“Russia made a decision to halt its participation in meetings of the consulting group from March 11, 2015. Thus, suspension of actions in the CFE declared by Russia in 2007 becomes full,” the statement reads.
The Russian Foreign Ministry added that “NATO countries actually prefer to bypass the provisions of the CFE Treaty by expanding the alliance.”
An “adapted” version of the CFE treaty was signed in 1999, but NATO members refused to ratify it until Russia withdrew troops from Georgia and the breakaway Moldovan region of Transdnestria, a criterion Russia regards as an “artificial linkage.” In December 2007, Russia imposed a unilateral moratorium on the CFE treaty, citing it’s “irrelevance” over NATO’s plans to increase its military presence in Eastern Europe and the alliance’s refusal to ratify the adapted version. In November 2011, NATO member states said they would no longer exchange information on conventional weapons and troops with Russia. In November 2014, Russia suspended the implementation of the CFE Treaty.
“In these circumstances, Russia considers it senseless to continue its participation in the meetings of the JCG [Joint Consultative Group]…for political and practical reasons and unreasonably costly from the financial-economic point of view,” the ministry said citing head of the Russian Delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control.
From day one, [G]ATO practiced aggressive expansion, breaking the treaties they sign from the moment they sign them in full Israeli-American style.
The women of China find him “very handsome and manly…”
And so do many others, all over the world – including many in Europe and America…
Ann, the guys on this forum will no doubt dismiss Putin’s attractiveness to women as unimportant details, but you and I know it’s important in the current info war.
With Nazis rampant in Ukraine, the massacre in Odessa and threats to cleanse Russian ‘Coloradoes’, Russia’s move was the principle of ‘Responsibility to Protect’, applied honestly, for a change, unlike the West’s habitual hypocritical resort to R2P as a cynical excuse for regime change, as in Libya, or aggression, as in Kosovo.
Heard the BBC use this same story to say that Putin had admitted he had planned his annexation of Crimea long in advance.
We know there was no active annexation and Putin here says his first discussion on the subject was on the 22nd (or is it morning 23rd) – just a few days before the parliament of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (yes that really is what it is/was called) voted for the referendum.
All in all – Putin is admitting he left it pretty late, and did practically nothing.
Disagree with your last statement: the Crimea has always been quasi-independent.
He would have done his ‘homework’ and known the situation in Kiev would prompt a ‘quicky divorce’: the sizeable Russian military presence in Sevastopol ensured no bloodshed.
And you can be sure they were good and ready for any Nato ‘help’ for the junta from the Baltic. Sevastopol is far too strategically important to leave to chance.
I remember reading about that poll before the referendum. It occurred to me that it happened very swiftly after the coup, so this news doesn’t surprise. However, the fact that this poll took place so as to learn the will of the residents prior to the referendum only confirms that Putin sincerely believes in international law as the only proper way for nations to relate to each other.
So Putin is showing how he’s playing the game. Seems he wants to give off a clear signal to where Nato have gone. A signal also to the people in the West to seriously start thinking about dumping our governments or else. And of course he would have never risked a referendum without knowing the result beforehand.
It’s been know for many years, that most Crimeans wanted to be reunited with Russia.Which is why when I first heard about the referendum I knew what was coming. It wasn’t just an idea that one day popped out of nowhere.What Putin was doing was confirming that with the poll.Yes,he of course “knew” what the results of a referendum would be,just as I and others that have studied Crimea did.But confirming that before the referendum was the correct thing to do.
I recall that many people who opposed Crimea joining Russia boycotted the referendum, taking the position that they would not participate in what they considered to be an illegal referendum. However, this boycotting tactic backfired. Nobody really gave much weight to their moralistic or legalistic posturing, and what resulted was a skewed excessive majority. Had they participated and cast their negative votes, the percentage of favorable votes would have been maybe significantly lower, assuming the referendum was really fair. I recall that Crimean Tatars boycotted the referendum, and most of them would have voted against joining Russia if they had voted at all.
Also,—I recall reading a screenplay by a Russian who moved out of Crimea as soon as the Ukrainians took over, and the respectful, almost admiring way that the German SS were portrayed
in the story [set in WW II] compared to the Ukrainians, demonstrated that this Russian was already deeming “Ukrainians” to be non-human “orcs” long before the conflict in eastern Ukraine popularized usage of this term and concept concerning Ukrainians.—It was like a suggestion that the forces of Stalin should have joined the forces of Hitler to march together against those horrid Ukrainians.—It was some heavy-duty Ukrainophobia expressed! No wonder, if that was the education about Ukrainians in Donbass and Luhansk, then there would be many Ukrainophobic fanatics in those regions, years before the rise of the Russophobia in Ukraine.—I read that polls taken in Ukraine before the conflict in the eastern regions showed that overall some 80% of the general Ukrainian population had favorable attitudes about Russia and Russians, but currently,
if sources be correct, only some 30%, if even that, have favorable attitudes about Russia.
So look, Ukraine, under Yanukovich, lacking even any military or professional military officers
to speak of, at one point reputedly had only 6000 combat ready personnel for a nation of some
40,000,000, and that was supposed to be a credible threat to Russia or to any country?
I suspect that behind the scenes, there was a predatory grab for land and assets by certain
Russian oligarchs [like Konstantin Malofeev], an effort to ruin the Ukrainian oligarchs of the eastern Ukraine whose man Yanukovich was.—This looks something like perhaps both “West”
and Russia against the middle, against neutral Ukrainian sovereignty.
I don’t think there was much doubt about the leaning and Putin was not about to let the USA’s NATO completely change the geopolitical balance and deny Russia a warm water port and access to the Mediterranean. That and the installation of US missiles in Crimea.
Whether Kruschev followed legalities in giving Crimea away in 1953 might make an interesting discussion.
Crimea wanted out in 1993 and settled for “Autonomous Republic” status when they couldn’t get full independence.
The Nazi’s intent to revoke that status and declare the Sevastopol treaties was and may still be (I haven’t checked recently) proclaimed on Pravy Sektor’s and Svoboda’s websites.
When they got into positions of power, Sevastopol’s mayor and others got the message: “Time to move”.
Russian TV channel “Rossiya 1” will air a documentary with Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking about the developments preceding the referendum on Crimean reunification with Russia on March 16, a statement on the channel’s website said Tuesday.
The film will be aired at 10:10 p.m Moscow time (19:10 GMT).
In the latest trailer of Andrey Kondrashov’s upcoming documentary titled “Crimea. Way Back Home” Putin said that the idea for Crimea’s return appeared after Ukrainian nationalists supported by the West came to power following a military coup.
That Russians would dare disobey the zionazi/nazi freakshow and broadcast this docu has Israel’s “Conchita Wurst” trannies screeching again:
Maja Kocijancic, spokesperson for the EU’s foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, said the European Union is aware of the documentary’s release and reiterates its condemnation of Crimea’s reunion with Russia.
Jen Psaki, the US Department of State spokesperson, said earlier on Tuesday that the film was consistent with Russia’s “deceitful approach” in eastern Ukraine. However, when a journalist asked her to explain what she meant, Psaki answered that she had not actually seen the movie.
34-year-old prosecutor of the Crimea and the favorite of Internet users around the world, Natalia Poklonskaya summarizes the first year of its operation in the high post. Meanwhile, the official has admitted in an interview with Tass, appointment of Attorney Crimea before the referendum on self-determination of the peninsula could cost her her life.
According Poklonsky, threats against her were heard from former colleagues – employees of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine. They regularly phoned the woman and urged to “voluntarily abandon criminal activity,” and then began to threaten violence.
I called, frightened, threatened, told that I sit in jail, that they would kill, tear – was quoted as saying Poklonsky. – What car has already left with riot police, I would be arrested, thrown into the camera. I said that I’d rather sit in the chamber than to serve the Nazis.
That Israeli-American “special” form of democracy, eh. “Do as we tell you, or we kill you or disappear you into some torture chamber for a very long time.”
The video doesn’t say much, but the theory that the Russians took a poll in Crimea to see the mood there turns out to be true.
Other news:
Russia Completely Withdraws From Conventional Armed Forces in Europe Treaty
“Russia made a decision to halt its participation in meetings of the consulting group from March 11, 2015. Thus, suspension of actions in the CFE declared by Russia in 2007 becomes full,” the statement reads.
The Russian Foreign Ministry added that “NATO countries actually prefer to bypass the provisions of the CFE Treaty by expanding the alliance.”
An “adapted” version of the CFE treaty was signed in 1999, but NATO members refused to ratify it until Russia withdrew troops from Georgia and the breakaway Moldovan region of Transdnestria, a criterion Russia regards as an “artificial linkage.” In December 2007, Russia imposed a unilateral moratorium on the CFE treaty, citing it’s “irrelevance” over NATO’s plans to increase its military presence in Eastern Europe and the alliance’s refusal to ratify the adapted version. In November 2011, NATO member states said they would no longer exchange information on conventional weapons and troops with Russia. In November 2014, Russia suspended the implementation of the CFE Treaty.
“In these circumstances, Russia considers it senseless to continue its participation in the meetings of the JCG [Joint Consultative Group]…for political and practical reasons and unreasonably costly from the financial-economic point of view,” the ministry said citing head of the Russian Delegation to the Vienna Negotiations on Military Security and Arms Control.
From day one, [G]ATO practiced aggressive expansion, breaking the treaties they sign from the moment they sign them in full Israeli-American style.
Even in the guardian, the recommends on comments support the fact that Russia annexed Ukraine due to democracy (Referendum).
Putin’s so intense. What a great guy. Nice blue eyes too.
The women of China find him “very handsome and manly…”
And so do many others, all over the world – including many in Europe and America…
Ann, the guys on this forum will no doubt dismiss Putin’s attractiveness to women as unimportant details, but you and I know it’s important in the current info war.
Awesome move! There was absolutely no choice, but how it unfolded was simply beautiful.
With Nazis rampant in Ukraine, the massacre in Odessa and threats to cleanse Russian ‘Coloradoes’, Russia’s move was the principle of ‘Responsibility to Protect’, applied honestly, for a change, unlike the West’s habitual hypocritical resort to R2P as a cynical excuse for regime change, as in Libya, or aggression, as in Kosovo.
Thanks for this.
Heard the BBC use this same story to say that Putin had admitted he had planned his annexation of Crimea long in advance.
We know there was no active annexation and Putin here says his first discussion on the subject was on the 22nd (or is it morning 23rd) – just a few days before the parliament of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea (yes that really is what it is/was called) voted for the referendum.
All in all – Putin is admitting he left it pretty late, and did practically nothing.
Disagree with your last statement: the Crimea has always been quasi-independent.
He would have done his ‘homework’ and known the situation in Kiev would prompt a ‘quicky divorce’: the sizeable Russian military presence in Sevastopol ensured no bloodshed.
And you can be sure they were good and ready for any Nato ‘help’ for the junta from the Baltic. Sevastopol is far too strategically important to leave to chance.
Sorry – I was referring to what he said – in contrast to how it was reported in my papers as an admission of a long term plan to annexe Crimea.
I agree that in fact they were just dusting down one of a set of alternative plans laid out long before. But that is not what he has admitted to.
I remember reading about that poll before the referendum. It occurred to me that it happened very swiftly after the coup, so this news doesn’t surprise. However, the fact that this poll took place so as to learn the will of the residents prior to the referendum only confirms that Putin sincerely believes in international law as the only proper way for nations to relate to each other.
So Putin is showing how he’s playing the game. Seems he wants to give off a clear signal to where Nato have gone. A signal also to the people in the West to seriously start thinking about dumping our governments or else. And of course he would have never risked a referendum without knowing the result beforehand.
It’s been know for many years, that most Crimeans wanted to be reunited with Russia.Which is why when I first heard about the referendum I knew what was coming. It wasn’t just an idea that one day popped out of nowhere.What Putin was doing was confirming that with the poll.Yes,he of course “knew” what the results of a referendum would be,just as I and others that have studied Crimea did.But confirming that before the referendum was the correct thing to do.
I recall that many people who opposed Crimea joining Russia boycotted the referendum, taking the position that they would not participate in what they considered to be an illegal referendum. However, this boycotting tactic backfired. Nobody really gave much weight to their moralistic or legalistic posturing, and what resulted was a skewed excessive majority. Had they participated and cast their negative votes, the percentage of favorable votes would have been maybe significantly lower, assuming the referendum was really fair. I recall that Crimean Tatars boycotted the referendum, and most of them would have voted against joining Russia if they had voted at all.
Also,—I recall reading a screenplay by a Russian who moved out of Crimea as soon as the Ukrainians took over, and the respectful, almost admiring way that the German SS were portrayed
in the story [set in WW II] compared to the Ukrainians, demonstrated that this Russian was already deeming “Ukrainians” to be non-human “orcs” long before the conflict in eastern Ukraine popularized usage of this term and concept concerning Ukrainians.—It was like a suggestion that the forces of Stalin should have joined the forces of Hitler to march together against those horrid Ukrainians.—It was some heavy-duty Ukrainophobia expressed! No wonder, if that was the education about Ukrainians in Donbass and Luhansk, then there would be many Ukrainophobic fanatics in those regions, years before the rise of the Russophobia in Ukraine.—I read that polls taken in Ukraine before the conflict in the eastern regions showed that overall some 80% of the general Ukrainian population had favorable attitudes about Russia and Russians, but currently,
if sources be correct, only some 30%, if even that, have favorable attitudes about Russia.
So look, Ukraine, under Yanukovich, lacking even any military or professional military officers
to speak of, at one point reputedly had only 6000 combat ready personnel for a nation of some
40,000,000, and that was supposed to be a credible threat to Russia or to any country?
I suspect that behind the scenes, there was a predatory grab for land and assets by certain
Russian oligarchs [like Konstantin Malofeev], an effort to ruin the Ukrainian oligarchs of the eastern Ukraine whose man Yanukovich was.—This looks something like perhaps both “West”
and Russia against the middle, against neutral Ukrainian sovereignty.
Total hogwash.
agreed
Agree. Utter nonsense.
Simple inversion of reality and psychological projection. Quite reminiscent of Zionist agit-prop, or the entire Western MSM these days.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_sovereignty_referendum,_1991
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crimean_referendum,_1994
I don’t think there was much doubt about the leaning and Putin was not about to let the USA’s NATO completely change the geopolitical balance and deny Russia a warm water port and access to the Mediterranean. That and the installation of US missiles in Crimea.
Whether Kruschev followed legalities in giving Crimea away in 1953 might make an interesting discussion.
Crimea wanted out in 1993 and settled for “Autonomous Republic” status when they couldn’t get full independence.
The Nazi’s intent to revoke that status and declare the Sevastopol treaties was and may still be (I haven’t checked recently) proclaimed on Pravy Sektor’s and Svoboda’s websites.
When they got into positions of power, Sevastopol’s mayor and others got the message: “Time to move”.
Russian Channel to Air Film With Putin’s Insight on Crimea’s Reunification
Russian TV channel “Rossiya 1” will air a documentary with Russian President Vladimir Putin speaking about the developments preceding the referendum on Crimean reunification with Russia on March 16, a statement on the channel’s website said Tuesday.
The film will be aired at 10:10 p.m Moscow time (19:10 GMT).
In the latest trailer of Andrey Kondrashov’s upcoming documentary titled “Crimea. Way Back Home” Putin said that the idea for Crimea’s return appeared after Ukrainian nationalists supported by the West came to power following a military coup.
That Russians would dare disobey the zionazi/nazi freakshow and broadcast this docu has Israel’s “Conchita Wurst” trannies screeching again:
Maja Kocijancic, spokesperson for the EU’s foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, said the European Union is aware of the documentary’s release and reiterates its condemnation of Crimea’s reunion with Russia.
Jen Psaki, the US Department of State spokesperson, said earlier on Tuesday that the film was consistent with Russia’s “deceitful approach” in eastern Ukraine. However, when a journalist asked her to explain what she meant, Psaki answered that she had not actually seen the movie.
Pathetically gay, as usual.
One year anniversary for “Prosecutie”:
Поклонская: Генпрокуратура Украины угрожала мне тюрьмой и убийством (Poklonskaya: Prosecutor General of Ukraine threatened me with prison and murder)
34-year-old prosecutor of the Crimea and the favorite of Internet users around the world, Natalia Poklonskaya summarizes the first year of its operation in the high post. Meanwhile, the official has admitted in an interview with Tass, appointment of Attorney Crimea before the referendum on self-determination of the peninsula could cost her her life.
According Poklonsky, threats against her were heard from former colleagues – employees of the Prosecutor General of Ukraine. They regularly phoned the woman and urged to “voluntarily abandon criminal activity,” and then began to threaten violence.
I called, frightened, threatened, told that I sit in jail, that they would kill, tear – was quoted as saying Poklonsky. – What car has already left with riot police, I would be arrested, thrown into the camera. I said that I’d rather sit in the chamber than to serve the Nazis.
That Israeli-American “special” form of democracy, eh. “Do as we tell you, or we kill you or disappear you into some torture chamber for a very long time.”
I think my mrs said this was a trailer for part of an hours programme……..trying to find it
but also this
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkS7Fb3-x-k
ex KGB officer defector explains Putins reasons too,with the help of the Russian State Police Choir.
Here’s an extended announce of this documentary: http://sayonaki-tatsu.livejournal.com/2354.html
The whole documentary is to be broadcasted on March 18th AFAIK
apparently full film re Crimea to be released on March 18th.