by Eric Zuesse
The official statement from the G7 group, of leading industrialized countries, publicly exposes the entire G7 group, by basing on provable and even blatant lies, the group’s support for continuation of Barack Obama’s anti-Russia sanctions.
In its statement at the conclusion of the meeting of the G7 countries on May 27th, the G7 nations — the U.S. (who dictate to the others), plus the six others (who always do what they’re told): Germany, Japan, Italy, France, Canada, and UK — said in their joint statement (which I shall accompany here by links to relevant sources, plus comments and questions from myself, for the purpose of clarification):
We stand united in our conviction that the conflict in Ukraine can only be solved by diplomatic means and in full respect for international law, especially the legal obligation to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence [even though they don’t similarly deny the rights of Catalonians to separate from Spain, nor of Scotts to separate from UK, if that’s what the people there want]. We reiterate our condemnation of the illegal annexation of the Crimean peninsula by Russia [as those links show, the illegality was actually Obama’s coup in Kiev, not what either the Crimeans or Russia did] and reaffirm our policy of its non-recognition and sanctions against those involved [those being sanctions solely against Russia, for having accepted the request of 97% of Crimeans to become Russian citizens, and for protecting Crimeans from being invaded by the Ukrainian army and air force].
We are concerned by continued violence along the line of contact in violation of the ceasefire [in the far-eastern Donbass portion of Ukraine]; we urge all sides to take concrete steps that will lead to the complete ceasefire required under the Minsk agreements. We also urge all sides to fulfill their commitments without delay with a view to holding local elections in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions [the two regions that together make up Donbass, the part of Ukraine that had voted 90% for the Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, whom Obama overthrew in February 2014] as soon as possible in accordance with the Minsk agreements. We emphasize our strongest support for full implementation of the Minsk agreements and the work of the Normandy format and the Trilateral Contact Group. We expect Russia [but not the Ukrainian government] to live up to its commitments and use its influence over the separatists to meet their commitments in full. [This passage acknowledges that Russia has only ‘influence’ over the separatists, not control over them, and yet only Russia is being demanded here to meet its alleged ‘commitments’, which would be precisely what, if Russia doesn’t control the separatists, and if Russia exercises no ‘influence’ at all on the other side, the Ukrainian government?] We stress the OSCE’s key role in helping to deescalate the crisis, and we call upon all sides, particularly the separatists [why ‘particularly’ the separatists — is this supposed to be an unbiased neutral statement, which it clearly is not?], to provide the organization’s monitors full and unfettered access throughout the conflict zone.
We recall that the duration of sanctions is clearly linked to Russia’s complete implementation of the Minsk agreements [yet again, the G7’s statement is clearly and singularly hostile against Russia, and supportive of the coup-imposed Ukrainian government] and respect for Ukraine’s sovereignty [but what about the right of self-determination of peoples, which even the West recognizes in the cases of Scotland’s right to separate from UK, and Catalonia’s right to separate from Spain — but NOT in Donbass’s and Crimea’s right to separate from Ukraine, though Donbass had voted 90% for Yanukovych, and Crimea had voted 75% for him, and the post-coup Ukrainian regime was rabidly hostile to them and calling the residents there ‘terrorists’ for rejecting Ukraine’s coup-government as their government?]. Sanctions can be rolled back when Russia meets these commitments [what ‘commitments’, that are only by one side of the dispute — and not even by one of the two sides in the dispute, neither by the Ukrainian government, nor by the separatists?]. However, we also stand ready to take further restrictive measures [here the warmongering G7 are actually threatening to increase sanctions against Russia, though their case for even having those sanctions is based entirely upon lies] in order to increase cost on Russia should its actions so require [according to what standard, and judged by whom — them?]. We recognize the importance of maintaining dialogue with Russia [but if this assertion weren’t a lie, then would their entire statement here be so incredibly one-sided and false as it so obviously is?] in order to ensure it abides by the commitments it [yet again referring only to Russia] has made as well as international law and to reach a comprehensive, sustainable and peaceful solution to the crisis.
We commend and support the steps Ukraine is taking [can anyone but a full-fledged idiot fail to recognize how biased in favor of the Ukrainian government and against the Russian government — how totally one-sided — this statement is?] to implement comprehensive structural, governance and economic reforms and encourage Ukraine to continue and accelerate the process. We urge Ukraine to maintain and enhance the momentum in its fight against corruption and its judicial reform, including the Prosecutor General’s office. We are fully committed to providing long-term support to this end [does that mean anything more than providing yet more taxpayer-backed loans to get the bankrupt Ukrainian government even deeper into debt and austerity than it already is and to sell off in insider-rigged ‘auctions’ virtually the entire Ukrainian government?]. We also commend the work of the Ukraine support group of G7 Ambassadors in Kyiv.
Three underlying suppositions of that statement are:
1: All of the violations of the Minsk agreements were by Russia.
2: Russia controls what the independence forces in the separatist Donbass region of the former Ukraine do, and is therefore responsible for everything that those forces do, including any Minsk-violation they might commit.
3 (a corollary of 1&2): The Ukrainian government never violates the Minsk agreements, or else must suffer no sanctions for having done so: only Russia can be blamed for any failure to comply with the Minsk agreements.
All 3 are blatantly false.
1: Many of the violations were by the Ukrainian government, and most if not all the rest were by Donbass separatist forces firing back at forces attacking from the Ukrainian government. Self-defense against attacks from the other side doesn’t violate any agreement, and it certainly isn’t a violation of the Minsk agreements. (The residents of Luhansk and Donetsk had never agreed to be sitting ducks for Ukrainian soldiers and airmen intent upon killing them.)
2: Russia doesn’t control what the separatist forces do, but does provide essential assistance to those forces — and there is a big difference between providing such assistance, and having control over those forces.
3: Here are some direct and indisputable violations of the Minsk agreements, by the Ukrainian government (totally ignored by the G7’s statement, just cited here):
Measure 4 of the agreement — which was signed on 12 February 2015 — states that,
“Without delays, but no later than 30 days from the date of signing of this document [i.e., by no later than 13 March 2015], a resolution has to be approved by the Verkhovna Rada [parliament] of Ukraine, indicating the territory which falls under the special regime in accordance with the law ‘On temporary Order of Local Self-Governance in Particular Districts of Donetsk and Luhansk Oblasts,’ based in the line set up by the Minsk Memorandum as of 19 September 2014.”
It wasn’t only a required action, but also an action required to have been taken by no later than a specific date, and it was not done. Instead, on 12 March 2015, Radio Free Europe headlined “A Bipartisan Cause In Washington: Arming Ukraine Against Russia” and reported that, “consensus appears to be snowballing among Democratic and Republican lawmakers in the U.S. capital on at least one issue: arming Ukraine. One exception, however, is the figure who matters most: President Barack Obama.” No reason was given for his hesitation on this, but by this time it was clear that Ukraine would be in stark violation already of the Minsk II accord — barely a mere month after its passage. The U.S. Congress can ignore international legalities and be unconcerned about the public appearance abroad (that America doesn’t really care about international legalities), but the U.S. President needs to keep up the legalistic front so as not to embarrass too much the leaders of America’s client-states such as Germany and France (which had initiated the Minsk agreements: after all, Obama’s agent who orchestrated the coup had said at the time, “F–k the EU!”; but there’s a limit to the public humiliation that even the most cooperative of the White House’s stooges can reasonably be expected to tolerate).
The crucial March 13th date came and went, without being mentioned in Western ‘news’ media. (And please note here that the 27 May 2016 G7 statement says “We also urge all sides to fulfill their commitments without delay,” but simply ignores that Ukraine didn’t only “delay,” Ukraine still refuses to comply.) Then, four days later, at the Fort Russ website on March 17th, appeared the headline “Back to war? Ukrainian parliament rejects the Minsk agreement”, and reported that, “A month after the Minsk agreement the masks are off. New weapons are coming, American instructors are in Ukraine, the IMF credit is approved. Time to get back to killing the kids of Donbass. Where are the sanctions on Kiev?” That information was unpublishable in the West’s ‘news’ media — their ‘journalistic’ standards exclude such ‘Russian propaganda’ as this. Truth doesn’t set these standards; power does, and the G7 (and their aristocracies’ ‘news’ media) have the power.
The Minsk II agreement set up a 13-stage process; and each stage beyond stage three, every stage from #4 on through #13, is in abeyance, because the Ukrainian government refuses to implement its side of them. As a consequence of Ukraine’s refusals, the G7 group are demanding intensification of the anti-Russia sanctions, on the basis of blaming Russia for all violations of the Minsk accords. Blaming Russia for all of them is the official ‘truth’, and the ‘news’ media comply with it. (Similarly, in 2002 and 2003, the ‘news’ media, in order to assist the U.S. government to eliminate another Russian-allied leader, Saddam Hussein, had complied with the official ‘truth’ about ‘Saddam’s WMD’ — that those nuclear-weapons equipments and materials still existed, and that they threatened the West, though the IAEA actually said that they had destroyed all of Saddam’s nuclear-weapons-related capabilities and materials in 1998, and the press simply hid this crucial information from the public, and allowed George W. Bush to state without challenge, citing “the IAEA, that they were six months away from developing a weapon” — an entirely fabricated charge against Saddam. Geoffrey Perret wrote (p. 349): “After inspections resumed in November 2002, the IAEA concluded that there were no nuclear weapons and no program to build them. That was why the Niger yellowcake story had to be cooked up.” So: Iraq was invaded on 19 March 2003, on entirely fabricated ‘evidence’, which an honest press would have exposed, instead of stenographically ‘reported’. And now, we’re heading into World War III, this way.)
Another item in Minsk II that has a deadline is #11: “Constitutional reform in Ukraine, with a new constitution to come into effect by the end of 2015, the key element of which is decentralisation (taking into account peculiarities of particular districts of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, agreed with representatives of these districts).” That deadline, too, came and went, and is still being ignored by the G7 and ‘the West’; and the reason it hasn’t been complied with, not even after the deadline passed, has likewise been that Ukraine refuses to comply with it (which is the reason why the West’s ‘news’ media ignore it).
The extension or even intensification of sanctions, and the NATO buildup on Russia’s borders, are steps along the road to WW III, but Western ‘news’ media have been so effective at their function (propaganda), so that their respective publics are unconcerned about the risks of nuclear annihilation resulting, and about the increasing closeness of whatever event will spark such a global nuclear war, because those publics don’t even know the most important things that are happening in their ‘democratic’ countries.
Here’s a video at Fort Russ on 1 June 2016, showing “Texas visits frontline DPR positions”. But such evidence is irrelevant to the G7 leaders (Obama, Merkel, Hollande, Abe, Cameron, Renzi, Trudeau): they’ve got an entire world to destroy, and they’re too busy doing it, to care about evidence that shows them to be all liars. (Not a single one of them said, to the G7’s proposed statement: NO — I will not sign this!!!)
Is the path to nuclear annihilation being created by an elite of hypocritical liars and a mass of their deceived suckers? Can anything destroy this path, and so block those liars from destroying the world? Will any major news medium in the West finally separate itself from the chorus of liars and start to report the terrifying truth of these matters — while there is still time left to avert global calamity?
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse is the author, most recently, of They’re Not Even Close: The Democratic vs. Republican Economic Records, 1910-2010, and of CHRIST’S VENTRILOQUISTS: The Event that Created Christianity.
Nothing new…….
The Western NATO-Zionist alliance are the enemies of Russia and the entire world.
We do not expect from them honesty, fairness, unbiased information, justice, peace, good-will, directness, clarity, friendship, calmness, etc, etc.
The only thing we can hope is for this empire to fail in their goals or be destroyed….
Anyone with the sense of a fried snail understands what DC and Langley are doing. At this time it is dawn, 27 July 1914. It’s that close. You keep on urinating in someone’s cheerios and sooner or later that someone is going to shove the bowl of cheerios right up your nether regions and pound said bowl in to place with a ten kilo maul.
If anyone doubts the intentions of The West, here’s a little something to remember. Just past us was the two year anniversary of the air attack on the civilian administration building in the center of Lughansk. Perhaps one should read again my comrade Juan’s primal scream shortly after the attack. He put it in a nutshell and clearly explains what EU/US/Australia think of us.
Auslander
Author
Never The Last One https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00ZGCY8KK
An Incident On Simonka https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01ERKH3IU
note also
“Ex-deputy of the Verkhovna Rada Irina Berezhnaya, a native of Lugansk reports that the Kiev courts trying to hush up the case with the bombing of the aircraft Ukrainian Lugansk military aviation June 2, 2014.
According to her, it is now legal support of the case involved “Institute of Legal Policy and Social Welfare”, which includes and carefully, but for two years the courts of various instances delay the verdict.
“The Supreme Administrative Court and the Supreme Court of Ukraine in its decision that the cluster bombs dropped on civilians in the center of Lugansk, not ostensibly connected with the decree on the ATO! However, the Kyiv District Administrative Court after a year considering our claim confirmed that the civilians were killed by bombs dropped it with a military plane, but the court, allegedly, can not determine whose it was a plane because the radar on this day was not carried out, despite the indisputable evidence and recognition of the Ministry of Defence that it was a plane the Air Force of Ukraine “, – says Gentle.
Recall that immediately after the tragedy in Luhansk official Kiev said, they say, caused the deaths of several residents was the fact that the administration building “blew air conditioning.”
http://www.anna-news.info/node/58647
google translate
so where have I heard elsewheres about ‘radar not working” or similar……….hmmm, MH17.
The lies are so blatantly obvious as to be pathetic. The aircraft is undeniably an SU-25, firing multiple small unguided air-to-ground rockets. The video shows that. Only the Junta had an air force. Radar not needed when eyes can see all.
See image ‘Su-25 at Kubinka air base’ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sukhoi_Su-25
The unguided rocket pods are at far left and right.
The fixed video from the ground clearly shows a normal city with people strolling about and the ripple hits behind the trees and the building.
Firing on civilians like this -unannounced and undeclared war is a war crime -but due to racist bias and ideology was ignored by the West.
Look closely at the dark area under the trees in the park and you will see the multiple ‘ripple’ rocket explosions -flame amd smoke:
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x1y3pkz_a-cctv-camera-captures-part-of-an-su-25-attack-in-central-lugansk_news
excellent thank you-very much look forward to an analysis of Mogherini’s EU “High” Representative on Foreign Affairs up and coming EU Defence policy, which should probably be retitled ‘Attack Policy’-and analysis on up and coming Warsaw NATO nonsense too.
God save us from the destructive lunacy of the western elites.
eg “In Hitler’s Steps: Huge US Military Convoy to Advance From Germany to Russia’s Border
US troops retrace the path of Hitler’s invading armies that would lay siege to Leningrad
Dean Parker Subscribe to Dean Parker29 seconds ago | 4 1
Donate!
24Share on FB
Share to TW
1Share to GP
Share to Pinterest
Share in VK
Share in reddit
Remember “Dragoon Ride” of 2015? It was a company of US stryker vehicles returning from an Estonia independence day parade (which was inexplicitly held not in the nation’s capital but 300 metres from the Russian border) not by rail or ship as is usual but across Europe’s highways.
Well say hello to 2016. This time it’s an entire regiment of 1,200 American troops with 400 vehicles which has hit the road — and in the opposite direction. Yupp that’s right. A Regiment of US troops has driven out from their Germany bases en route to Estonia and the neighborhood of Russia old imperial capital of Sankt Petersburg (once Leningrad) in the Baltics — ie they are retracing the steps taken by the Third Reich’s Army Group North taken during the invasion of the Soviet Union. Once there they will join a 14,000 strong multinational NATO military exercise.
What a remarkable lack of self-consciousness. Germany, Poland and the western media scoff every year when Russian bikers perform their annual ride from Moscow to Berlin. Yet those are private Russian citizens and furthermore unarmed. These are soldiers en route for war drills on Russia’s border.
Russia is famously and understandably hyper-sensitive about anything WWII in which it lost 25 million people, most of them civilians a to genocidal policies of the western occupier. US knows this but still pulls up stunts like this. Is US military really this oblivious to the paralels here or is somebody at the Pentagon going out of their way to provoke the Russians and cook up a budget-enhancing crisis?”
http://russia-insider.com/en/hitlers-steps-huge-us-military-convoy-advance-germany-russias-border/ri14784
God save us from the destructive lunacy of the all elites.
» nuclear weapons … nuclear war … nuclear annihilation «
The same old doomsday litany. Unless Eric Zuesse and other well-intentioned (I believe) authors update their take on the bombastic elastic pseudophrastic nuclear bogeyman, they’ll keep pointlessly agitating in a web of lies like fish caught in a net. Unlike this spooky nuky kooky stuff, the truth makes sense.
Ah, yes, I remember you. There was “never any moon landing”. No one died on 911. So no action is required by anyone on anything.
After that “surely” it is “past-time” for Russia to issue an official statement of their own.Saying that unless the Ukrainians live up immediately to the agreements at Minsk. Russia will no longer have anything to do with those agreements. And that if the G7 want to play sanctions then they need to be ready for “real sanctions” ,applied to them. Such as,no country that sanctions Russia may fly their aircraft over Russian airspace. No country that sanctions Russia will be paid back loans owed to those countries banks until sanctions are removed. There will be a “sanctions tax” on exports of gas and oil sold to countries that have sanctions against Russia,etc,etc,etc. If there was ever a time to “play hardball” with those stooges it is now.
To me, the whole framework of the Kremlin’s approach is questionable. They recognized Poroshenko as legitimate. That makes everything else somewhat illogical or even incoherent. Why shouldn’t the Donbass obey Kiev if the government is legitimate? How would Moscow feel if an area within Russia rebelled? Putin is just as legitimate as Poroshenko, right? For that matter, why should the Crimea be able to leave without Kiev’s approval? They are legitimate, right?
Moscow has been playing an unclear game (similar to the short story by Surkov), where nobody knows what is what. Did the Kremlin want the Donbass to hold a referendum? Is the actual goal to see the Ukrainian economy collapse? They sometimes seem too clever for their own good.
Now compare that with the US’s story/approach. The people were angry at a corrupt government and drove the head out. He ran away to be closer to his loot (and to avoid interrogation) in Moscow, and a new, fair government was elected. Moscow used the turmoil as an excuse to steal the most valuable part of the country, the Crimea. In addition, to weaken the new government and distract from their crime in the Crimea, Moscow supported a separatist uprising. As this uprising had limited support, it didn’t do that well till lots of Russian resources, advisors, and materiel were brought in. Moscow was insincere in actually wanting the Donbass, as it was merely a bargaining chip. Thus the war is just that Moscow still has dreams of a Eurasian Union that will be a hidden version of the USSR. Once it was clear that the West would not exchange the Donbass for recognizing the Crimea, the Kremlin didn’t know what to do, and is currently struggling over sanctions and the damage to its reputation in Europe. The Minsk agreement was to let the Donbass return to its proper place, but Moscow still wants to hold influence in Kiev, even though she has no right to ask for such power, and no government would ever grant such a thing.
Who has a clearer and more principled approach? Moscow argues for the integrity of the Ukraine as one state, but this is almost absurd when the best part of it is now in Russia. DC, Brussels, and Berlin argue for the integrity of the Ukraine, including the Donbass and the Crimea. Who is more logical?
Doesn’t Russia fare better when taking a strong and clear stand? Consider the war with Georgia. Moscow said killing peacekeepers and civilians Russia was protecting was not OK. After mopping up, Moscow said Abkhazia and South Ossetia were now off-limits to Georgia and recognized them. And the one clear thing that Moscow has done in the whole Ukrainian affair is protect and incorporate the Crimea. Besides being clear about it, Moscow argued that it was a matter of principle and that NATO can stuff it. What principles does Moscow want to apply in the Ukraine now?
Paul II
Well, your post has some very interesting news. Krimea has gone from being a useless backwater tourist trap with crumbling infrastructure to ‘the most valuable part of Ukraine’. I had no idea this island was that important, qualifying that statement with except for our Navy base in Sevastopol.
You need to read up a bit on the history of this island and it’s most important city, Sevastopol, and how the original gift of it’s administration to Ukraine SSR ( a country which no longer exists) was done, that event being totally against SSSR law as there was no referendum about the change by the citizens, no law passed by the various government entities and the event was done even before the obligatory Politburo rubber stamp. Since the event was illegal it is not valid and should not be and is not recognized by the citizens.
I am not going to waste the time of going through and negating each point you made but I will argue that the current government in Kiev is not legitimate and is the result of a violent and bloody coup d’etat staged against the EU and UN adjudged legally elected government of Ukraine, this done with the open support and connivance of the Government of the United States of America, various European governments and the EU itself. Was the Yanukovich government corrupt? Absolutely and to the very core, as was the Yushenko, Kuchma and Kravchuk governments before Yanuk’s turn. A pox on the lot of them.
However, for whatever reason the aforementioned foreign governments decided to remove the legal government of Ukraine and replace it with not only an illegal government but one that is avowedly Nazi in concept and application. Don’t even bother to argue the ‘nazi’ point, when there are literally hundreds of photos extant of members of the Armed Forces of Ukraine giving the stiff arm salute, using patently Nazi and SS unit symbols and conducting funerals for their fallen ‘heroes’ in German Nazi Regime uniforms and even medals one could have no other conclusion but to know it is a Nazi government. I won’t bother to mention the large numbers of Ukraine Armed Forces members who have the swastika on their helmets, lots of photos of that little foible, too.
In summation, your arguments are specious. You have a cavalier view of the events that led to a full scale civil war in Ukraine and the severing of ties of Krimea and Sevastopol to Ukraine. When the citizens of Novorossiya, then Donbas, first expressed qualms about the events in Kiev and asked for discussions their expressions were instantly met with violence and the deaths of citizens of Donbas. What would you do in such a situation, stand there and say ‘please shoot me’ or would you raid the Militsiya weapons (generally with the open assistance of Militsiya) rooms, arm up and fight back.
When very serious threats of violence and death were made to Sevastopol and Krimea (for your information two separate entities) the citizens did not wait for confirmation of these threats, they immediately armed up and secured their homes, their villages and towns, their peninsula.
Has this peninsula and this city suffered from their stance and actions? Yes they have and will continue to suffer for a decade and more. Compared to what Novorossiya and her citizens have suffered it is nothing, nothing more than a before dawn ten second summer shower.
Auslander
I know all your points and am on your side. I am saying that the story for the US is more consistent than that for Russia. Moscow cannot recognize that Poroshenko and his government are legitimate and then act like they aren’t. Either it was a Nazi coup or it wasn’t. The Kremlin says it wasn’t. You cannot incorporate the Crimea into Russia and then say that you want a “complete and whole” Ukraine. To me, Moscow’s approach has been unclear. Perhaps it seems clear and logical inside Russia when talking to Russians, but from abroad, it seems somewhat contradictory. But maybe you disagree – just separate the emotional angle and consider the actual actions.
And the Crimea is the military key to the Black Sea. If Russia had lost that, it would have been bad news indeed. Tourism isn’t what this war is about.
Thank goodness we Westerners all live in representative parliamentary democracies, whose government policies always exactly reflect the desires of the majority of citizens.
NOT.
In reality neither EU or the US are democraces. EU is led by non-elected bureaucrats, and US is led by a plutocracy (ref. to the recent Princeton study)
Russian envoy: Progress at Minsk talks insufficient for resolving Donbass security issues
Russian Politics & Diplomacy June 03, 11:35 UTC+3
According to Russia’s Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe, “the array of problems in the political sphere is still there”
Silhouette of a child with an inscription # 101 (the number of children killed in the conflict in Donbass), on the wall in Donetsk airport
Silhouette of a child with an inscription # 101 (the number of children killed in the conflict in Donbass), on the wall in Donetsk airport © Mikhail Sokolov/TASS
MOSCOW, June 3. /TASS/. Lack of progress in the work of the Contact Group on the settlement in eastern Ukraine does not allow so far to expect a speedy solution to the problems with the political reforms in the country and security in the Donbass region, Russia’s Ambassador to the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) Alexander Lukashevich said at a meeting of the organization’s Permanent Council on the situation in Ukraine. The text of his speech has been posted on the website of the Russian Foreign Ministry on Friday.
“Progress at the talks in Minsk within the Contact Group and its working subgroups is clearly insufficient for expecting a speedy solution to the key security issues and political reforms in Ukraine,” he said. “The Ukrainian side stubbornly refuses to honor its obligations under the Package of Measures.”
Therefore, “the array of problems in the political sphere is still there,” the diplomat added.
READ ALSO
Donbass leaders: Kiev has to coordinate all steps with DPR, LPR as part of Minsk deal
Self-proclaimed Donetsk republic to start mass issuance of passports soon
Kremlin denies that Russia agreed with plans to deploy police mission in Donbass
Donbass self-proclaimed republics do not want military contingents in their territories
Kiev’s statements on arming OSCE mission hinder talks
According to Lukashevich, Kiev’s unilateral statements calling to arm members of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) Special Monitoring Mission in Ukraine frustrate talks.
“Unilateral statements and propaganda ‘attacks’ not only significantly worsen conditions of the SMM’s work but also frustrate the negotiating process,” Lukashevich said at the OSCE Permanent Council’s meeting in Vienna on Thursday, according to the Russian Foreign Ministry.
The diplomat reminded that in his recent statement deputy chief of Ukraine’s presidential administration Konstantin Eliseyev said Russia has allegedly backed plans for the deployment of a police mission in Donbass. “In an attempt to mistake the wish for the reality, he misinterprets the content of the Package of Measures, distorts the agreements of leaders of the Normandy Four on a scheme of further consultations,” he said.
Moscow calls on Kiev to be cautious about statements on arming members of the SMM or any police mission. “All issues concerning the Donbass elections, including their security, should be solved as part of the Contact Group with the Donbass representatives,” Lukashevich stressed.
Direct dialogue between Kiev and Donbass
The diplomat has stressed that only direct dialogue between Kiev and the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Lugansk republics can facilitate peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis.
READ ALSO
More than 9,300 killed in Donbass conflict since April 2014 — UN
“The imperative of the peaceful settlement of the Ukrainian crisis is direct dialogue between the sides in the Ukrainian conflict. Other formats – bilateral formats, ‘Normandy Quartet’ (Russia, Germany, France, Ukraine) – should facilitate searching for constructive resolutions but cannot and should not substitute for it,” Lukashevich said at the session of the OSCE Permanent Council on the situation in Ukraine. “In the end, precisely Kiev, Donetsk and Lugansk – not Moscow, Berlin, Paris or Washington – should find a way to co-exist in one state,” he noted.
Lukashevich also touched upon the issue of border control. Ukraine repeatedly refused to discuss preparations for local election in Donbass citing low security in the region and demanding control over border with Russia, though this should happen only after local elections. In this regard, the diplomat reminded that restoring Kiev’s control over the border “is one of the last stages of implementation of the Package of measures, which is preceded by comprehensive political settlement in the form of a constitutional reform.”
More:
http://tass.ru/en/politics/879896
This was explained Kiev journalist Vyacheslav Pikhovshek, assuring that the fact that it became known from reliable sources. One of the reasons referred to the behavior of the Metropolitan of Kiev, who a year ago demonstratively refused to stand up in Parliament during the speech of President of Ukraine Poroshenko, glory to the heroes of so-called “TAU”.
Now the political environment Poroshenko tries to bring about a radical turn in the policy of official Kyiv against the Ukrainian Orthodox Church His Beatitude Metropolitan Onuphrius. The peculiarity of this radical change that Poroshenko offered to document: the current UOC MP is allegedly a threat to national security of Ukraine, and the main task of the state is to create “a single local church.”
Hard to say, about which the documents in question. Pikhovshek admits that something is prepared by the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, and perhaps a section or chapter in his annual address to parliament Poroshenko, a formal decree on the preparation of which he published March 12. This will be a large-scale provocation in any case.
“Poroshenko is pushed to a serious conflict with the Ukrainian Orthodox Church in the mistaken belief that” now it is time to do away with it “, which is obviously done by people under the influence of demons … I just can not imagine how then can we talk about peace in the East of Ukraine, when a serious blow will be inflicted on the feelings of believers. Feeling a deep rejection of the official policy of Kiev will increase “, – predicts a Ukrainian journalist.”
http://www.anna-news.info/node/58641
google translate yup Moscow Church is a terrorist threat to ukraine it believes.
Member of National Assembly of France – a resolution against anti-Russian sanctions, which will be discussed in the Senate of the Republic on June 8 failing Kiev Minsk agreements and the mood in the EU
– Mr Mariani, in late April, you initiated a resolution in the French National Assembly (lower house), which was adopted. What can you say about the document that your colleagues from the Senate – Yves Pozzo di Borgo and Simon Syutur – will put to the vote on June 8?
– First of all, this is very good news. After six days, a document similar to the provisions for which I had previously initiated in the National Assembly, will be considered in the upper house of parliament. I want to congratulate Mr di Borgo, who I know very well, he was with us in the Crimea, as well as several times in the last year was Russia, with this event. In my opinion, the vote in the Senate will be very interesting, because, of course, as my resolution, the current also is a recommendation, the government has the right to do anything. However, as you know, in France there are two chambers of parliament – the National Assembly and the Senate. If both chambers vote against the extension of sanctions will be a shock for me, if the government does not take this into account.
– I’m sure you discussed with Mr. di Borgo situation in Ukraine and the subsequent deterioration of Franco-Russian relations. What is his opinion on this matter?
– As I said, Mr. di Borgo is my friend, our views coincide. Namely – that sanctions are useless. You know the official position of France: the restrictive measures contribute to the implementation of the Minsk agreements. But what we see in reality? Until now, the Verkhovna Rada has not carried out any reforms envisaged in the agreement, “Minsk-2″. That is why we are in favor of the lifting of sanctions against Russia. Sorry, but if you think logically, there are two exits. Firstly, it is necessary to cancel the anti-Russian sanctions, and the second – to impose sanctions against Ukraine. Because now Kiev shows disrespect without performing the Minsk agreements. At the same time the main responsibility lies with the Ukrainian side.
– What are the chances that the Senate will approve a resolution on June 8?
– The probability of this is high…………..I do not know what will be the official position of our country. First you need to wait for a vote in the Senate, and then see whether the government’s position change. I think, June 8, it becomes clear what to expect on a pan-European meeting in Brussels. ”
extract from long article
http://www.anna-news.info/node/58661
google translate.
later
‘France’s Senate will vote on the resolution on the easing of anti-Russia sanctions on June 8. According to French lawmakers, the bill was met with almost unanimous support in the Senate Committee for the European Affairs.
“[The Verkhovna Rada] urges French Senate to prevent the adoption of a resolution that can be seen by the Russian Federation as the weakening of the EU unified position regarding unacceptability and condemnation of Moscow unlawful actions on the international arena,” the Ukrainian resolution said.
In April, the National Assembly, France’s lower house of parliament, supported a resolution calling to lift the sanctions imposed on Russia.”
http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/ukraine-parliament-pleads-french-senate-not-lift-sanctions-russia/ri14775
a minor confusion
“Rider has win taken away because the rest of the peloton went the wrong way
Stuart Clarke June 2, 2016
74
shares
Ukrainian rider is the only one to go the right way at the Tour of Ukraine but a protest sees the result wiped out and a new 5km race is started
image: http://keyassets.timeincuk.net/inspirewp/live/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2016/06/Cj4BvR-WgAAvbWw.jpg_large-630×420.jpg
Cj4BvR-WgAAvbWw.jpg_large
Riders before the restarted race (Photo: Twitter/@peloton.by)
You wait six years for a victory and then a mistake by the commissaires sees that hard earned success taken away.
Such was the ridiculous situation at the Tour of Ukraine on Wednesday when local rider Oleksander Sheydyk was the only rider to cross the line, after the rest of the peloton went the wrong way inside the final 20km.
>>> Bob Jungels sent the wrong way while leading stage three in Valencia (video)
Rather than let the result stand, the commissaire offered to cancel the stage or to have a 5km lap to decide the placings. Many of the teams decided to ride the 5km, but Sherydyk’s team boycotted the contest, along with several others.
The commissaire reportedly said that there were no cars, volunteers or even signs to show the riders which way they should go to the finish line. Team Kuota tweeted that the rules state that the riders should know the way they are going, adding that they disagreed with the jury’s decision to restart a shortened race.
>>> Watch: Peloton misses turning at Tour of Alberta, gifting Hansen the win
Siarhey Papok, the rider who eventually led the lost bunch over the line for ‘second’ place in the first race, took the win in the restart and also went on to win Thursday’s stage in a sprint.
The organisers were in hot water again later that evening as one rider, Fabio Calabria, tweeted the UCI complaining of no hot water in the hotel and that some riders were turned away from dinner without food.
Read more at http://www.cyclingweekly.co.uk/news/racing/rider-win-taken-away-officials-send-rest-peloton-wrong-way-231753#zQvMdG2UWPKeoMYC.99
Rebuff for Chancellor Angela Merkel at the G7: the US, Japan and Canada have rejected any further admission of refugees. Financial grants were also excluded. The war, being the most important cause of flight, was not even discussed.
The idea of Angela Merkel and the EU, to become more involved in the refugee crisis, was rejected by the US, Canada and Japan. Chancellor Angela Merkel had to acknowledge that concrete commitments were made at the G7 summit in Japan, to raise more funds for the refugee crisis and for the assimilation of additional migrants. “I do not expect concrete numbers,” Merkel said on Thursday in the Japanese Ise-Shima. However, something has to start internationally, she added, referring to the UN emergency summit earlier this week in Istanbul. However, this had brought no tangible results apart from fine words.
The G7 states would have agreed that “we must do everything possible to combat the causes of flight,” Merkel said. The refugee crisis is one of the issues to be on the agenda of the seven major industrial countries during their ongoing summit, lasting until Friday.
At the beginning of the Tunis meeting, European Council President Donald Tusk had directed the demand towards the G7 “that the international community has to show solidarity and to recognize that this is a global crisis”. Tusk, participating as EU representative, said, the G7 would have to increase their assistance to refugees and to host countries such as Turkey, Lebanon and Jordan. Also international financial institutions would have to increase their funds. But none of the parties, called to aid seemed ready for concrete commitments, as Merkel had to concede on Friday.
The main causes of flight – namely in the Syria conflict and in the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya – were apparently not put in mandatory context with the movement of refugees.
The fact that the 7 supposedly most powerful states of the world should not be able to put an end to the activities of the IS and other mercenary militias in the Middle East, can really only be explained by the lack of will of the states. Currently, the Russians are in fact the only ones to support Syria in its fight against international mercenaries and Islamic militias.
All the more disconcerting is the fact that the G7 want to see Russia further excluded from their circle. Obviously, the Americans have brought the EU into line in this context: Merkel announced the sanctions against Russia to be preserved.
But the G7 are running the risk of being sent into isolation themselves, which they really would like to see the Russians in. The Russians have not even taken note of the summit.
Instead of acting as a bridge builder in view of international tensions, the G7 are eager to antagonize China as well: Despite protests from Beijing towards the G7, to stay out of territorial disputes in the East and South China Sea, the group starts to interfere in the conflict. “We have the common position to resolve the conflict peacefully,” Merkel said. Also there was agreement that international institutions “are legitimized here,” Merkel said at the arbitration court in The Hague, which is expected to decide on China’s claims in June. Beijing does not want to accept the verdict.
“The G7 should better deal with their own problems, instead of interfering in the affairs of other countries,” said Foreign Ministry spokeswoman in Beijing.”
https://southfront.org/embarrassment-for-merkel-western-powers-reject-assimilation-of-refugees/
“Postscript with Alexei Pushkov” – one of the leading analytical programs of Russian television. PS is dedicated to the most important events in the country and abroad.
The program of prominent Russian and foreign policy repeatedly took part: Yevgeny Primakov, Sergei Stepashin, Gennady Seleznev, Igor Ivanov, Grigory Yavlinsky, Yuri Luzhkov, Patriarch of Moscow and All Russia Alexiy II, the Condoleezza Rice, Henry Kissinger, George Robertson, Zoran Djindjic and other .
The program is popular and respected among influential political and business elite of Russia and the CIS. Every Saturday, tens of millions of viewers, which is the most active part of the population, given their preference for PS and its author and presenter Alexei Pushkov.”
programme
http://frontinfo.info/?p=7443
———————————————
One by one countries in Eastern Europe and Ukraine are launching projects decommunisation. Authorities promise to rid the population from severe, as it seems, the Soviet legacy. Under loud slogans destroyed not only all that is associated with the Soviet Union, but also of modern Russia. Chopping off the roots. Even Russian names in the Baltic States are trying to do is illegal.”
programme
“Evroamneziya”. Film Alexander Buzaladze
http://frontinfo.info/?p=7469
—————————————————
( a rambling comment, my apologies). One wild card in all this: the establishment of a Palestinian state. A number of days back, I was reading a Lavrov speech or interview and unprompted, he mentioned a two state solution for the Israeli-Palestine conflict.
[this is why I love following all of Lavrov’s public talks. He could be participating in the opening of an animal shelter in Vladivostok, and casually drop a revealing geopolitical comment. You just never know with him!]
Between Lavrov, Steinmeier, OSCE and the Russian Foreign Ministry, there is a new phrase in use — resolving or addressing the ’causes of terrorism’. This appears to refer to resolving the Israeli-Palestine conflict. In a two-state kind of way. Touché.
By the way, Mercouris wrote an interesting article about Germany for the Duran, posted today. He reminds us that Steinmeier is connected to Gerhard Schroeder. Mercouris speculates that Steinmeier is positioning himself to become leader of SPD party. This explains his independence, which I had also noticed. He seems to be separating himself from both Merkel and the CIA mouthpieces in the govt.
Here it is:
http://theduran.com/merkel-weakens-eu-sanctions-unity-cracks/
Mod
I had caught myself thinking, “Steinmeier seems to be a patriot, who’s willing to think internationally, and these others are just speaking USA, USA, USA.” I don’t suppose he’d deliberately create that impression, would he?? :-)
Maybe in the shadows, behind all this, Schroeder, Putin and unknown others are making a move on Israel. What do you know, Russia seems to be “Israel-firsters” too!!
And I think China’s in on this too. At tge moment, I can’t remember what I saw or where I saw something suggested that.
As I understand it, Russia made exactly zero commitments under the Minsk accords (except the usual diplomatic support). Hence, Russia should simply state that it had fulfilled and kept all its obligations at signature time. Immediately after such statement should follow a recitation of the entire Minsk II accord. Western media will turn the speaker off. Hence, the statements should be delivered in a posture that any cut will be blatantly obvious to anyone.
Eric always does a good job, but i disagree with the notion that Saddam was Russia’s ally. If you want to see the reasons why I think so read my comment under this article which was cross posted on Washington’s Blog. Would have put comment here, but saw article on WB first. Sorry for no link I am not very computer literate. Just google and look for this article, which is on second page now.
P.S. I am surprised no other commentator here has commented on this!
G7 is a private club…
Nothing new, this is what you can expect from mass murdering satanic s***s: when they murder people without any regret, then what makes anyone think that they would not lie? They point one finger at Russia, and 3 fingers back at themselves. And it matters *not* what they say, it only matters what the USG does, namely biden (not really obummer, I think he offloaded it to biden long ago). The USG acts similarly to the way hitler did: he publicly told his brown shirts to stop beating up people, but of course, they just carried on doing so, because hitler told them privately to ignore what he had said publicly.
1) Why can clear, concise, well-reasoned analyses like this one absolutely NEVER appear in the mainstream American media? Granted, it departs from the official government contrived narrative, but whatever happened to dissent? There is functionally no free speech, whatever the constitution may say, if dissent is stifled.
2) It’s not Russia escalating the violence in Ukraine that the West has to worry about. I suppose Russia will tolerate this status quo as long as it has to if it keeps them out of total war with NATO. The bad actors to be concerned about are the right wing militias and hard core neofascists in the Ukrainian power structure that seem itching to stage another coup and overthrow Poroshenko, for the very purpose of starting a war with Russia. They think if they start something (just as Poland, the Baltics and a few other fanatical countries of Eastern Europe wanting revenge against Russia for centuries of dispute seem primed to do) that NATO will ride to their rescue and crush Russia in a major war. The fools seem to think they would be left standing to do their happy dance. Talk about drinking the NATO Kool Ade! This statement by the G7 only encourages that lunatic faction in Ukraine and greases the skids towards World War III, after which all these disputes will be besides the point. The cockroaches will sort it all out.