resolution should not be used for further escalation of the armed conflict.” Does Churkin not know that the fully-armed Saudi military is leading an international aggression in this war?
Frankly, I am at loss for words. This Russian abstention reeks of hypocrisy and reminds me of the shameful Russian abstention on the anti-Libyan resolution in 2011. For the life of me I cannot imagine what the Russian rationale was for allowing the adoption of this resolution. Maybe it was to draw the Saudis further into a war they cannot win, but if that is the case, this is not, in my opinion, the morally or even politically appropriate thing to do, if only because of the damage suffered (yet again!) by the Russian diplomacy.
When Russia unilaterally refused to deliver the S-300s to Iran and in 2011 when Russia allowed the anti-Libyan resolution to pass, Medvedev was in power. Now, however, it is Vladimir Putin. This time he cannot argue that “the other guy did it”.
I find this latest development both very disappointing and rather frightening.
What do you think?
Cheers,
The Saker
Must be linked to the whole Russia with teh west against ISIS thing in some sort of (never to happen) tradeoff on WESTs’ stance on Ukraine somehow….
Disapointing and naive. Never drop your pants first in a negociation!
@ Fabien, I don’t believe this has anything to do with Russia and the West against ISIS as you’ve stated.
Come-on, everyone is taking this UNSC resolution too seriously. The reality is that the Yemen debacle has been, to date, a huge slap in the face for Saudi-Arabia and the rest of the GCC (Gulf Cooperation Council; i.e. the Gulf Arab States, such as the UAE). Add to that the United State’s very tepid background ‘support’ of Saudi Arabia and things are looking very bad for the Gulf states. I’m not sure how enforceable this UNSC resolution will be; this sound more like a Pyrrhic victory.
The bombshell most of you have missed here is that the Gulf Monarchies have just awoken to the fact that they are quite isolated due to the opportunism of and betrayal by the recipients of their generosity, namely Pakistan and Turkey. Both these countries have given the Oil-Sheikhs the shaft by refusing to come their aid militarily despite their useless words of support and encouragement towards the Saudis. The real shocker for the Gulf Arabs is that the Pakistanis have stiffed them despite the 10s of Billions of dollars the gulf state have given to Pakistan for decades (by now the total must be close to 100 Billion dollars over the last 40 years). This must really be shocking and really sting:
The can’t rely on Pakistan or Turkey to protect them or support them militarily. They can’t ask those countries to send their sons to die on their behalf. So now these monarchies, who’ve always relied on non-arabs to do their dirty work, will have to send in their own coddled and poorly trained boys to deal with their own problems.
Compared to this stunning betrayal and ripping off that the Gulf monarchies have suffered from their erstwhile lackey (Pakistan), the useless UNSC resolution discussed in the above article is a very poor consolation prize. I don’t think it’ll do anything to decrease the weapons supply to the Houthis (who weren’t respecting any law when they were smuggling in weapon in the first place; they get their weapons from huge army caches and from the lawless horn-of-Africa region.).
We live in interesting times.
Not ‘coddled and poorly trained boys’ but mercenaries. The Saudis are doomed. Mercenaries will always bow too the hand of gold.
I think this analysis is spot on. Would have the moral thing to do been to veto? Absolutely. But pragmatically, and here I have to fully disagree with the Saker, I think they did the right thing. First off, had the Russians used their veto, the MSM would go into overdrive about how Russia supports the “terrorists” in Yemen. Then the EU lapdogs would start yapping about renewing sanctions and increasing support to Kiev. I have little doubt that the main reason for abstaining is maintaining the status quo of a slow splintering of EU “unity”. Putin rightly realizes this is the trump card for ending the sanctions, knowing what side his bread is buttered, choose future EU relations over the fate of Yemen.
And then there is the more cynical angle: Yemen was a quasi-failed state before the war, it certainly qualifies now, and, frankly, vetoing an embargo would have accomplished squat. The Houthis already raided Saleh’s arms depots, the country was already knee-deep in small to medium arms, and moreover, who was going to be providing weapons to Sanaa in anything but a back channel anyway? Morally, I see the point, but, pragmatically no one was lining up to officially arm the Yemenis anyways, so whats the harm?
Go a level deeper and it still makes sense in the long run. The Saudis thought they could poke the bear in its eye with their oil price manipulations. And actually, they achieved their goal; the Kremlin’s pissed. And now it’s the Russkies turn. Like Nasrallah said in his most recent interview, the writing is on the wall for Saudi in Yemen. It will be a bloodbath, but Riyadh is going to bleed too. The Khaleejis have stuck their foot in the mud, and morally reprehensible as it is, the last thing I think Moscow wants to see is anything short of a painful and protracted extraction.
I think this analysis is spot on.
Putin is, if nothing else, extremely pragmatic. A moral veto would have not stopped the slaughter of civilians in any case. The Houthis have all the arms they need and no one would formally supply them in any case – even without a UNSC resolution. The standard back channel arms supplies are always available.
On the other hand a veto would have made Russia stand out and take a lot of flack without changing the attitude of the U.S./Saudis on the ground.
So, in a strict game theoretic sense, not vetoing has the greatest benefit (or least loss) to Russia (which is all Putin cares about calculating).
The “abstaining” was in some sense the “moral” vote: Russia is indifferent to the resolution. But it can continue to call for a ceasefire on all sides (consistent with its stance on Ukraine and Syria)
I mostly agree. Unlike Libya this is not an authorisation to use violence but only a weapon embargo combined with a few personal sanctions. A Russian veto would have achieved little, as no one is sending weapons to Yemen and to do so is impossible anyway as all ways to do so are blocked.
Of course the resolution is a kind of moral support for the Saudi violence. I think that here pragmatic considerations come into the story. A Russian veto would have achieved nothing in terms of diminishing the violence. It might have damaged Russia’s relations with some Arab states. Note also that China voted in favor of the resolution – so Russia would have been alone to veto it. A final consideration is that for some neocons a Russian veto would have turned the Houthi’s into a valid target – just as Russia’s support for Assad is one of the reasons for America’s support of the Syrian rebels.
In those circumstances the best Russia could do was probably making a moral stance – as it did by being the only country to withhold its support from the resolution.
Yes this was an easy on the part of the Russian govt and the right one.
The resolution, passed on Tuesday, also calls for an immediate ceasefire, access to humanitarian aid to the airstrike victims and ensuring the safety of civilians, but stops short of condemning the Saudi war on Yemen.
I believe that the Russian’s think the further the KSA gets into this the weaker it is going to emerge. And if it helps tie up and exhaust more US forces. Now their maybe a quid pro quo for Russia if they do go into Ukraine. As far as Obama and his statement over the S 300 trying to take heat off uproar the Republican’s are going to make out it, kind of takes the sting out of any escalation they would try to make of it.
You’re a good man saker – but faith in the Russian elite is misplaced.
I was interested in Russia as a counterweight to the machine – but it’s leadership are actually an integral part of the machine.
This isn’t about Russians v the west – it’s about us versus them.
What do we do? wait for Animal Farm or organise ourselves.
How?…open to suggestions – i’m currently feeling verrryyyy sick.
but faith in the Russian elite is misplaced
You misread me. I have with in *Putin*, yes, but not in the Russian elites per se.
However, I do expect the Russian elites to act in their own, rational and pragmatic self interest and this vote at the UNSC does not even pass this criteria. I find that decision both morally wrong and pragmatically misguided.
Cheers,
The Saker
Putin is one man of the Russian Elite. He presides over a morally corrupt elite. He is corrupt – exemplified by the decisions of his administration.
saker said:
“I do expect the Russian elites to act in their own, rational and pragmatic self interest and this vote at the UNSC does not even pass this criteria.”
The answer to your quandary is that there is a global elite, with Russian members, that act in the interests of the global elite – they do not act in the interests of Russians.
There is no UNIFIED global elite. Believing that there is does guarantee that you won’t be able to explain very much of what has been happening in the post- Soviet era.
I believe your assessment is completely off-base. There is an agenda set by what is termed the unified global elite. It is an agenda agreed upon and put into action which serves to solidify their grip over resources and capital.
Are you of the opinion that independent actions are taking place without regard for others of the same group. I believe it certainly helps in explaining what has occurred since WW1 and forward.
John R Bell on April 14, 2015 · at 10:39 pm UTC said:
“There is no UNIFIED global elite. Believing that there is does guarantee that you won’t be able to explain very much of what has been happening in the post- Soviet era.”
is there a western elite?
are they very powerful?
had they infiltrated Russia by the early 90’s?
is it likely they took their pedal off the gas after they infiltrated?
They need perpetual war – including Ukraine.
Putin is just another figurehead – it’s practically beyond belief that he is not a member of the global elite.
Sure they have power struggles but for sure not in the general interest of Germans, Russians, English, Americans, Chinese, Brazilians etc (and to describe groups of humans by pieces of dirt they were accidentally born on is futile / demeaning anyway).
Get over the Russian elite (and “Russia” as a counterweight) – they have their fingers in as many (or more) pies as Eric Schmidt / Sergey Brin.
Just a thought……
Imagine the outcry and fury if Russia had vetoed this?
Nothing like leading with your chin for a punch in the face eh?
Do you really think that it would have made any difference
‘on the ground’, as they say?
The Saudis went to war without reference to the Un, so they
are going to listen now? With the Usa and Israel in their camp?
What would a veto have done?
More trouble for Russia. By the way, what did China do?
oldnik007 on April 14, 2015 · at 7:13 pm UTC said:
“What would a veto have done?”
been moral.
Moral, maybe, but certainly idiotic. Or do you think Russia should provide a precedent for adding fuel to thefire of a civil war, as say, in Ukraine.
Never interrupt your enemy while they are making a mistake!
Please see the link below and find your country on the list. Also find the explanation for their predicted numbers written in purple at the bottom and laugh out loud!
http://www.deagel.com/country/forecast.aspx?pag=1&sort=GDP&ord=DESC
Saker,
I wish you’d take a little more time to reflect on issues before writing. Remember your rush eulogising of Tsipras – followed by a dismissal only hours later? Now you see you were mistaken, I hope?
In the Yemen case, what do you think a veto would have achieved, if the “international community” – that is, the white races – and their Arab slaves have decided to destroy that country? And in any case, when was the last time a UNSC made any difference anywhere?
Also, surely you know that in the current over-excited state of the world, a veto is taken as an act of war, and unless you are prepared to back it with actual weapons, you had better not use it in the first place. For Russia, as I see these things, arms supplies or no arms supplies to Yemen is not worth opening another front in the war with the mad West. Selling weapons to Iran is, since this is important for Russia. Supporting Syria is, for the same reason. More importantly, there is Ukraine. Then the Victory Day celebrations, which cannot be jeopardised by opening yet another front? And there must be other battles on other fronts that are hidden from us…
In such dire straights, the Yemens and Libyas of this world must be left to God – and all the rest of the human family. Why should Russia be the only one to defend each and every member of the human family?
As for your slur on Putin’s honorability – accusing him of hypocrisy and cowardice – that’s what “the other guy did it” amounts to – this is simply disgraceful on your part. It is clear your understanding of politics at this level, and diplomacy and mental wars, etc., is less than adequate, but this deficiency is not sufficient to exonerate such statements: you have enough sense to measure the gap between your mental capacities and those of Putin, and be more sparing with your judgments.
You are right to be disgusted with Russian foreign office, saker.
why is Russia so suicidal?
the west has found Prussia with clay feet and that encourages west to surround and then attack Russian interests .
14/04/2015.
and Russia has yet again back stabbed her ally in Yemen to please Saudis and anglos -what a loser Russia is!
not a single resolution to the benefit of Russia can Russians bring on UN but they re the first to endorse or not veto any resolution which harms Russian allies.
the world watches this and that is why Russia will be left alone and then attacked without any ally-on all front by the same anglosaxon cabal and saudi evil nation which Russia has always helped as opposed to her own ally.
30 September 2010
Quote “Russia has thrown its defence ties with Iran on the altar of its “reset” with the United States. President Dmitry Medvedev last week imposed a sweeping ban on defence sales that goes beyond even the international sanctions on Iran and is likely to have a long-term negative impact on Moscow-Tehran relations.”
Quote” That said, Resolution 1929 contained no explicit ban on air defence systems and Mr. Medvedev’s decree went a step too far. Ironically, defending Moscow’s ban on S-300, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, in the same breath, lambasted unilateral U.S. sanctions on Iran as being “ethically and morally wrong” and a “violation” of the U.N. resolution. … …”
It is this stupid thinking of Russians especially the elites of Russia that Russia gets shafted easily by the west.
Russia does not want to help her allies because west would get annoyed?
The same west which does all this to destroy Russia as main aim .
When will Russia wake up?
Like Libya, the situation in Yemen is primarily a US/NATO/Saudi deliberately constructed “crisis”. Russia blocking the resolution would not have changed much materially, and may have stalled the formation of a valid Yemeni opposition. Yemen is not strategically necessary to Russia and continuing conflict there causes more problems for the US/NATO/Saudi crowd. The same logic as Putin not ordering the Russian military to directly defend in Ukraine beyond the legally/historically defensible and highly strategic Crimea. The militias in Eastern Ukraine carry the valid/overt support of the citizens, something Russian troops could not in the same way.
It is tragic that innocents will die and be forced to live in chaos and deprivation… again. But the longer the US and their 0.01% masters back such blatant human rights abuses, the weaker their claims to legitimate authority to rule become.
Yours is an interesting comment.
It is my opinion that rather than judging the actions of various states, we should endeavor to understand them. It seems that once one expresses a position he no longer is an observer, and he becomes a political player. Although there is nothing really wrong with this choice, we should note that there is an overabundance of the latter and a scarcity of the former. This is why the observer-analysts are much more valuable to the world.
One cannot simultaneously seek the truth and engage in politics.
“One cannot simultaneously seek the truth and engage in politics.”
Perhaps this is another example of the “exceptionalism” of the opponents.
This is very disappointing and quite incomprehensible. Let’s see what Putin has to say. I hope some heads roll for this.
Very strange indeed. Saying that, I believe there is an invisible game happening below the visible one and without knowing much about it I would try not to jump into any conclusions. Time will tell…
Nightingale on April 14, 2015 · at 3:51 pm UTC said:
“Time will tell…”
Unfortunately you are correct – look at Libya?
It makes me wonder what influence Saudi Arabia has with Russia. Threats or promises?
You read it : Yemen is is awash in weapons, embargo or not, so what ?
Saudi is at war for (bad) religious reasons… Let them weaken themselves.
I think the guys in charge of russian diplomacy are right. The world can see Russia always consistent with peace seeking… and refusing to send weapons to a country in conflict (in Ukraine for example…).
And anyway, Yemenites are proud warriors and the Saudi army is a joke, they will win !
+1. This is where I’m heading with my thinking as well.
Your comment reflects my thoughts.
And I think the Russians give the West and the Gulf-suckers enough rope to hang themselves.
My first reaction was a frown like the late Mr. Spock.
And Libya came to my mind as well.
But it’s different and 3 Cents nailed it.
Don’t worry Saker, Putin (and Tshurkin) are on the right track!
(And when time is right – sack Medvediev and those corrosive NGOs!)
There may have been some behind the scenes “agreement” vis–à–vis Ukraine. No, it is not very moral, but neither was letting Novorussians being slaughtered by the Kievan army. Russia just could not go in, and we all know why. Sometimes you just cannot do what is most moral, I guess, because of the long term game. It sucks though.
Don’t forget, there were some good news in deciding to deliver S-300 to Iran. Of all people, you Saker must know, that there have got be some sort of behind the scenes “negotiations” going on. There is probably a bigger picture, and Russia cannot be belligerent all the time. At least I hope they have a very very good reason for making this decision.
They may also be a simpler reason, as Saker suggested: keep them busy killing someone else, they might just be too thinly spread to inflict further damage closer to home.
Absolutely. MH-17 (Russia telling the scum “you all know i know who did it”) + $3bi ukr debt with a broken covenant + $7-9bi p.a. Remittances from Russia to the Bozo-land (ukr) + syria + Gas to the s**thead scums in the new nazi-playland (eu) + supporting with is (islamic state) + mistral (“hollande, you sick little piece of s**t, i’ll clean up your act here, and you do me a favour”) + S300 finally to Iran…. And much other stuff – all pieces of one game. We don’t see the big picture, they do. Nobody told us it is a game of high morality.
Putin is not Satan but neither is he a saint. Putin is conservative and pro-business. He looks out for Russia, not for Yemen.
Yemen is not of vital interest to Russia, and no one expects the Sauds to win their war with or without the embargo, so why should Russia further antagonize relations with the Sauds over this vote?
Putin is probably hoping that someday he’ll mend fences with the Sauds so they’ll agree to raise oil prices.
If you are looking for a saint who will save the world, keep looking.
If Putin were a ‘saint’ would he have acted differently? What are the practical effects of vetoing or not vetoing the resolution? Were nations lining up to give/sell arms to the Houtis? Would vetoing an arms embargo commit Russia to supplying arms to the Houtis? And would it provide an argument for sending arms to the Kiev regime? Abstaining may not be taking the moral high ground but it looks good when everyone else is standing in a moral hole.
.
If I get this right, this resolution merely attempts to prevent further escalation. It applies the “no further-ness” to both sides as a kind of even handed gesture even though, as the Saker points out, the rebels are way out-gunned.
So the resolution is effectivlely meaningless, the Russians know this. They give a collective “shrug” and abstain. Maybe, as the saying goes, they have “bigger fish to fry.”
Hi! Thanks for the very informative and classy site here!
Well, it sounds for me like Russia just don’t want right now more reputation and fame and prime time of to be the number one contender to the West. Russia (and Putin as a kind a hitlerian figure) is under intensive blackmailing campaign e.g. here in Finland.
Russia is answering mostly by silence and non-reaction, and I can see the frustration of our conflict-mongers when they are trying to keep the fire alive. And the more Russia is still the more difficult it’s to accuse her, by this euro-NATO-lovers. I find it also out that most of the ordinary people are quite reasonable and always prefer good relations to everything else. So the conflict and confrontation isn’t in it’s fullest right now.
Middle East is cursed by it’s oil have to say. It’s shameful situation, and it looks like there is simply nothing to do for Yemen. I think Russia and China prefer to stay away now. For Russia it’s almost obligatory, to stay quiet. I read somewhere here that Putin sees lot’s of awakening in Europe and potential for that. I see it too.
But for the Middle East and muslims, africans, poor asians who are working for our endless desire for new toys etc.:
Je suis un hypocrite par excellence.
Maybe an attempt by the Kremlin to mend the fences with the West? In hope for concessions by them with respect to Crimea and the Donbass, encouraging a slap on the wrist by the EU/US leaders. Of course such a thing might in theory bring beace to the former Ukraine, but it’s naive to think it would work out this way.
HI Saker, Again it is Sanjay here. I think you and all the fellows beings up until now wants Russia to do what they would like to do. As i pointed out during the Rubble devaluation time that Russia has defeat the West in their own game. Hence the first success you saw what happened and happening with Central Bank and Economy of Russia. Middle East a lots of things are happening and it is on Fire and it should be on complete Fire in my opinion. The entire problem today in the world is due to the ME (petrodollars). Russia should not involved everywhere in a Zero-SUM game. I could elaborate on this but you all are well educated and WELL INFORMED from various sources which I don’t have. Libya and Yemen are not the same. Moreover Russia has not supported the Yemen Resolution where as in Libiya, Mr Medvedev signed. So there are many differences.
By the way Saker, I have a question for you. Since it is the time of Easter…. I would like to ask you the following:
1. How would you recognize if Jesus is reborn?
2. And if you could recognize then Could he be safe and sound ?
Regds & THnx
Sanjay
Spot on Sanjay!!
I have asked this same question of the true believers….their answer?….mumble..mumble!
as you say…what would keep such a person alive?
nothing ,except camouflage.
Q. Would Jesus look like… a white caucasian?,…a bearded male?.
R. To recognize something you must already know what it looks like.
So…if it walks like a prophet,if it talks like a prophet….
Hey!! let’s get the hammer and nails!!…find a tree and nail up this blaspheming son? of a non-believer,then…….
Messiah? what Messiah?……
A self re-enforcing dogma,just what the world needs!!Laughing-out-Loud,
Jesus will not be reborn! He won’t be either Caucasian or Afro or Chinese looking.
To know how it would be you will find the answer in the Scriptures. It might require a bit of effort, but you will have real answers, not the mumbling of idiots like Anon 6April, 6:00
The Second Coming will be “as the lightning [which] comes from the east and flashes to the west, so will be the coming of the Son of Man.”
“Then the sign of the Son of Man will appear in heaven, and then all the tribes of the earth will mourn, and they will see the Son of Man coming on the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.”
” But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night, in which the heavens will pass away with a great noise, and the elements will melt with fervent heat; both the earth and the works that are in it will be burned up.”
“At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Christ!’ or ‘There He is!’ do not believe it. For false Christ’s and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even the elect—if that were possible. See, I have told you ahead of time. So if anyone tells you, ‘There He is, out in the desert,’ do not go out; or, ‘Here He is, in the inner rooms,’ do not believe it.”
“No one knows about that day or hour, not even the angels in heaven, nor the Son, but only the Father.”
“For the Son of Man is going to come in His Father’s glory with His angels, and then He will reward each person according to what he has done.” “Behold, I am coming soon! My reward is with Me, and I will give to everyone according to what he has done.”
“So also Christ died only once as an offering for the sins of many people; and He will come again, but not to deal again with our sins. This time He will come bringing salvation to all those who are eagerly and patiently waiting for Him.”
Bravo!
“By his deeds”
Russia has no reach there. Just like she had no reach in Libya. All they could do is block it in UNSC and watch it being broken by Saudi/USA coalition and being unable to do anything = weak.
So, in my opinion Russia is choosing only fights that it can win. If Russia controlled the Fed’s printing presses and had a mil. budget of 680bil. and the biggest blue water navy in the world – I am sure that they would simply say everyone to back off from Yemen of anywhere else. But if that was the case none of this would happen….
So, in my opinion, Russia doesn’t want to end it’s victory streak by fighting impossible battles. They (thankfully) doesn’t have the arrogance of USA and think that they can be the world policeman, only to see every intervention turning into chaos.
Here is another example for my country (Serbia)
If Serbia decided now to kick Washington’s puppets out and realign in foreign policy towards Russia instead of EU we still wouldn’t get any help from Russia.
Even now when there’s no Yeltsin, Russia would still only be able to watch how another “intervention to save democracy” plays out.
AND I DON’T BLAME RUSSIA!
There is just no reach. We are surrounded by NATO on every side + have problems internally and army from the 70s. Russia would have to make a suicide like it did in WW1 just to help us. We are grateful enough for that and if that didn’t happen I doubt there would be Serbia today. Maybe in some different shape and form and different religion too…..
So, don’t expect Russia to go around and fix the world wherever the USA broke something. This is EXACTLY what USA would like Russia to do. To lure it our from it’s comfort zone and defeat it in front of the whole world to see. And of course, no one would lift a finger to assist Russian navy of any other branch that would have to break the siege of Yemen.
I don’t see China doing anything either. India too. Aren’t China supposed to be world greatest power of something? Well they are quiet as a mouse too. No massive blue water navy = no Empire.
What Russia survived historically it is a miracle to see it standing (just like my country) and not to speak that she is still a respectable and strong. Always remember that only 140 mil. citizens defend the Russian Federation which covers the biggest landmass of all counties by far.
“So, don’t expect Russia to go around and fix the world wherever the USA broke something [..]”
I’m not expecting Russia to fix the world single-handedly, but after all the heroic Russian stories I read and, shall I dare say; Christian values they seem to assign to themselves… I am expecting them to stand on the side of right!
All it takes it’s a gesture – even if it’s a symbolic one – or a statement, that’s all I ask. This might open the door for others to gather their own courage and follow suit.
Someone had to be the first one to stand up and say: I’m Spartacus! Or, if you prefer a slightly less depressing example: the “O Captain! My Captain” scene in ‘Dead Poets Society’.
Dont bring checkers to a chess match, just a thought.
Yeah… I suppose you’re right about that, T1 :)
“I’m Spartacus! Or, if you prefer a slightly less depressing example: the “O Captain! My Captain” scene in ‘Dead Poets Society’.”
I notice you are attracted to the productions of Hollywood so let me use the vernacular of South Central in the same city.
Put simply I would suggest that Russia is “saying” consistently – We will co-operate with you but we will be neither your pimp nor your b@tch- in order to “open the door for others to gather their own courage and follow suit.”
“I notice you are attracted to the productions of Hollywood so let me [..]”
Oh! I forgot that only ‘History-buffs’ are allowed to post opinions on this site. Everybody else should, naturally, show themselves the door… since they/we‘re rather obviously: not welcomed…
Sorry, my mistake :/
“We are surrounded by NATO on every side”
Surely if “we” are surrounded by NATO, “we” surround NATO?
As to Yemen it would appear many commentators are unaware of various factors including but not restricted to terrain and networks not restricted to “lines” drawn in “deserts” or seas.
It is also likely few have visited Yemen since for the last 40 years or so it was a difficult place to visit.
Extrapolations are dubious at the best of times, but extrapolations on the basis of limited data are dubious at all times.
“It is also likely few have visited Yemen since for the last 40 years or so it was a difficult place to visit.”
Not true, I met the country a decade ago as a tourist and I have never felt more safe and loved in one trip. If you go with good will, not to intrigue, not to flaunt your privileges, adopting a simple profile, people greet you with warmth, although some looked as if you were alien. Very good and innocent people, very generous and selfless, they give you what they have not. People, despite poverty seemed happy, even women, people are there very loving, friends walk hand in hand down the street and when they came to see us eat at some ·mattam” in some village on the road, entwined with each other by the shoulders. When you get to a village, children come running and take you by the hand. Everyone approached to take pictures with us and we were hugged as if we were one of the family. They are people of peace, whether fighting in some areas it was to get essential things like water or electricity.
It seemed that nothing had changed since the time of Herodotus … because I also found Arabia Felix.
When I heard the last call to prayer, at sunset, in the Old City of Sanaa, my soul was pierced, and when that plane of Yemenia Airlines taked off, feeling that, perhaps, most likely never again set foot in those lands, I was heartbroken.
“likely few”
Likely does not mean no one.
This blog is conducted in English and hence on the basis of analysis to date the use of likely is a valid hypothesis, not disproven by one or a number of exceptions.
“I have never felt more safe”
Nothing was said about safety, although apparently you imputed that it had been.
The difficulty aspect was introduced as “for the last 40 years or so it was a difficult place to visit.”
The “or so” ackowledges that it was not the case for everyday within 40 years, but does not cite why it was a difficult place to visit or for whom.
For a relatively short period within the 40 years roughly since the British were defeated in Aden and limited clandestine operations in Yemen, it was possible for tourists generally holding certain passports to visit Yemen as you say you did yourself ” a decade ago”.
This substantiates that it was possible to visit in a specific period, for specific reasons, for specific holders, of specific passports, using specific routes and modes of transport.
Through specificity it would tend to substantiate a level of difficulty.
“It seemed that nothing had changed since the time of Herodotus”
Neither of us were around in the time of Herodotus so you are projecting again and seeking to condition this with the use of “seemed”.
“my soul was pierced”.
Beware of romanticism it can often lead to extinction – ask your older neighbours what it was like for romantics during the times of Franco and before.
You are projecting your interpretation on what was written i.e. in the proper definition of the term you are being ignorant, the root of which is to ignore.
You therefore substantiate the closing hypotheses that:
“Extrapolations are dubious at the best of times, but extrapolations on the basis of limited data are dubious at all times.”
@elsi
For what it’s worth; I enjoyed your Yemen anecdote, elsi =)
That’s how those of us – the ‘travel impaired’ – learn about places we’ve never been before (through no fault of our own).
I love stories like yours.
“I love stories like yours”
Oh, I see you’re a romantic too. I’m glad you enjoyed it, I just wanted to convey in a few words what a welcoming and worth seeing for the traveler this country is. Unfortunatelly, because of the space and the environment, I can not tell you the details of this journey, perhaps the best trip of my life. I would love to put here some photographs where you might appreciate how happy we were some, visitors and natives, during that trip. Some of us were bound for life by friendship ….. That trip would give a fascinating book …..maybe one day I will write…..
If you can not travel, dear friend, follow traveling through literature, and above all, do not forget to dream. Although you could not physically travel, is clear that you have the necessary spirit for adventure. Had it not been that romantic spirit that pushes you to overcome all barriers of fear, formalities, the criticism of others, we’d all be confined, gripped by fear and limited by the biased information that those who hold power want to serve us.
A big hug!
Soooo loved that post! And you should write that book! Share your experiences with the world; it can only enrich the ‘human experience’
Plenty of hugs back at ya!
yes, you’re probably right, russia needs to more intelligent overall than its ( in some aspects ) still stronger adversaries (us/nato); and the empire probably really wants to do an “afghanistan” again on russia, and I guess these guys in the usa are stuck in the cold war, so now they are trying to “recreate” it – cause they think they won the last time, well, anyhow, things look rather different now…
Perhaps the resolution makes Obama’s position even more untenable?
The takfiris were good in Libya, bad in Mali, good in Syria, bad in Iraq, good in Yemen …
Not the best way to prove one’s indispensability, I would have thought.
Good call, Saker. Putin really dropped the ball on this one.
The Houthis are guilty of nothing more than banishing a corrupt US-Saudi stooge (Hadi) who had no interest in honoring a power-sharing agreement made before elections. (In which he was the only candidate, by the way)
Russia should defend the right of people to self determination and to arm themselves against US-Saudi colonialism.
Why would Russia agree to this stupid UN resolution??
It boggles the mind!
In fairness…
Technically; they didn’t agree, they just abstained.
But, admittedly, this is just semantics at this point, the end-result is the same. What they should have done is vetoed it.
Is this Russias attempt to drag USA into a war with Iran?
If Russia sells the S-300 missiles to Iran, it means Israel must attack Iran before they are sold, else Israel will forever lose the chance to bomb Iran. So it forces Israel to attack, and once Israel attacks of course Iran counter-attacks against Israel, this will USA to declare war on Iran.
A USA war with Iran would probably be very good for Russia.. Firstly Iran produces lots of oil, none of this oil would be sold if USA invaded Iran, secondly oil-sells from the entire middle east would be disturbed if there was a huge war between Iran and USA, oil from Saudiarabia probably would not be sold at all.
So oil prices would explode. It would be hugely damaging to USA : Economically, militarly, and morally, and the Ukraine sitaution would be forgotten. For Russia it would be very good economically and morally.
Is Russia trying to force USA into a war with Iran with this deal?
There are other irons in the fire. Syria and Ukraine.
Also, the gift of S300 missiles to Iran indicates that Iran has to be secured before another front is opened which has naval supply lines from Iran to Yemen.
This puts the Yemeni Shias in the similar boat of Donbass and Syria loyalists. They have to fight and bleed for their victory.
A wider war in Yemen with Iran supplying arms brings Egypt and troops into the battle to save and protect KSA. The Saudis already are not getting much help from Pakistan, but Egypt is ready to rock and roll in Yemen.
This move sends a message to Iran that it has to earn its hegemonic role by other means.
Russia and China want a stable economic world where they can win.
Neither can win in a world in war and chaos. That is the Hegemon’s game.
Thus, we won’t be seeing the Dragon and Bear interceding as the USSR once did globally.
They will work with economic weapons and Russia’s defensive systems to protect partners.
All these separatist conflicts play into the Hegemon’s hands while they play into the hearts of the people (we all want to see people get their “independence”). But Siberia and the Far East is a target the Hegemon is working, as is Hong Kong, Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang. These are always targets for separatist movements.
Russia and China do not want to be seen as pro-separtism.
The Hegemon’s plans call for carving up Iraq, Syria, Russia, Iran, China and any other nation into smaller parts.
Russian and China are trying to sew together a large Eurasia. A war in Yemen changes the seas into US Naval control zones. That is bad, very bad for China’s trade and Maritime Silk Road.
Tough decisions ideologically by Russia and China. But an easy call if you look at the big picture.
I was upset when I heard it. But then, I thought about the strategy of Eurasia, the current wars, the cusp Iran is now poised to be free of sanctions, and this all makes sense.
It’s exactly like Donbass. Simple for Russia to win, hard to have to play the long game.
China has huge economic interests in the Middle East. Nothing worse than war for smooth trade and development.
Both nations (Russia and China) showed their muscle in rescuing people from the war zones. That is a form of planting a flag. If the Houthis can keep the ports open, Russian, Iranian and Chinese ships can still create a voentorg of sorts.
Meanwhile, the bombing will run out of targets and the “war” will be the traditional Yemen-Saudi cross border conflict while AQ will be the real target for Iran to defeat there.
@Larchmonter445
I literally couldnt have stated it better myself. While the west pursues its’ policies of destabilization with much bluster, Russia simply acts.
I have a hard time thinking that Russian foreign policy decisions aren’t under Putin’s control. I sense that there are back door agreements that have been worked out to deal with western provocations.
Oh really? When was the last time they acted?
“If the Houthis can keep the ports open, Russian, Iranian and Chinese ships can still create a voentorg of sorts.”
Well-minded.
Yes, I noticed and was puzzled as well. Perhaps some kind of backstage tradeoff or ‘deal’ has been struck? I keep getting this sickening feeling that Russia still tries to please Hannibal Lector’s empire – when it is more stick, less carrot that has any hope of backing them up. Hopefully we’ll get some further explanation…
Saker,
There is no problem there. The veto wouldn’t have changed the situation on the ground. By abstaining, they clearly show they are against armed groups that want to seize the control of State institutions. What would have been the message Russia sends if they voted against the resolution? Too much risks for a country far away.
And of course, they know things we don’t know (a deal, maybe?).
Wow it’s disappointing to see how everyone turned on Russia about this in a heartbeat!
Isn’t this the exact thing you Saker warned about all those naysayers that screamed: “Putin let Dombass down the drain!” Etc etc.
People you don’t seem to understand this. Russia is not the world policeman as much as some of you would like her to be. Russia has not the capacity for that NEITHER any desire to do so.
Next thing you forgot. American Empire is by far the strongest Empire in the history of the world as we know it. And so far Russia is the ONLY ONE in the world that confronted them directly.
Just 15 years ago Russia was on her knees and to this day she made an incredible recovery, but don’t somehow expect that Russia will now go around the world and defeat USA/NATO wherever the show their ugly heads.
Keep it real people, Russia is doing good and nobody is a ‘traitor’….
Excellent ! I fully agree Sinisha,if that’s correct.’oh ye of little faith’ comes to mind.
If you haven’t got a blinding move to make,you wait,reverse the flow,see your opponent move to the front foot and then you have more options as he is vulnerable from more directions.see chess- see judo see Putin,thinker.
Of course…
And look at the situation in Venezuela, Brazil and possible coup in Argentina…
I guess that people now would expect that Russia intervenes in every single conflict. Let’s say that there is new conflict around Falklands – everyone would be like “Oh my God Russia do something!”
Then if USA pressures Venezuela to install a regime that they like, everyone would be like: “Oh my God Russia do something!” And so on and so forth….
If this was to occur, Russia would last about a month before disintegrating.
So, everyone just cool your heads. Fighting your enemy isn’t just about doing opposite of them everywhere they are. Russia can’t out-spend and out-produce NATO and smarter moves must be made instead of just head-on collision every single time they meet.
Синиша on April 14, 2015 · at 6:55 pm UTC said:
“I guess that people now would expect that Russia intervenes in every single conflict.”
It wasn’t about intervention
It was about vetoing
Thanks for making Sinisha’s point again, Anon!
It is simply illogical to think that Russia can, will, or should stand up to the Empire at every opportunity. Russia certainly has the moral high ground, but that’s just not enough for David to tower over Goliath. As the Saker has said regarding Donbass, expect them to press when they have the advantage, retreat if a position is untenable. The veto would have lent moral support but accomplished absolutely jack. The veto wouldn’t have stopped the onslaught, the Houthis already have weapons, plus no one was in line to deliver arms officially anyway. Isn’t that the definition of an untenable position? Where staying and fighting (vetoing) would gain you zero and cost you scores on other fronts?
Furthermore, it would do Russia, or the wider world, zero good to pull on a ‘world cop’ uniform and play King-of-Moral-Mountain with the US. Russia simply does not have the military and economic assets (as of yet) to pull that off. The lifeguard would drown with the swimmer, the Empire would easily see to it. Russia has to pick her battles. I’ve yet to see a convincing argument that Yemen is such a battle.
“It is simply illogical to think that Russia can, will, or should stand up to the Empire at every opportunity. ”
The definition of what is logical is often deemed to be a function of what is perceived, thereby obscuring/precluding opportunities for perception. This is the WYSIWYG or looks like a duck, walks like a duck integration/immersion.
I note you use standing up which is an activity that generally can be seen/perceived – for Russian speakers standing up also suggests getting out of bed after sleeping – and hence you possibly limit your opportunities for perception. This is the WYSIWYG or looks like a duck, walks like a duck integration/immersion.
It would appear that some of this blog restrict the definition of war to things that go bang, have difficulty understanding that conscious “inaction” is a form of action, and similarly limit their opportunities for perception. This is the WYSIWYG or looks like a duck, walks like a duck integration/immersion.
I would suggest that data in the public domain consistently shows that “Russia” consistently challenges the opponents, even through its existence.
As far as I am aware one of the strategic goals of “Russia” is to catalyse transcendance from “exceptionalism” to equal and different as you appear to realise:
“zero good to pull on a ‘world cop’ uniform and play King-of-Moral-Mountain with the US.”
possibly without a wider perspective of the reasons why by apparently limiting them to:
“Russia simply does not have the military and economic assets (as of yet) to pull that off.”
Mutating into, replicating the behaviours, or if you prefer relating in a linear way, to the opponents would preclude one of the strategic goals.
I would suggest that on the bases of data presently available in the public domain, it would be naive to think that this is not understood by some, and futher that the perception of some is limited to “military and economic assets” .
“The definition of what is logical is often deemed to be a function of what is perceived, thereby obscuring/precluding opportunities for perception. This is the WYSIWYG or looks like a duck, walks like a duck integration/immersion.”
Interesting epistemology, but you say nothing to the thrust of my point, which is why should one expect Russia to counter the US at every step?
“I note you use standing up which is an activity that generally can be seen/perceived – for Russian speakers standing up also suggests getting out of bed after sleeping – and hence you possibly limit your opportunities for perception.”
Yes, I used “standing up”, a phrase widely used in English, which connotes both literal and metaphoric senses (ie for English speakers also ‘suggests getting out of bed after sleeping’). How pray-tell does this “limit [my] opportunities for perception”? What I was suggesting is what you accuse me of missing, that inaction (not vetoing) could have been the “correct” action.
“It would appear that some of this blog restrict the definition of war to things that go bang, have difficulty understanding that conscious “inaction” is a form of action, and similarly limit their opportunities for perception…. I would suggest that data in the public domain consistently shows that “Russia” consistently challenges the opponents, even through its existence.”
Forest for the trees on this one. This is exactly what I suggested, ie that doing an inaction (not vetoing) would be the correct action and is in itself a form of resistance, as you still exists (resistance) and you can pick a winnable battle to “go bang” over.
“As far as I am aware one of the strategic goals of “Russia” is to catalyse transcendance from “exceptionalism” to equal and different as you appear to realise:
“zero good to pull on a ‘world cop’ uniform and play King-of-Moral-Mountain with the US.”
possibly without a wider perspective of the reasons why by apparently limiting them to:
“Russia simply does not have the military and economic assets (as of yet) to pull that off.”
Mutating into, replicating the behaviours, or if you prefer relating in a linear way, to the opponents would preclude one of the strategic goals.”
Taking the cake with this one. As you quote me, I say specifically it would harm Russia to emulate the US. Just because I point out the physical impossibility of this currently (lack of “assets”) is not the same as an argument that it ‘should’ once it procures those assets. That was “perceived” solely on your part. I only said they couldn’t even if they wanted to, nothing about whether they should.
“I would suggest that on the bases of data presently available in the public domain, it would be naive to think that this is not understood by some”
Sage advice. How bout you take it?
“is not the same as an argument that it ‘should’ once it procures those assets. That was “perceived” solely on your part. I only said they couldn’t even if they wanted to, nothing about whether they should.”
You apparently don’t understand that a blog is a broadcast medium with an audience of more than one.
You also appear to subscribe to the notions that information is private and/or intellectual property (including by way of your consistent use of I first person singular), sharing views is criticism, criticism is a form of attack, and data/information weapons of bludgeon.
The comments were to catalyse data/ thoughts through using example, including leaving lacunae to afford others the opportunity to bridge/fill them, or to embrace and be less fearful of doubt, and other opportunities which I will not outline in a broadcast medium.
In this particular case opportunities were afforded by ” possibly without a wider perspective of the reasons why by apparently limiting them to “Russia simply does not have the military and economic assets (as of yet) to pull that off.””
which you conveniently filled with
“is not the same as an argument that it ‘should’ once it procures those assets. That was “perceived” solely on your part. I only said they couldn’t even if they wanted to, nothing about whether they should.”
thereby not only bridging/filling lacunae with your projection, but simultaneously trying to map this projection onto another.
Some are very well aware that “….is not the same as an argument that it ‘should…’, and hence that it was never included in the original comment.
The overall comments were designed to test whether in this case perception is a projection of prejudgement – a hologram.
It was also designed to test perceptions as to what constitutes an asset, what a liability and when.
It was also designed as an invitation to furnish additional data – which you have done allowing testing as illustrated above.
“Sage advice. How bout you take it?”
The exceptionalists take, where as their opponents share.
Part of the exceptionalist ideology is based on and reinforced by, the perception of them being givers (job creators, necessary experts/interpreters etc) and the others are takers or at best receivers of benificences through the good will of the exceptionalist (trickle down).
The lateral strategy is to share.
Not to be either a giver or a taker, but to perceive others as being equal and different to co-operate with and share .
Behaviours and perception are very important in achieving the strategic goal of moving from exceptionalism to equal and different.
Often behaviours and perceptions are saturated by ideologies/practices which underpin the present socio-economic system that requires transcendance.
One of these ideologically saturated practices is schadenfreude; not only a displacement/dissipation strategy but simnultaneously an adoption of the role of the exceptionalist, since the action which gave rise to the opportunity to engage in schadenfreude didn’t happen to them – a momentary feeling of superiority.
The exceptionalists offer “truths” in which to “believe”, their opponents try to catalyse situations where people will test data and throufgh their own experience will adopt different ways of behaving, seeing and thinking, since war is not restricted to things that go bang.
The overall purpose is to contribute to the catalysation of the transcendence from exceptionalism to equal and different.
I’m admittedly very naive in these matters, but I would just think they abstained because the resolution was not one which would lead to a ceasefire, being only directed against one side. Whatever the outcome or the rationale for making such a decision, it seems to me an outright veto would be asserting that Russia favors one side over the other in a conflict between two ‘invading’ forces in the region, and what is needed is something like what they are trying to establish in Ukraine, to cease all hostilities so that conflicts can be solved diplomatically.
It doesn’t appear inconsistent with the stance Russia has taken over the conflicts that do affect Russia more, and I don’t really see it favoring the Saudis or disfavoring the poor Yemeni people, who now like the Ukranians face turmoil and woe whoever is firing guns and bombing them.
To me the sadness is that the resolution didn’t include both sides.
“To me the sadness is that the resolution didn’t include both sides.”
When your opponent is busy undermining himself neither criticise him nor give him unnecessary wriggle room by “including both sides”.
I suggest your sadness is both misplaced and a barrier to lessening naievity.
You need to see the whole document but from the snippet I read on Press Tv there is more to it. maybe there is a level of consistency in the Russian approach and some tactics though it does seem a little short of the mark. I guess interpretations are a little open too especially with the call for an immediate ceasefire.
”The council’s imposed sanctions include an arms embargo, asset freezes and travel ban against Abdul Malik al-Houthi, the leader of the movement, Yemen’s former dictator, Ali Abdullah Saleh, and his son Ahmed Ali Abdullah Saleh.
The resolution also calls for an immediate ceasefire, access to humanitarian aid to the airstrike victims and ensuring the safety of civilians.
The resolution, drawn up by Jordan and Arab states of the Persian Gulf, was adopted with 14 positive votes while Russia abstained.”
IMO From what i can see of Putin he seems to have reactionary mindset to the western interventionist philosophy. He seems far too attached to the idea of non-intervention as a reaction to western dogma of intervention. He believes in treating with honor, integrity and respect, however he seems to view standing up for oneself and standing up for what is right, claiming to know what is right and pressuring them in that regard, to be mutually exclusive this.
All in all i would have to say that he is far too timid. He does not believe in voicing his opinion or making others pay for their misdeeds. This is clear in Ukraine and his treatment of Europe and US.
Also, let’s not forget China also has a veto right and authorized this as well.
If we consider that a system works for those who have set it up, then we must not be thrilled at the prospects of BRICS :
– elite of Brazil : those comprador billionnaires that destroy their own ecosystem
– elite of Russia : oligarchs
– elite of India : Mittal anyone ? Slumlords on a massive scale, also.
– elite of China : insane billionnaires with dreams of grandeur riding a financial bubble. Also, slave factories (faxconn anyone ?)
– elite of South Africa : which ones were already up and running during the apartheid ?
Although it is a stereotypical worldview, it illustrates well why nobody should have too high hopes for humanity coming from this kind of people. In the end they are all going to use the best combination of Technology, no matter their tone of skin or religion.
“elite of South Africa : which ones were already up and running during the apartheid ?”
Excellent point.
I always wondered why South Africa – of all African countries – it’s included in the BRICS. I mean, SA, has to be, like, the ultimate Hegemon African colony!
Just because it has “Africa” in its name, it doesn’t necessarily mean it’s a country ruled by and for, truly African people.
This needs to be repeated:
Alex Sed Lex on April 14, 2015 · at 4:49 pm UTC
Also, let’s not forget China also has a veto right and authorized this as well.
If we consider that a system works for those who have set it up, then we must not be thrilled at the prospects of BRICS :
– elite of Brazil : those comprador billionnaires that destroy their own ecosystem
– elite of Russia : oligarchs
– elite of India : Mittal anyone ? Slumlords on a massive scale, also.
– elite of China : insane billionnaires with dreams of grandeur riding a financial bubble. Also, slave factories (faxconn anyone ?)
– elite of South Africa : which ones were already up and running during the apartheid ?
Although it is a stereotypical worldview, it illustrates well why nobody should have too high hopes for humanity coming from this kind of people. In the end they are all going to use the best combination of Technology, no matter their tone of skin or religion.
It is a global oligarchy – at worst they know each other and they work with each other. At best they are are essentially sibling rivals in economic oligarchy e.g:
http://www.clydefitchreport.com/2014/12/oligarchys-sibling-rivals-the-u-s-and-russia/
“…[]…But the Times article’s most telling paragraph, and not just for Russia, was one summarizing Putin’s power over the economy:
Enlightenment’s story also traces, in miniature, the arc of the Russian economy over the last quarter-century, from Soviet state ownership, to privatization, to what might be called the theater of state-sponsored private enterprise that flourishes today under Mr. Putin. In theory, market competition exists. In reality, the Kremlin and its functionaries have divvied up the nation’s strategic industries among a small and malleable circle of allies. They command some of the nation’s largest energy companies, control banks and much of the news media, and, increasingly, have a footprint in smaller sectors, like book publishing, that are nonetheless important to Mr. Putin’s political control.
It’s that paragraph’s section beginning with “In theory…” that’s particularly telling, because that description of a small circle controlling energy, banks, news media, and increasingly smaller sectors, happens to mirror the United States. The two major powers, now at odds over who will benefit from the global economy and control of energy sources in Eurasia, are essentially sibling rivals in economic oligarchy.
Indeed, two American political science professors earlier this year released a study determining that the U.S. is no longer a democracy, but an oligarchy. That study, penned by Princeton’s Martin Gilens and Northwestern’s Benjamin Page, stated:
…we believe that if policymaking is dominated by powerful business organizations and a small number of affluent Americans, then America’s claims to being a democratic society are seriously threatened…
… In the United States, our findings indicate, the majority does not rule—at least not in the causal sense of actually determining policy outcomes. When a majority of citizens disagrees with economic elites and/or with organized interests, they generally lose. Moreover … even when fairly large majorities of Americans favor policy change, they generally do not get it.
This is why Peculiar Progressive has concentrated columns on the five vital realities politicians won’t discuss, but — along with Wall Street and the military-industrial complex — will manipulate. And why we refer to the Millionaire President and Millionaire Congress, because when Big Money controls Washington, then the democracy is dissolved. As it obviously also is in Russia, though both Moscow and Washington claim they continue to grow democracies, while, in fact, they don’t.“
The Anarchist Collective’s IMAGINE flier, once printed in this website – insistes that the remnants of the American Democratic were overthrown on November 22, 1963.
There has been some discussion among our members of the date for the end of the Republic. Some choosing the Death of FDR (insisting he was murdered), others choose other dates as far back as the 1930s, or the illness (poisoning?) of Woodrow Wilson. We settled on 11/22/63 (my chosen date).
It is with great glee that I read of 2 fellow Profs from Princeton – (Univ of President W. Wilson), have come to an intelligent conclusion. Indeed, even Jimmy Carter has declared that the US is no longer a Democracy.
Although I caution about information being released by the NYT, the leading Terrorist-imperialist brainwashing propaganda mouthpiece for the Anglo/American Zionist oligarchs, the key question to be asked of citizens of our world, IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS???
What is our Vision?
Are we willing to elaborate on our vision?
Are we willing to fight for it?
Fight for Democratic Republics!
Fight for this higher level of societal organization!
Or not.
Peter J. Antonsen on April 15, 2015 · at 3:15 pm UTC said:
“…the key question to be asked of citizens of our world, IS WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO ABOUT THIS???
What is our Vision?
Are we willing to elaborate on our vision?
Are we willing to fight for it?
Fight for Democratic Republics!
Fight for this higher level of societal organization!
Or not.”
I wrote the original post.
I don’t want to fight for Democratic Republics – I want to fight for a Democratic Republic.
A democratic & just New World Order – not one with friendly borders between nations, one with no borders at all. One in which discrimination favours the weak & the disenfranchised. One where many are exceptional but they would be embarassed to say so.
Not the best source, I know, but one of the few with more than just one line about this. Russia wanted ALL sides to be embargoes, and humanitarian corridors or ceasefires included, as the civilian situation is apparently getting bad.
Iran has apparently also called for humanitarian breaks, and one source says Venezuela was backing Russia’s all-inclusive version.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2015/04/14/3fa6d5de-e297-11e4-b510-962fcfabc310_story.html
In reality, this resolution makes no difference on the ground. What else could Russia have done? vetoing it won’t make a difference on the ground, either, but it would make Russia look like not even trying to help resolve it…. probably a lot more damaging than just abstaining from a valueless vote.
Do morals mean absolutely nothing to you?
This is about Russia, Yemen, Iran, Saudi etc. I am not their keeper. And you are not mine, so time to stop following me around.
Kat Kan on April 14, 2015 · at 6:10 pm UTC said:
“This is about Russia, Yemen, Iran, Saudi etc. I am not their keeper. And you are not mine, so time to stop following me around.”
Huh? Is their an interpreter on this forum?
The point is that the moral action would have been for Russia to veto whether it would/would not have made a difference.
As TooLegit2Quit on April 14, 2015 · at 7:07 pm UTC said:
“I’m not expecting Russia to fix the world single-handedly, but after all the heroic Russian stories I read and, shall I dare say; Christian values they seem to assign to themselves… I am expecting them to stand on the side of right!”
morality means a lot especially when you are not strong in other aspect of warfare-as russia is not obviously especially in propaganda and public relations.
Do morals mean absolutely nothing to you?
Despite the benevolent rule of Britannia the Fair, the stiff upper lip; the democratic, peace loving efforts of oligarch’s, USA, Nazi’s, AngloZionists – have I missed anyone? – war, and the talk of war, and morality do not really mix. How can they?
Exception makes the rule of course, as this blog itself often demonstrates.
Perhaps it is easier, or safer and more acceptable, to speak the intelligent language of war in an age geared to the hilt for death and destruction, than the language of peace, forgiveness, brotherliness and hope, which we long for, and which we will die for.
God protect Mother Russia.
The morality here is about letting Saudi Arabia, the major aggressor bombing another country, off the hook by being side tracked by a meaningless vote to “stop arms to either side” as if that is the major problem. it was a minor mistake, agreed, but a diplomatic mistake nonetheless.
It also lends credence to the narrative that this is just a local civil war when it is much more than that. Call a spade a spade and refuse to be side tracked, diverted or exhausted by meaningless resolutions.
Thank you for your sincere, clear response and explanation which was helpful, although I had later realised with chagrin the same after more thought. I will always struggle with the idea of war and morality being in any manner compatible.
your quote ” benevolent rule of Britannia the Fair, “/????
are you mad?
the english were responsible for the biggest genocide of the human beings the history-either Africans or Indians or native Americans.
they are still doing genocide in last twenty years in iraq, Afghanistan and all middle east nations which they have stuck like parasite pest.
time to sort out that disease from the body politic of the world.
Maybe an Irony Alert option? Deeply ironic comment at the start and fading into a sort of philosophic musing at the end, (apart from God protect Mother Russia, which is my deepest prayer).
“all’s fair in love and war” however, and no misrepresentation charged . . .
Thank you, Kat Kan. This makes sense to me.
I did post here but it doesn’t appear. Are you moderating or is it just a slow pick up? test test
All posts are moderated. We try for a few minutes but sometimes there’s a lot to do. Occasionally there is nobody here for a few hours, sorry.
Russian leadership may have also followed Napoleons advice on “Never stop an enemy when he is making a mistake”.
First, the Houthis are very serious and capable fighters, who have an impressive pedigree of fighting against overwhelming odds (British Empire, Ottomans, Egypt) and coming out ahead. They can be expected to greatly bloody the Saudi coalition. They are not the “Opera military” of Muammar Al Ghadafi. In addition, the current intervention gives them a very just cause to fight. And having the better cause is often a considerable equalizer, even if you find yourself outnumbered and outgunned.
Let us investigate what a forms a protracted Saudi intervention in Yemen would take, and what effects it would have:
1: Saudi Iranian tensions would intensify. The Americans would use Iranian support for the Houthis (which actually wasnt very big so far) as a “Casus Sanctioni”. This would not be followed by either Russia and China, which opens additional opportunities vis a vis Iran for Russia.
2: The Saudis would soon find that being an occupying power is pretty drat expensive. Saudi Arabia at “cold peace” can live with low oil prices, Saudi Arabia immersed in a major war cannot. The Saudis would likely stop artificially depressing oil prices at Washingtons behest, which benefits Russia.
3: Concerning “fun with Oil prices”, China likes low oil prices, but it can hardly blame Russia if Saudi hubris/idiocy increases them.China would likely see direct Russian destabilization of the middle east as quite offputting, if the Saudis do the destabilizing it is their fault.
4: Growing instability in the middle eastern Oil region will increase Russia negotiation position vis a vis the EU.
5: One should not what Saudi Arabia is doing. They are trying to reinstall their puppet (Hadi was/is more of a puppet then Yanukovich ever was) at gun point while driving into Yemen with tanks. The hypocracy of the west which supports this stunt is an automatic propaganda victory for Russia. Alternatively, if “restoring constitutional order at gunpoint” becomes acceptable, well, that would open or ease certain options elsewhere.
6: Amusingly enough Hadi is Soviet educated, there may be some leverage/connections with/over him which the Kremlin has in reserve.
Bottom line, the Saudis are going to have their Vietnam and also their Afghanistan, in one package, right at their border. It may also lead to majority Shia Najran province blowing up like an Ukrainian built space rocket. Karma is a bitch.
There was a rumor that Surkovs more patient strategy concerning Ukraine won Putin over by Surkov stating that “the American cannot, on their own, pass up any opportunity to insert their private parts into some godforsaken hornets nest. We stall until they do just that, and then either negotiate or fight from a position of strength”. Yemen is that hornets nest, and it is a hornets nest that is not important to Russia (Syria was/is a hornets nest where Russia has investments and interests, and thus Russia acted to preempt this) while having many nasty hornets.
Other idle speculation:
Russia will be “shocked, simply shocked” that some US “defensive weaponry” delivered to Ukraine will turn up in Houthi hands (in violation of that UN embargo) via no doubt interesting shenangians, and shall waste no time bringing this lamentable if completely predictable violation of international law to the worlds attention.
So, it appears that in Syria , US and RF and Israel have their private parts stuck in hornet’s nest. Never realized how sexy hornets nests are.
Regards, Spiral
“Maybe it was to draw the Saudis further into a war they cannot win”
Bingo but still kind of disgusting. Chaos and conflict next door to Saudi also raises oil prices.
What do you think?
Very difficult, I think the Russian side knows what is doing.
Dear Saker
In the case Libya, there were no Russian interests to protect.
Gadafi was pro-American president..
His children never set foot on the Russian soil, they were educated in UK and they had property in London.
Gadafi did not invest any money in Russia, Gadafi did not give preferentional status to the Russian companies or to the Russian workers in Libya.
Russia would never put a veto without support of China.
If China did not support the veto so there was a reason.
I think Russia was correct.
This might be a factor too (from PressTV):
“The resolution also calls for an immediate ceasefire, access to humanitarian aid to the airstrike victims and ensuring the safety of civilians.”
You know the Saudi’s are going to break those terms.
http://presstv.ir/Detail/2015/04/14/406290/UNSC-passes-resolution-against-Houthis
The press release also spoke of disastrous humanitarian conditions — as these worsen, world demands for a cease-fire and humanitarian will increase substantially and the RF will get what it fought for and lost in attempting to amend the UNSC resolution.
As well, the slaughter of innocent civilians and the wanton destruction of infrastructure will inevitably lead to condemnation of the Saudis and Amricans — a result that will not displease the RF.
chet380 on April 14, 2015 · at 6:27 pm UTC said:
“As well, the slaughter of innocent civilians and the wanton destruction of infrastructure will inevitably lead to condemnation of the Saudis and Amricans — a result that will not displease the RF.”
Of course, a little bit of condemnation should do the trick – just ask the Israeli’s as they pull up their sofas in anticipation of another nights blitzkrieg of Gaza entertainment.
Saker,
I respect your hard word but need to tell you that PAST PERFORMANCE in these matters is the best indicator of future performance…I am appalled but not surprised by the Russian action and not surprised by your reaction..
En effet étrange que de s’abstenir mais nous ne somme pas encore a la création d’un “corridor aérien” peut être est ce une partie d’échec? mais vous avez raison dans le sens que cette décision parait surprenante. mais je ne doute pas non plus de l’arsenal qu”on laisser les soldats US lors de leurs départs.
[MOD:
In fact, strange as refrain but we’re not yet at the creation of an “air corridor” may be is this a game of chess? but you’re right in the sense that this decision seems surprising. but I have no doubt most of their arsenal will be left by the US soldiers during their departure.]
Strange that they abstaine(d).
News changes daily–yesterday Iran basically said “Go straight to hell! We don’t need your stinking S-300 now, years after you backstabbed us. It’s obsolete & we got something better.”
Iran Expects Russian S-300 Missile System Delivery in 2015
April 14, 2015 – 15:04
TEHRAN (Tasnim) – Secretary of Iran’s Supreme National Security Council (SNSC) Ali Shamkhani said on Tuesday that Tehran expects Russian S-300 anti-aircraft missile systems to be supplied in 2015.
“I think that it will be delivered this year,” the Russian TASS news agency quoted Shamkhani as saying.
http://www.tasnimnews.com/english/Home/Single/710554
Saker,
They are still two different cases.
In Libya, Gaddafi was the legitimate leader. In Yemen, it is still up in the air.
Now, I am pretty sure we have discussed this in past posts, but Russia is not meant to rule the world, nor be its police force.
We are having a hard enough time dealing with one country’s illusion of grandeur (US) and we do not need Russia to adopt this mentality.
Is it horrible what is happening in Yemen?
Yes.
But ….
If the Shia rebels in Yemen are able to hold, they may make things uncomfortable for Saudi Arabia. I think all of us agree that it is important for the Saudi Royal family to be taken down a peg, to feel some losses and perhaps this may hinder their efforts in supporting all of these terrorist groups.
Look at the map….
The Gulf of Aden has Yemen on his Northcoast and Somalia on his Southcoast.
One can imagine what happens to the world trade route through the Suez-channnel having angry people in little boats and firearms on both sides of this place?
The Malakka-Street will be compared with a boat trip at the East -River if this happens.
This game is getting harder and harder… but I still think that russians are overplaying the anglozio elites.
Yemen is/was a trap against Russia’s interests in Middle East. I don’t see as a coincidence the complete and fast american withdrawal from Yemen.
The RF have strong interests with sunnites and chiites nations. A russian intervention in Yemen (economic, diplomatic, etc.) to help huthies, could mean serious problems with Egypt and Turkey and the ongoing proyects with them. Anyway, RF can help huthies through PR, Media, through Iran and maybe through Oman. About Saudi agression, they are just digging their grave, why stop them?
I think RF is managing things well and smoothly.
About the aparent hypocrisy: this is a game of big guys, thinking innocently could kill you.
Russia and Putin have little power on the World Stage today but they do have the symbolic veto at the UN. This embargo and its call for a ceasefire will be ignored by both sides, especially the Saudis who told the UN to bug-off in 2013. Putin showed weakness again in this decision, a veto would have at least required more negotiations, just as his weakness and accommodations to the West have allowed the killing to continue in Ukraine.
A strong Military means nothing with weak leadership.
I think I understand why Russia abstained and in their place I’d do the same.
First, I doubt a weapons ban has much practical impact. No one was going to officially arm the Houthis to begin with. Anyone wanting to arm them covertly (and I’m not sure anyone even wants to do that) can still do so. This is consistent with Russia’s actions in NovoRussia, since officially they are not arming the freedom fighters their either. And what kind of weapons can you give? Was Russia or Iran about to place an air defense grid in Yemen?
Second, since there is no advantage to a veto, there is no reason for Russia to skyline itself for more western hate-fests.
Third, China needs to keep decent relations with KSA so Russia would have to veto alone.
Regarding Libya, that was a huge mistake. Not becaue Russia “owed” Qadhafi anything, but because a UNSC veto would have really cramped NATO’s style. It might have caused enough of a delay in the bombardment that the Libyan government might have turned things around. This would have forced the NATO/Wahhabi nutters to divide their forces and would have taken a lot of heat off of Syria.
And if NATO attacked anyway without a UNSC resolution, it would have given Russia much more leeway to act in Ukraine if it wanted to.
Regarding Yemen, Russia is in for a very long and multi0-faceted new cold war with a very large US/UK/EU/Zio alliance. Therefore it has to conserve its resources and pick its battles carefully.
Naive people…
Let me cite the blogger:
https://z5h64q92x9.net/proxy_u/ru-en.en/runo-lj.livejournal.com/1904250.html
– “Tue, Apr. 14th, 2015, 08:25 am
Questions to Putin
They say that Putin is preparing for another phenomenon of people – a large press conference. The event is rather pointless, of course, purely public relations. But if I had the opportunity, I would like to ask two questions.
1. How you lost Ukraine? Do you understand, f**k bald that the transformation of Ukraine into an anti-Russian Russophobe bridgehead USA is the biggest geopolitical catastrophe since the collapse of the Soviet Union?
2. Explain how you’re allowed to turn Donbass into a bloody mess. And why are you so deceived and screwed over millions of people who believe you and Russia?
In fact, more questions to comrade no. What ever may be questions from the Russians to the head of the colonial anti-Russian regime?”
Use your brains at last!
“And why are you so deceived and screwed over millions of people who believe you and Russia?”
Thank you for your show of anger and display of integration into “exceptionalism”.
The intensity of anger displayed by opponents is not only used to evaluate effect/perception of prior activities, but affords opportunities to further encourage opponents into over-reach.
First I thought “OmG, what the hell are the russians doing”, because it doesn’t fit in the picture. But the more I look at it the more I am convinced that it is a clever move – a very clever one indeed. Yrr gets the picture right.
1) By abstaining Russia can present herself as peace loving – at no cost, because the resolution is completely meaningless. “Yemen is awash with wepons” – right, and most of the weapons are smuggled from Somalia and Eritrea anyway.
2) There is no way the Saudis can win this war. They now have almost all Yemeni tribes against them, which will result in the mobilization of roughly two million tribal warriors against this joke called Saudi army.
3) The resolution gives the Saudis the illusion of international support, most likely causing them to get stuck deeper and deeper in the Yemeni quagmire. This increases the chance that the Saudis will finally dig their own albeit well deserved grave. And frankly, I can’t await that to happen.
I would also take any bet that Russia’s abstention was coordinated with Iran
good points. My bet too!
If the Russians had been smart, they should have proposed a resolution that includes an arms embargo against ALL participants. i.e. Saudi Arabia and others….
Of course it would not have passed, but then you can’t blame Russia. :)
STUPID!
re: rittmeister. “If the Russian’s had been smart” Agreed. If you are speaking meaningless PR votes and meaningless “unanimity of the international community”, then by all means vote for idiotic, cynical lowest common denominator resolutions, but if you are talking world leader, Man of the Year on Time Magazine, well, this requires resolutions of clarity and finesse. and , sigh, may I add, principle.
Anonymous on April 14, 2015 · at 10:21 pm UTC said:
“… but if you are talking world leader, Man of the Year on Time Magazine, well, this requires resolutions of clarity and finesse. and , sigh, may I add, principle.”
Geez, we really are in trouble.
“If the Russians had been smart, they should have proposed a resolution that includes an arms embargo against ALL participants. i.e. Saudi Arabia and others….
Of course it would not have passed, but then you can’t blame Russia. :)
STUPID! ”
When the opponents are undermining themselves don’t hinder them but don’t give them additional wriggle room by “propos(ing) a resolution that includes an arms embargo against ALL participants”
To do so would be “STUPID!”
I think understand your position/ strategy.
I think this “Putincaved” attitude is uncalled for and erroneous. Ask yourself why did 14 members of the UN Security council, including China, vote for the resolution? Why is Russia’s abstention the only object of attack by the author of this article?
Oh! I’m condemning China’s position just as much if not even more than Russia‘s. The rest of the Security Council are all just ‘birds of a feather,’ so, they’re write offs anyways.
It’s a test.
It is not immoral to advocate an end to war. At every opportunity this is what Russia considers it’s duty. Even if it is clear from the outset that ‘certain parties’ are not interested in ending the bloodshed. But the truth is, that Russia cannot carry the weight of defending repressed people all over the world. Moreover, if anything has to be crystal clear at this stage, it has to be that ‘liberating’ a country is a fallacy, if it entails picking a ‘clear winner’ beforehand. And what Russia’s adversaries would like to see, first and foremost, is that Russia would engage in an arms-race similar to the one that sank the Soviet Union.
Yemen is a hell-hole. And supporting the adversary of your enemy could easily suck you into a quagmire that is sure to leave you with a bloody nose. The U.S. got their ass kicked. Now the Saudi’s are giving it a go. But I wouldn’t be surprised at all if it would unsettle the status quo in S.A. itself, since there is no way you can hope to win that kind of struggle through a bombing campaign.
Voting against this particular resolution would have suggested that Russia is interested in continuing the war. They made it abundantly clear that they would like the UN to adopt a resolution that would order the Saudi’s to stand down too. And prohibit the kind of support the U.S. has provided. But such a resolution is not going to garner enough votes. So, be realistic.
Please read this article, it will clarify the Russian response. Exactly what Churkin said “it’s well known that Yemen is awash in weapons,”. This means he understands the situation on the ground. The people of Yemen is fine and more than capable to defend themselves. The Saudi campaign is failing, Russia knows this..
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41530.htm
Great 10 min. interview with Hassan Nasrallah.
Summary:
The Yemeni are very capable fighters.
Big trouble for the house of Saud.
Another failure for the USA and Israel.
Iran is watching and winning.
Let me start off by stating that this is not a personal attack but some constructive criticism and opinions, considered opinions, but nonetheless opinions.
Saker regarding your disappointment with Russia’s apparently nevilling abstention at the UNSC, it’s my view, this is what happens when you predicate your projections and analysis based on emotions instead of facts. Putin is not necessarily the paragon of virtue and principles as you seem to have alluded to in the past (you’ve never actually said that, it just comes across that way as a general theme). I’m not saying he’s a bad guy or a ruthless psychopath masquerading as a guy who cares, nor am I saying he’s just another mafioso – just a less sexually deviant one than the ones in the West, nor am I saying he’s controlled opposition (like some conspiracy theorists believe). I don’t know the man’s heart, and that’s the point. We can’t assume he’ll make decisions based on principles as if we know what really makes him tick.
Also you seem to overlook that Iran is not a trustworthy power, including with Russia – I believe this further clouds your analysis: We are not privy to what Russian Intelligence and Leadership is privy to with respect to Iran. My own analysis of Iran is that they would dump Russia in a heartbeat if it were in their Mullah-elite’s interest. Why should Russia spend diplomatic capital trying to protect Iran’s proxy warriors when, due to the real nature of Iran’s leadership, Russian support may not be reciprocated in the future.
Some rare countries operate on principle (they’re often burned and considered fools – Nehru’s India and Nasser’s Egypt come to mind), most others operate on pragmatism and short-term self-interest, even fewer operate on long-term pragmatism and self-interest. Iran, the EU and America belongs to second category and possible the BRICS (really Putin’s Russia, China, and Modi’s India) belong to the 3rd category.
“We are not privy to what Russian Intelligence and Leadership is privy to with respect to Iran”
I respect your opinion, but truth be told, we’re not privy about many things. We have to go by what it’s publicly known, that’s the very nature of honest political analysis; we can only talk about and/or analyze what we can prove, the rest is speculation, or off the record and therefore hear-say. Giving the State [any State] the benefit of the doubt, it is a form of a) hopeful thinking and more importantly: b) unfounded speculation.
“Why should Russia spend diplomatic capital trying to protect Iran’s proxy warriors when [..]”
Aaaand that’s an example of speculation. There’s little proof that the Houthis are Iran’s Proxy revels. That is in fact; American/Israeli propaganda, they can’t back with facts.
Saker,
Your comments on the disgraceful votes (all the major powers) on the Yemenis struggle are to your credit. You have courage and VISION.
The comments by the participants in the Saker website are highly intelligent and informative. It does no harm to Putin, or the Russian people to strongly critique their efforts. The Russians are not gods to be worshipped. Stalin. Hitler, and Mussolini-(Siempre tiene razon) were above criticism, as is the American political social economic system; and look how they turned out.
The Russian political leaders, and their citizens, do what they can. They, on the whole, are putting up a resistance to the imperialist Anglo/american/Zionist Oligarchs. But, it is incumbent on “We The People” to advance a VISION and help defeat the Oligarchs. Others, Heroes, Gods, Elves, Hobbits, Hollywood Stars, or Dwarves, will not come up from Middle Earth to save us.
As the Irish Resistance said; “Ourselves Alone.” We must advance on the stage of history – as best we can. The world is a mess. They have not begun to fix the Nuke Plants at Fukushima.
If it was easy, I would have a date with Sheryl Crow, and my children would give me all (or most) of their money. If it was easy, we would never have met, and this website would not have been attempted. If it was easy, The Kennedys, ML King, Malcalm X, Fred Hampton, John Lennon, and millions of other victims of the Oligarchs would be alive. The finest Anarchist, Durruti, would have died peacefully, in bed. And Dieudonné would be hosting the “Tonight Show” this week.
We live through the Vision!
For the Democratic Republics! Here and There!
IMAGINE
Peter,
Your post above all others summarises the situation for me.
It always amazes me how country after country fall for the basic US ploy time after time even though they’ve seen it in action again and again. Iran springs to mind, for instance.
The US basic “diplomatic” tactic works like this: You have someone who wants to do something nationalistic instead of doing things your way. So first, you hurt them–you do sanctions, you demonize them internationally, you do stuff to “make their economy scream” as the Nixonites said about Chile under Allende. Then on any given issue, you tell them “Maybe we’ll be nicer to you if you just give in on this!”
Then you don’t honour your side. Repeat until they wise up or until they capitulate completely and let you run their country.
It’s an amazingly simple approach, but everyone seems to get fooled by it at least some of the time, like Charlie Brown kicking the football. Every country seems to imagine that maybe this time, the Americans are telling the truth. Gosh, we wouldn’t be going through all this song and dance of doing diplomacy if it was completely pointless, would we? Putin believes in diplomacy and international law and stuff, so he’s vulnerable to that kind of illusion, that maybe if he deals with the Americans in good faith, this time they’ll reciprocate.
@ Lysander on April 14, 2015 · at 5:58 pm UTC
Putin was scared of oil for 10$ administered by Saudis in return for Russian veto. What confirms your remark about Russian interest in that issue.
Another step back did by Russia… Churkin, Lavrov, Putin – old foxes stinking with hypocrisy too long to be kept at their post yet at the expense of Russia. Time for new hardcore Russian nationalists and generals with balls.
Dear The Saker,
http://rt.com/news/249621-yemen-resolution-unsc-houthis/
Also to quote from Tass:
“Russia has not supported the resolution on Yemen in the UN Security Council because Moscow’s “constructive proposals” were not considered properly while preparing the draft document, Russia’s Ambassador to the UN Vitaly Churkin said on Tuesday.
“The Russian delegation’s constructive proposals were not properly considered in the process of coordinating the draft,” Churkin said.
Russia, in particular, insisted on introducing an arms embargo on all sides of conflict in Yemen, not only on Houthi rebels, as the adopted resolution stipulates.”
I can see why they abstained!
Saker, I have to disagree with you about comparing this to Libya.
The resolution on Libya was about a no fly zone and an all out attack on the country and legal Government by EU/US and their arab allies. So Putin hasn’t done anything wrong – this was about sanctioning two people and an arms embargo on the rebel side in a country awash with arms. I think your reaction was knee jerk.
There is always the bigger picture – this will be the Saudi Vietnam – give them enough rope…….The Russians are the only ones who have come across as reasonable here and it will be remembered. They have enough on their plate at the moment.
Rgds,
Veritas
This “Saudi Vietnam” argument is delusional. Hasn’t (at the very least) the war in Ukraine shown that ethnic cleansing is the name of the game ?
There was only one vote about Lybia, where NATO twisted the meaning of the agreement by launching a full-scale war. How can people think there is ever going to be another vote on Yemen ?
Russia could have said no, just like France said no, back in march 2003. It did cost France the last remnants of its sovereignty, with all political parties severely cleansed from anything not atlantist-to-the core, and a purge in all media. But they did say no, perhaps for the last time in France’s history.
But today Russia did not say no, as they did before about Lybia – there is a precedent. Let us remind ourselves of The Saker’s fears, last summer, about yet another Yugoslav/Kosovo scenario.
I don’t think the argument is delusional at all about Saudi Arabia. I await to see who will be right on this…..
You seem to forget that the current bombing was done without UNSC approval. A fact that tells you a lot about this situation. So what difference will this resolution make by embargoing one side only – not much. However, it makes a crucial point – the humanitarian points agreed which are desperately needed. Would you rather there was no cessation and no humanitarian relief? Vetoing this would have stopped this and how they would have jumped on Russia and made it more difficult for her to get people out. This is a fine balancing act and Russia knows when to put its foot down.
The Libyan resolution is different – maybe you should re-read it. I followed the whole disgusting debacle from start to finish so feel confident in my assertion that this resolution is not comparable. People may see some similarities but it is not the same and Russia is looking at the long term here.
What it shows is the utter hypocrisy of the US/EU/G7 when they allowed a legitimate President to be ousted in a coup – other countries will see this too.
Thank you – I agree. To veto a resolution that sets the legal status as humanitarian crisis would not have been a forward-moving act. To abstain from a resolution and let the others have their will with it shows that the resolution doesn’t call for what Russia wanted, but that Russia is not going to stand in its way. It actually seems like a simple enough procedural move whose basic subtleties – such as they are – can be understood by all parties.
Russia to me has proven her worth in diplomacy a hundred times in the last couple of years. It seems best to me to assume that this move was the optimal move and then try to understand why.
Thank you :).
Rgds,
Veritas
@Alex Sed Lex
May I also add to what I have stated above – I suggest you read Ambassador Syed Mohammed Murtaza Shah’s interview posted today on the blog.
She seems to back up some of my points too…..just saying……
Veritas
Well I feel more or less like you Saker, but not surprised me so much and neither I’m speechless. Simply I associate this to the point of a commenter here that the Russian government is willing to be co-operative.
But, as noted by another reviewer, can you cooperate with the psychopath? In which? Clearly, when there is a sector of governments in the world that has a psychopathic behavior, become police is the only thing can make those who have some power (Russia, China, BRICS …). You do not negotiate with the psychopath, because it is not rational. Let him kill some hundreds of thousands of defenseless citizens among the poorest in the world will not release those who want to save the bag that the psychopath will turn against them.
For those who argue that Russia should just look for their economic interest, say, then, why Russia should expect support from people outside Russia in any subject?
If VVPutin and his associates have the support they have inside and outside Russia is not for the support of some friends in Germany and the US who want to do business in Russia. The support comes from people at the time that people have the feeling that finally someone is there to deal with the bully. Not that people expect that Russia has to do all the work and put all the means. The work, the means and, especially, the dead, always puts ordinary people, in Russia, Yemen and Sebastopol.
What is happening in Yemen is an attempt to grassroots organizing, between forces of different sign / ideology (including religious) to get rid of dispossession and oppression imposed on them for decades now by imperial raptors. If they are crushed, and some look away, there will be people who will not understand. I particularly have a piece of my heart in those distant lands. Yemenis will fight, because they are people with heart and because they have very little to lose, in most cases a simple roof and a meal a day. No for them neither health nor education (something that they met during the Soviet period thanks to the support of the USSR and Cuba).
Those who are with the people, of Donbass, Yemen, Africa, the world, observe and draw conclusions. People, most, may noy understand performances included in lateral strategy whose results only could be found in future generations, will understand only to be supported during his lifetime.
People are very tired, not only in Yemen but in more privileged places. Believe that you can save only the elites and their assets, is only an illusion, a hologram.
“in lateral strategy whose results only could be found in future generations”
Why such a long time frame and why only?
Maybe because you always say that what Russia is now is due to strategies that began long ago, even in the 50’s and ?
Yesterday I saw that video that left me Helene where all those poor babushkas cried desperate ( is that no one can take them out of there? ), everyone cried, cried even Stanislava (and I found her much changed, hardened …) being newly married …
And now this…..Sometimes i can not help.
Give me something, friend, because on days like today my faith falters.
Just was y did in 2008 in my Blog about Putin, Russia an his policis.
“whose results only”
The results can be seen everyday, some of the resluts are “today” – the present and its perceptions – and they are the results of lateral processes over a long period.
On your way of thinking you can refer to many contributions including the reply above on Yemen.
“my faith ”
Faith is a way of bridging doubt and a barrier to transcendance from “exceptionalism” to equal and different.
Embracing doubt catalyses the process through what if to how to.
Romanticism in the philosophic sense which encompasses faith, is a form of self-inflicted blindness which in certain contexts prove terminal.
“Give me something”
To give is to practice/reinforce “exceptionalism”, sharing is to practice/catalyse equal and different.
Oxfam tried to explain this in a slogan-
“Give a man a fish he eats for today, teach a man to fish he eats everyday”
However the exceptionalists strategy is to give a fish today if profitable to do so, to maintain life as necessary, so they can go out fishing largely for the exceptionalists everday.
This is one of the underpinnings of social democracy and its role in the creation/extraction of surplus value.
Consistently my sharing has been of sharing hypotheses to test if so minded.
The exceptionalists proffer “facts” to “believe”.
The request to “Give me something” can be translated as a request to help you return to your comfort zone, which is consistently used by the opponents.
This is an illustration that in some regards you can be your own most dangerous opponent.
There is another interesting example of this above in respect of the opponents.
Why should Russia care?
It’s none of our business how the US will be beaten there, for the US and other slaves of Satan will lose this war against the Man, there’s no doubt about it.
And if Yemen wanted Russia’s support they’d better offered us something in return and should have thought twice before attacking Russian embassy…
Once there was an embargo on selling weapons to Croats, later they won the war.
With American bombs and generals
Actually, that’s true! This was then used to justify USA direct support for Operation Storm.
And that’s exactly why I cannot understand all the lingering hatred & bitterness in Croatia
Update on new CISPA, renamed CISA, & what it is
CISPA and its Senate equivalent the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act (CISA) are being reintroduced in hopes of capitalizing on public anxiety related to recent high profile hacks such as those of Target and Sony. The bills claim to only promote information sharing between companies and the government but in reality will expand government and private surveillance power over the public.
https://willyloman.wordpress.com/2015/04/14/cispa-is-back-with-a-vengeance/#more-33968
In reading the comments I find that if one removes this from the context of the Libya Fiasco and the S-300 Debacle of three years ago then the Russian Actions would make sense….Doing this however, would require a leap of Faith in the Russian Leadership . History will prevail and the truth of the matter will be clearer…
@ Синиша
Basically I agree with your comments, however I think you’re not going far enough.
I understand Russia seeing the UN has a dead man. Hence they use it how it can be used for their intent. The resolution cannot stop the weapon delivery to the Yemen free people when the veto could affect the ability to play any other clever attempt.
Better, it gives Russia an opportunity to build another evidence of the noxious effect of the UN.
Well done Russia!
I rather agree with you. The UN is now a mere corpse…
“Better, it gives Russia an opportunity to build another evidence of the noxious effect of the UN.”
Some may differ but I would suggest it will also catalyse lateral challenges which will lead to the demise of the UN.
There have been two incredible developments this week, of which this is one. The other, veritably jaw-dropping, is Raoul Castro’s embrace of Obama, now almost fashioned as another Lincoln. The very Obama who launched illegal wars, drone assassinations, NSA worldwide surveillance, the destruction of Libya, regime changes in Honduras and Ukraine and attempted regime changes in Venezuela and who knows where else. Leaving out the elites’ crimes unpunished at home, the recrudescence of police brutality and the obvious class-struggle in reverse. Could not believe my ears or trust my eyes.
With the case at hand, given that the Saudi Arabia elite is now (and maybe who knows since when) an arm of AngloZionist policies, Russia was compelled for diplomatic reasons, to smother the fire of indignation at the SaudiZionist Yemeni crime.
Or “… there are more things in heaven and earth, dear Saker, than are dreamt in our philosophy.” But they are surely hard to see.
Yep! Castro completely sold out. A 50-year struggle gone… just like that.
He even pretended that Obama was different from previous American presidents, although he’s got to know its not true.
The truth is, Obama must be the worst of them all.
As for Russia… hopefully I won’t hear any more of the grand chess master Putin BS. The reality is that he gets outplayed all the time.
Worse, he seems to collaborate quite a bit. The Russians are already backtracking on the S-300 announcement, saying it could be a slow process, that details need to be ironed out, that it could take up to 18 months to deliver the first systems, and so on and so forth.
@Charette please stop being so negative.
Iran expects the S300 by the end of this year, and Russia said it may take up to 6 months to get them manufactured (I don’t suppose Iran wants used ones although in an emergency maybe….)
I’ve not seen a single word about “could be 18 months” except from you, do you have a link to back that up please?
Castro? a handshake is throwing out 50 years of struggle???? Castro said after the first meeting
:”We could be persuaded of some things; of others, we might not be persuaded,” Castro said. “But when I say that I agree with everything that the president has just said, I include that we have agreed to disagree. No one should entertain illusions. It is true that we have many differences. Our countries have a long and complicated history, but we are willing to make progress in the way the president has described.”
They are talking, What is wrong with that? you want them to start out being rude to each again right away?
Cuba has been taken off the list of state sponsors of terrorism. They will think about opening embassies. Big deal, what throwing out of struggle is that?
He did not ” …pretended that Obama was different from previous American presidents…” he just said he doesn’t blame Obama (personally) for things that happened in the 19th and 20th centuries…. after a long litany of all the bad things the USA HAD done…. a strong reminder to Obama that Cuba knows what the US is capable of.
I don’t care what politicians say. I look at what they do. Castro has clearly sold out. Let’s get back to this in five years, when Cuba is nothing more than a vulgar Las Vegas island.
As for the links, do your own research, I saw articles on this in both English and French.
@Charette
I don’t have to do YOUR research. You make the claim, you back it up if asked to , that’s how it works around here. Otherwise anyone can make up and say anything, and send other people on wild goose chases looking for it.
I don’t care what politicians say. I look at what they do.
So far, what has Castro done? he attended a conference, made a speech, had a brief meeting with Obama. Oh and horror, shook his hand.
If you believe he sold out, how about giving us some evidence, what has he done that to you looks like selling out?
Oh you dictate the rules, do you?
You guys keep on painting every single Russian geopolitical setback as some kind of great chess moves by Putin.
It’s really getting pathetic.
“Oh you dictate the rules, do you?”
I’m afraid many of my very reasonable comments are no longer posted.
Castro talking at all to the shop-front leader of the hegemony at a time when it has never been worse is indicative of the debacle.
You seriously don’t believe Obama is removing Cuba from the U.S. terror list and taking steps to lift the embargo without having received some guarantees from Castro, do you?
You see, that’s the problem with you guys: you analyze the public theater that politicians put together instead of connecting the dots to try and get a picture of what’s truly happening backstage.
It would be really great if you posted that ‘What Lies Beneath’ analysis sometime. Or just impression, from the linking of said dots.
So far you haven’t.
Ps Is this thread your idea of singing from the same hymn-sheet? Have you read even half of it?
@Charette
I suspect that Russia does not really want its S300 tested under fire and to see it fail in the face of an Israeli or US air assault. Such an event would screw international sales not only for the 300 system but the upcoming 400 and 500 systems Russia wants to market in coming years.
I think Iran will get the S300 system when:
1. There is very little probability that it would be called upon to defend Iran -i.e.: tested truly
2. That it can be touted as having “defended” Iran through deterrence.
And not before.
@ Zap,
Q; I suspect that Russia does not really want its S300 tested under fire and to see it fail in the face of an Israeli or US air assault.
R; Have you ever wondered why Obambi suddenly didn’t bomb Syria?
[Folks, bear in mind that I didn’t manage to read all the comments yet, so who knows, there might have been new developments I’m not aware of, since I wrote this > and me posting it…]
.
Saker took the words right out of my mouth, this is another Libya.
It’s indefensible. I’m beyond disgusted at Russia’s position on Yemen. No wonder they were so quiet about it since the bombing started; now, it’s blatantly obvious that they had nothing ‘good’ to say. I mean; seriously? Nothing to say at all? They are in the Security Council, this a: clear-as-day violation of International Law, where are the calls for sanctions on the Saudis & Co? Even if no-one heeded them, it surely is the moral thing to do.
Meanwhile; Russia was involved in the charade negotiations with Iran, but negotiating what exactly? The Iranians are only interested in lifting the sanctions, nothing else would do, so, are the sanction lifted? I’m guessing, no, they are not. They had an opportunity to help Greece and throw a spanner in the EU machine… did they? Nope, they were more interested in securing Turk-Stream to connect to Greece plus some vague promises of ‘aid’ in the future.
They don’t want Nato at their borders but they’re doing exactly zilch to prevent EU expansion, which is the very reason why Nato has been creeping up closer and closer to the Russia’s borders. So, how do we square that circle, uh?
Back to Yemen, where civilians are already dyeing by the hundreds, yet, the looming humanitarian catastrophe is even worse than the US-made bombs falling on their heads; shortage of water, food, fuel and medicine might end up killing a large section of Yemen‘s already desperately poor population.
The shipments of bare necessities into Yemen are being blocked by the very ones attacking Yemen, and yet, non of this amounts to a Crime Against Humanity for Russian diplomats, apparently… But they still manage to evacuate stranded American citizens out of Yemen and to hell with the Yemenis themselves…
I’m starting to believe that Russia is nothing more than fake opposition to the murderous West.
I’m dyeing to know what’s the Russian public opinion in all of this, because I still hold faith in the Russian people, my faith in their government might not be in tatters yet, but it’s getting close to it.
-TL2Q
It does feel like we’ve been taken for a ride on a good cop, bad cop trip, doesn’t it?
@Charette
I hear you… Although I prefer to describe it as; ‘black hat vs. white hat.’ But, I’m just nitpicking at this point… ;-)
There is no such thing as ‘humanity’
Millions of black abortions
Millions of forced abrahamic conversions
If you care so much, pick up a gun and go there yourself. Pmc is very easy to get into
“There is no such thing as ‘humanity’”
For you maybe there isn’t, but for plenty of the – sane – rest of us; there certainly is one!
What kind of a statement that is anyway: “There is no such thing as ‘humanity’” (!?) Eh?!
That’s like saying; there’s no such thing as oxygen, or the solar system… it’s all lies!
WTF?!
Exactly. They are being diplomatic bynot supporting but also not vetoing a completely worthless resolution. In my opinion it doesn’t matter. The rebels probably already have enough weapons -AKs and RPGs. It is not like they were going to get huge shipments from anywhere. It is also not like if they get say the S-300(of course that is a ridiculous suggestion but I make it for the sake of argument) that they will be able to use with any degree of success.
As for the idea that any russian veto would have stopped the saudis – well I think it wouldn’t in any case. Just the same as it doesn’t matter that the resolution was passed(from that point of view) – the saudis will push further and further in what I would very much like to be their demise(sadly I do not believe it will, but I believe they will lose).
Of course I may be wrong.
Cheers
this article may go somewhere to explaining it — perhaps russians think saudis doomed no matter what http://www.spyghana.com/saudi-military-almost-entirely-staffed-by-mercenaries/
Strange. Since when have political strategies been based on moral considerations? Of course it helps to be on the right side of history, but in the end the winner will decide what is morally acceptable. What Russia needs is time. Time to grow stronger, both militarily and economically. And every day the evil empire is busy spending resources on faraway conflicts will change the equilibrium in Russia’s favor.
Russia’s battle against the hegemon lies elsewhere. And it may well be Putin himself that gave rise to it with his vision of an Eurasian economic block stretching from Lisbon to Vladivostok. If you were a US politician, how would you feel about the prospect of having the industrial muscle of Germany and the largely unexploited resources of Russia combined in an economical alliance? It would make America irrelevant almost overnight and spoil all the plans they’ve worked on for decades.
I think that is the real reason behind their frantic efforts to create a ‘cordon sanitaire’ around Russia and the rush to implement the Transatlantic Trade Treaties. And if the European Union is destroyed in the process it will be an added bonus. You not only eliminate a competitor, but eliminate any chance of a common geopolitical stance.
They nearly have their ‘cordon sanitaire’. Just look at a map. What is left? Ukraine, Belarus, a few minor, fragmented states and – surprise, surprise – Iran. The time is fast approaching when Russia will have to either make a stand or complete the pivot to Asia and accept a secondary role in Europe.
I always thought that the neo-con idea about dismembering Russia as an entity was a bit of a wet dream. What was achieved in those nations that were taken over in the wake of WWII will not be realized so easily in the vast Russian hinterland. But it is possible to stop or at least slow down Russia’s rise as a superpower by denying them access to European and North American markets, especially in the new economic paradigm were about to face.
I believe Putin knows all that far better than I do and is concentrating his efforts where it is most needed. And that is not in Yemen. That conflict needs to be solved by the people involved and the muslim world at large.
Hansjam, But there is no dilution of Russian resources or efforts in simply casting a veto. You may think morality has no place in interrnational politics, but surely international law does. What could be more important than the right to defend oneself?
We should be absolutely clear on one point: Increased trade/economic alliance between Russia and EU does NOT endanger US. It ends only US plan to rule the world. We should not be “understanding” about US disappointment in preventing its global rule.
India China keep Russia on a leash as no one trusts white people.
Germany Russia industrial corridor is not in our interests lol
50% of us doctors and scientists are Indians.
Have fun building something without indian chinese personnel and knowledge.
You will be back in medieval kievan rus
Is that “us doctors” or “US doctors”?
Russia has about 100% Russian doctors and 100% Russian scientists.
They had a lot of fun building the first space ship to put a man into space….54 years ago this week. They made half the International Space Station. They made the rockets the USA uses to get their space craft into orbit…..
They make nuclear weapons and nuclear power stations — $100 billion worth of new ones on order all over the world, INCLUDING 12 for INDIA and nuclear submarines and nuclear icebreakers….
They build excellent airliners and transport aircraft, superb fighter planes, and made the Ak-47 which has become the most copied gun in the world…..
Russians invented arc welding, and fire fighting foam, made the first light emitting diode and latest high-tech material graphene. ….
All without a single Indian or Chinese anywhere.
Kat Kan on April 15, 2015 · at 3:56 am UTC said:
“Russia has about 100% Russian doctors and 100% Russian scientists.”
Do you equate Russia to the Russian Federation in your exceptional definition of Russians?
Or “has about 100%” actually 99% or 95% or 90% or something else?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Russia
“The demographics of Russia is about the demographic features of the population of the Russian Federation,[8] including population growth, population density, ethnic composition, education level, health, economic status and other aspects.
…[]…
According to the 2010 census, ethnic Russian people make up 81% of the total population. This share remained steady over the last few decades.[19][20] Six other ethnicities have a population exceeding 1 million – Tatars (3.9%), Ukrainians (1.4%), Bashkir (1.1%), Chuvash (1%), Chechens (1%) and Armenians (0.9%). In total, 160 different ethnic groups live within the Russian Federation’s borders.”
Kat Kan, he’s obviously a troll (perhaps even a hasbara) trying to drive a wedge between Russians, Chinese and Indians.
I am sure the Chinese and Indians feel ashamed to have someone of his mentality comment here.
yes, John, we have leashes of varying lengths and strengths here ;)
John on April 16, 2015 · at 3:47 am UTC said:
“Kat Kan, he’s obviously a troll (perhaps even a hasbara) trying to drive a wedge between Russians, Chinese and Indians.
nope, just tired of the Russian exceptionalist story (or anybody’s exceptionalist story)
“I am sure the Chinese and Indians feel ashamed to have someone of his mentality comment here.”
I have both primary&secondary degrees.
I see “Kat Kan” still hasn’t answered my question.
Russians invented the caterpillar track (tractors, tanks…), electrically-powered railway wagons (“It all started in 1874-1876, when Fyodor Pirotsky conducted a slew of experiments on transmitting electricity over a distance, with one rail serving as a direct conductor and the other, as a reverse conductor…The first electrified tram line was opened as late as 1881 in a Berlin suburb on the basis of designs by the Russian inventor), radio (Popov 1885), helicopter (Sikorsky), Solar cell (Alexander Stoletov, late 1880), transformers (invented, built and put into operation by Russian electrical engineer Pavel Yablochkov and physicist Ivan Usagin. The solution that made it to history books as the “distribution of light” was produced by Yablochkov in the mid-1870s. The invention, which consisted of a transformer and condenser, was displayed in Paris and St Petersburg and, as early as 1882), synthetic rubber (Sergei Lebedev 1910; his book “Research in polymerisation of by-ethylene hydrocarbons”, printed in 1913, provided the foundations for commercial artificial rubber synthesis).
BTW all the information provided above is taken (for convenience) from… Russia & India Report! Want more? There is more:
Wikipedia:
Timeline of Russian innovation
List of Russian inventors
Science and technology in Russia
I once knew someone who was studying Russia who said there was a word meaning ‘to achieve by waiting’ or ‘to achieve by not acting’. Perhaps there is, and you know the word, but I found the concept of a ‘waiting move’ very useful (and used in chess, and martial arts, at times).
I suspect that Putin is smarter than I am, and I am hesitant to second guess him.
From recent posts of yours – I suspect he is nowhere near as smart but a lot richer.
I too am surprised Russia would sign off on something like this.
But my reading is that Yemen is outside Russia’s sphere of influence. Better to let the West get bogged down fighting the hill tribes of Yemen while deflecting or stalling the coming war against Iran.
–Gaianne
I think it is really a different thing.
– It is all about current constitution of UNSC!
We had several news recently about reforms / abolishing veto rights in UNSC in German state media last months.
The bottom line was always: Russia and China “misuse” their veto rights.
What can Russia do?
Veto on important topics and sometimes give in, only to circumvent UN resolutions as the Western powers are doing for decades.
It is really delicate … as the veto thing seems really outdated. There are more nuclear powers than veto powers in the world. There are economic empires – like Germany – without veto right, but it has been trying to get it for some years now.
Your post makes no sense. To lose their veto Right – Russia would have to vote to lose their veto Right! They are certainly not going to vote to disempower themselves.
On the other hand – if they overuse their veto right and the UN dissolves into total irrelevance that will weaken the powers that gain the most from the UN. Who gains the most from the UN? Clearly those that control it – US/UK/”The West”.
There is no way Russia loses out by using its veto whenever is appropriate.
My 2cents worth..
1 The RT poll on what should be done re the Yemen gives 70% support to “letting them sort it out for themselves.” Supplying arms to the REGION – because there are no guarantees where they will wind up – only pours fuel on on the now-raging fire in the M.E.
2 The best guarantor for potential peace and prosperity in the REGION is an Iran-led rapprochement between religious factions and the lancing of the abcess of Takfiri extremists, in all their various guises. The Yemenis are feared because they are displaying the dreaded symptoms of NATIONALISM, something the Oiligarchy dreads. The transnational cartels have always exploited Arab tribalism to their advantage.
Russia’s supply of S-300’s to Iran is a recognition of both its significance and a sign of indifference to Washington-Tel Aviv ‘sensitivities.’ It is noting that both are essentially operating without democratic/popular mandates from their own populations.
3. The UNSC is functionally corrupt, just like most UN institutions. All resolutions are a charade until the rule of international law is restored: that requires a dismantling of the Hegemon and its Anglo-Zionist interests. That is underway.
4. The resolutions was formulated by the usual suspects, but with one crucial difference: the necessity of providing humanitarian aid. The original Russian proposal emphasised this as the priority. Raising a moral objection to the Saudi Coalition invasion would be futile: it wouldn’t stop it and it would cause a frenzied round of ‘whataboutery/hypocrisy from the MSM/Nutty and Co (Ukraine, Crimea, Georgia..zzz ).
How to handle the curate’s egg, good in parts?
Don’t.
Lol libya collapsed 100s thousands migrants flood europe – win
Regain crimea, bloodbath for eu – win
Stall time with 0% growth us vs indo china – win
Reduce legitimacy of UN create cause for India veto seat – win
Raise oil price after India China at full storage – win
Save face by not doing useless veto – win
Prevent firther escalation – i.e naval blockade so covert re supply possible – win
Create large rift in sunni world btw arab non arab – massive win
Neither vote for or veto both give anti muslim fuel abstain keeping you in own soi – double win
Creating controversy would unite turkey pakistan with gulf again. Keep them occupied
This is how realpolitik works – military = sum of economy as without air power it is spear vs gun
2 trillion russia vs 17 trillion us 17 trillion eu
Don’t overshoot
You save your own people first as if you overextend you die and those you try to save.
Quit crying,
ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕਾਖਾਲਸਾ।।ਵਾਹਿਗੁਰੂਜੀਕੀਫਤਹਿ।।
I mean they probably know more than we do to be honest with you…
As people are saying it looks like a trade off or a concession.. let Putin clean out the 5th column first which is more dangerous than America, and then we can judge Russia I think.. We KNOW for sure that if it was up to them this resolution wouldnt be passed, so there must be something going on behind the scenes and Putins team compromised in exchange for something else more vital..
Anonymous on April 14, 2015 · at 8:56 pm UTC said:
.. let Putin clean out the 5th column”
Putin and his cronies are the 5th column…just a continuum from Yeltsin https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0B2yKbdlVVM
That is not what the General is saying.
It is a good link to understand the internal problems that VV Putin had to overcome in his first two terms.
History would teach us that the ‘bankers’ will only promulgate war when that war is profitable to them… when they can control both sides to a desirable outcome. Relatively this has been true for maybe 300 years, maybe more.
While I would prefer to believe that someone stands in the way of the evil empire, I question whether Russia, Iran, or any other ‘entity’ is/is not controlled opposition – I can tell you for a fact: I don’t know what to believe.
Living as I do in one of the empires zones of control, where institutionalized paedophilia and scandalous corruption are the norm… and watching the sheeple slumber on – I can predict, with a reasonable degree of certainty, that whatever plans are currently unfolding around the world – they will not have a happy ending for the majority of the human race.
Russian foreign policy: There is no place for self serving opportunism which in the long run turns out to be self defeating. It is hard to claim the high ground against Western lead aggression in E Ukraine when you are supporting it in Yemen. Real Politic? real stupido!
Perhaps the Houthis are beginning to regret sacking, looting, and occupying the Russian consulate in Yemen?
Dear Saker, do not be worried, everything is very complex and you can be sure Russia got many things secured as payback for the vote.
World is changing into multilateral and game is changing.
Try read interesting blog at philosophyofmetrics.com
I believe (without knowing for sure) that this is not directly about Yemen but rather about containing/diminishing Iran’s influence. Especially Saudis can not allow Iran to gain control there right in their backyard, thus the escalation.
I find this post and many related comments a little naive. All options have no doubt been carefully weighted. The russian govt is playing on a fundamental shift of power in the world. It’s not trying to become the new world police just yet, and it cannot afford to throw its weight around politically just yet either. Russia is not the ones invading Yemen, neither it is the guarantor of Yemen’s independence and political legitimacy. It is definitely not worth losing the endgame and the Russian country over, especially considering the Yemeni are far from achieving a stable unitary state, even without the USaudI intervention.
i approve Russian decision. They did not stick up for any side in conflict except trying to implement peaceful resolution by means of intl. law, peace, etc…. If at UNSC did not want it, that speaks who they really are. Warmongers and some of them are hidden part in conflict. So, if they want to kill each other, so be it. They will not change anything. Like they did not in Lybia. They provoked uncontrolable chaos. What side would one moral person choose in Lybia? Russian are living in different reality than americans. Latest are anxious waiting for some ‘actions’ killing, bombing, etc… from first step on american continent until today. Predictable.
To be clear, this is about a vote abstention by Russia. Why indeed would Russia abstain and allow the resolution to pass? It is apparent Russian officials felt Russian interests were better served in this instance by doing nothing. Why would they think that? First, an abstention diminishes Western propagandists from further demonizing Russia for favoring the wrong side against the US/Saudi coalition. Secondly, as frustrating as it may be for those sympathetic to the Houthis, the abstention probably strengthens world perception of Russia as favoring negotiation over military conflict. In this instance, Russia appears to favor reduction of armed conflict regardless of whether the reduction is one-sided and/or wrong-sided. Hard to view that position as Machiavellian. Third, a Russian abstention may signal that Russia wants to keep its options open in the future if the Yemen conflict grows (which no doubt it will), to avoid a perception in the future that Russia is reneging on a previous understanding based on this vote. Difficult as this may be to digest, the abstention may have given Russia more flexibility to act at a future date without diminishing world view of Russia in the short term.
@ The Saker,
The west used rulers, pencils and a map to create all these countries, kingdoms and more rulers. You expect a natural developed country to step into this western horse manure and pretend their stamping on drapes to make
whinewine?Russia is learning the ropes [the hard way], but should copy China’s way of studying on how to do a ‘Sun Tzu’ on her ‘partners.’
China got it from India,
Russia should focus on Fgfa and t-50.
World power is shifting, and India with a Tejas Mk-2 and Amca will be leaving Russia behind in 5-10 years.
Russia is already ordering HAL avionics for Su 30 SM.
It needs to double down lest it be caught with aging su27s.
Upgraded su27s will be fine for now as it has large buffer in central asia, china Japan in east and no f35 delivery to eu any time soon.
However that is only giving it few years.
T50 production starts next year and fgfa 5ish after that.
—
F35 is flop, f16 is garbage now being beaten by mig 21 bison. So even vietnam can beat any arab air force.
F15e of usaf is ok but won’t stand up to much either.
9 squadron f22 is entire us airforce and it is maintenance nightmare and will not survive longer than 2 week war.
As in let the Saka, Arya, Cina nexus build arms for the next great war.
No rush
Giving up yemen to split Pakistan Turkey from Saudi is worth it alone.
You can pivot Iran towards zorastrian and have a syria, tajik and persian population that is hindu again.
Isolates Pakistan and crushes Islam.
You can move on christianity i.e catholic proteetant zio nexus after.
You last sentence blows any credibility you might otherwise have right off the plantation.
Clueless. Absolument.
Assuming you’re Indian, judging by your pride in all things Indian. It makes Indians look bad to sound so ignorant. Good for a laugh is all.
HAL??? has been doing fighter avionics since 2012 — on technology transfer from Russia. That means Russia equipped and trained everyone, and the avionics are their design, to go into the Russian MIG and SU jets being assembled in India, from largely Russian parts. Same deal with the T50.
The F35 and other “F” named aircraft are all from the USA.
The Tejas sound good, but India has little experience building planes, whereas Russia has been building them since 1910, after experimenting with flight since the 1880’s. India in those days had only BIRDS.
None of this will make any population Hindu unless they want to, and present indications for the nations you mention are they they are quite happy being Muslim.
What is the alternative? Veto the resolution and arm the rebels?
Dear Saker. If Russia starts spreading chaos, it will be the next empire of chaos. Is this what you want? What you hope for? I think not.