-
Hayastan or Bust. -
Re: Ukraine
WOW
Hayastan or Bust.Comment
-
Hayastan or Bust.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
Generally I would consider parading prisoners ( which is against the Geneva convention)Originally posted by Haykakan View Post
a sense of desperation to gain any propaganda value possible,
however sympathetic to their cause one might be.
.Politics is not about the pursuit of morality nor what's right or wrong
Its about self interest at personal and national level often at odds with the above.
Great politicians pursue the National interest and small politicians personal interestsComment
-
Re: Ukraine
Yes i agree treating prisoners with some dignity is important. While this story gets some attention hardly anyone talks about the Ukrainian army shelling civilian homes, schools, residential buildings.. Media is one dimensional and will make you feel bad for the criminal and make the victim seem like the oppressor if it so chooses.Originally posted by londontsi View PostHayastan or Bust.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
NATO chief eyes more bases in E. Europe to confront Russia
Published time: August 27, 2014 09:54
Edited time: August 27, 2014 11:57 Get short URL
NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen (Reuters/Laurent Dubrule)NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen (Reuters/Laurent Dubrule)
1.5K2272
Trends
Russia-NATO relations
Tags
Air Force, Arms, Europe, France, Germany, Military, Moscow, NATO, Politics, Robert Bridge, Russia, Security, USA, Ukraine, War
Under the pretext of an 'overt' Russian threat, NATO is pushing for a ‘readiness action plan’ that will bring the Cold War military bloc closer to Russian borders than ever - even despite objections from some NATO members.
NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said the 28-nation military bloc, which meets next week in Cardiff, Wales, would attempt to overcome internal opposition and agree to the deployment of military bases near the Russian border.
Two NATO warships heading to Black Sea
Amid the ongoing Ukrainian conflict, which is fracturing the country along east-west ideological lines, NATO is preparing to install for the first time military “reception facilities” in Eastern European countries, including Poland and the three Baltic countries: Lithuania, Estonia and Latvia.
"We have something already called the NATO response force, whose purpose is to be able to be deployed rapidly if needed,” Rasmussen said in an interview with several European newspapers. “Now it's our intention to develop what I would call a spearhead within that response force at very, very, high readiness. In order to be able to provide such rapid reinforcements you also need some reception facilities in host nations. So it will involve the pre-positioning of supplies, of equipment, preparation of infrastructure, bases, headquarters.”
British Foreign Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs William Hague (L) and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen (R) unveil the logo for the upcoming NATO summit in Wales during a family photo of NATO Foreign Affairs ministers at the NATO headquarters in Brussels on June 25, 2014. (AFP Photo)British Foreign Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs William Hague (L) and NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen (R) unveil the logo for the upcoming NATO summit in Wales during a family photo of NATO Foreign Affairs ministers at the NATO headquarters in Brussels on June 25, 2014. (AFP Photo)
The bottom line, according to the NATO chief, is that there will be “a more visible NATO presence in the east.”
Asked whether there would be permanent NATO presence in Eastern Europe, he said, "The brief answer is ‘yes’. To prevent misunderstanding, I use the phrase 'for as long as necessary'. Our eastern allies will be satisfied when they see what is actually in the readiness action plan."
Rasmussen, whose term expires on September 30, said the new NATO forces in Eastern Europe could be “deployed within hours.”
Needless to say, NATO's militarization of the region will not sit well with Moscow, which has watched with increasing alarm since the collapse of the Soviet Union - despite pledges from the Western military bloc not to expand further east - as NATO continues its march towards Russia's western border.
Currently, the Polish port city of Szczecin, which military experts anticipate will serve as one of NATO’s new “reception facilities,” represents NATO’s easternmost military presence.
Ironically, NATO’s latest enlargement plans are being opposed not just by Russia, but by its very members, some of whom do not see the point in aggravating tensions with Moscow.
It should come as no surprise that the United States and the United Kingdom, distant as they are from any potential fireworks on the European-Russian border, favor a military escalation in Eastern Europe. Other major NATO members, however, including France, Spain and Italy, have expressed serious reservations to the plans.
Meanwhile, Germany, NATO’s second strongest member, remains uncommitted to the expansion plans.
This should come as no surprise considering the recent deterioration in relations between Washington and Berlin.
Paratroopers from the U.S. Army's 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team participate in training exercises with the Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers at the Land Forces Training Centre in Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland, May 1, 2014. (Reuters/Kacper Pempel)Paratroopers from the U.S. Army's 173rd Infantry Brigade Combat Team participate in training exercises with the Polish 6 Airborne Brigade soldiers at the Land Forces Training Centre in Oleszno near Drawsko Pomorskie, north west Poland, May 1, 2014. (Reuters/Kacper Pempel)
Germany was forced to take a critical new look at its powerful American partner following Edward Snowden’s shocking NSA revelations, which showed massive US and UK spying on German citizens. Even Chancellor Angela Merkel’s personal mobile phone was caught up in the international surveillance net.
Remarkably, Rasmussen asserted that Russia “does not consider NATO a partner,” when it was NATO that flat-out refused Russian participation in the controversial US missile defense system, also planned for Eastern Europe. Such cooperation, had it been given the green light, would have sealed the so-called reset between the two Cold War-era foes, bringing to end years of mutual suspicion and antagonism. Instead, the US and NATO opted to keep Russia on the sidelines, ensuring nothing less than another full-blown arms race.
Speaking on the subject of Crimea’s decision to hold a referendum to join the Russian Federation under the threat of military attack by pro-Kiev forces, Rasmussen commented that “nobody had expected Russia to grab land by force.”
At the same time, the outgoing NATO chief reiterated claims – surprisingly without providing any sort of unassailable proof, in this age of advanced surveillance equipment - that Russia is actively participating in the Ukrainian upheaval.
"We have seen artillery firing across the border and also inside Ukraine. We have seen a Russian military buildup along the border. Quite clearly, Russia is involved in destabilizing eastern Ukraine … You see a sophisticated combination of traditional conventional warfare mixed up with information and primarily disinformation operations. It will take more than NATO to counter such hybrid warfare effectively," Rasmussen was quoted as saying.
NATO officials, however, have admitted their intelligence is not perfect.
"We can only watch from 23 miles (37km) up," one official told the Guardian.
Ukrainian servicemen rest in the shade next to an armoured vehicle topped with a Ukrainian flag as they take up a position near the eastern city of Debaltceve, in the region of Donetsk, on July 30, 2014. (AFP Photo/Genya Savilov)Ukrainian servicemen rest in the shade next to an armoured vehicle topped with a Ukrainian flag as they take up a position near the eastern city of Debaltceve, in the region of Donetsk, on July 30, 2014. (AFP Photo/Genya Savilov)
Ukraine's President Petro Poroshenko is to attend the NATO summit, where the 28-member bloc has prepared four ‘trust funds’ to finance Ukraine's military logistics, command structures, and cyber defense forces, and to pay overdue military pensions.
Yet somehow Rasmussen was able to say of Russia’s embattled neighbor.
"Ukraine follows its own path…It is actually what we will decide to do at the summit, to help them build the capacity of their security sector, modernize it," he said.
Meanwhile, it looks as if Rasmussen will be passing around the proverbial hat during next week’s summit, looking to collect more money from NATO members, even as their own countries are facing economic turmoil amid IMF-enforced austerity measures.
"Since the end of the Cold War we have lived in relatively good weather. Now we are faced with a profound climate change. That requires more investment," said the NATO chief.
It will be interesting to see how many member states take up this latest challenge, which threatens to ratchet up European-Russian tensions to levels not seen since the Cold War.
Meanwhile, there is no question as to how Russia views NATO's relentless eastward encroachment.
“No matter what our Western counterparts tell us, we can see what’s going on," President Putin said in July at an emergency Security Council meeting in Moscow. "As it stands, NATO is blatantly building up its forces in Eastern Europe, including the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea areas. Its operational and combat training activities are gaining in scale.”
Putin stated that NATO’s military build-up near Russia’s border, which includes the US-built missile defense system, is not just for defensive purposes, but is an “offensive weapon” and an “element of the US offensive system deployed outside the mainland.”Hayastan or Bust.Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
Looks like things are escalating. Porky Petro has accused Russia of 'invading' Ukraine...With just 1000 troops..
Looks like he is just trying to upscale the army's public image with the people after suffering such a defeat...
Armenians have fought and died on both sides of this silly conflict..Such a shame...Armenian colony of Glendale will conquer all of California!Comment
-
Re: Ukraine
High price for ceasefire in eastern Ukraine
The Kremlin will have achieved its goals - for the time being - if there is a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine. But it wouldn’t mean the end of the conflict, writes DW’s Ingo Mannteufel.
All signs point to a change of course in Ukraine. After a phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko mentioned an agreement of a ceasefire in eastern Ukraine. Details and the roadmap to a possible truce remain unclear for now, however. There are contradictory signals coming from Kyiv, Moscow and the regions controlled by separatists. It would be great news for the local population if the fighting did indeed stop. But a ceasefire would have fundamental political consequences for the months of conflict in Ukraine.
A new frozen conflict
A permanent end of fighting would mean victory in this conflict for the separatists who are supported by Russia. They would cement their power in the controlled areas and could increase it further. That's the goal in Putin's seven-point-plan on solving the conflict. That would turn the situation in eastern Ukraine into a new "frozen conflict," of which there have been several in the post-Soviet area for the past 25 years: in Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia, and Nagorno-Karabakh.
To Russian policymakers, those "frozen conflicts" are familiar territory and indeed ultimately very welcome. Russian interests can be defended in endless diplomatic negotiations via such proxy structures. And Russia can exert its influence on domestic policies in the concerned countries.
Tough power politics is what guides this strategy. Russia lost its most important political ally in Kyiv - Ukraine's President Yanukovich and the pro-Russian party of the regions - in the "Euromaidan" revolution which culminated in February. Since then, it has become clear that the Kremlin will use other means to influence Ukraine's political future. A ceasefire - which President Putin has called for repeatedly over recent weeks - would mean a secret victory for his Ukraine strategy.
Poroshenko, a loser
The fact that Ukraine's Poroshenko seems ready to accept a ceasefire is understandable after recent days' events: the losses of Ukrainian government forces and the land gains made by the separatists, who seem to be supported even by regular army units from Russia, appear to have made Poroshenko realize that the military solution to the conflict he has been aiming for since late June has failed. The additional front line opened by Russia near Mariupol in the very south of the Donetsk region has increased pressure on Kyiv.
If there was a ceasefire, the bloodshed would end at last. But politically, Poroshenko and his government would take a high risk, just ahead of the parliamentary elections scheduled for October. Many Ukrainians would feel offended, resenting the ceasefire and the resulting de facto capitulation. That is particularly true for the many nationalist voluntary units who have seen big losses in their own ranks over recent days. It's hard to imagine that those forces, politically difficult to control, will follow the political logic of a ceasefire. Intense domestic tensions would be the result. In the elections, radical parties could make significant gains. A partisan war in eastern Ukraine can also not be excluded.
Another loser
The European Union, and above all Germany, have pushed for an end to the fighting for weeks, campaigning for a political solution. But if the situation turns into a frozen conflict there is a risk that parts of the Ukrainian society will turn their backs on Europe. For weeks, Ukrainians heard rumors of a deal between Berlin and Moscow, according to which Poroshenko would end the fighting, and virtually hand over Donetsk and Luhansk to the separatists. Many Ukrainians therefore feel betrayed by the EU and especially by Germany.
Several European countries share the impression that the EU's answer to Russian aggression against a neighboring country was not resolute enough. A frozen conflict in eastern Ukraine would cause long-lasting aftershocks in the European Union. Relations with Russia and with Ukraine are probably strained for years. Europe will not be able to return to the status quo before the conflict.Last edited by londontsi; 09-04-2014, 04:22 AM.Politics is not about the pursuit of morality nor what's right or wrong
Its about self interest at personal and national level often at odds with the above.
Great politicians pursue the National interest and small politicians personal interestsComment
-
Re: Ukraine
Can someone confirm this? I was browsing, and I saw this on wikipedia
This number seems inflated, as the 2001 Census put the Armenians in Ukraine at 99,000. It did say on one page that there are a large amount of guest workers in Ukraine. But this number is new to me and a bit staggering. Are these Armenians from Russia?
Armenian colony of Glendale will conquer all of California!Comment
-
Hayastan or Bust.Comment
Tweet
Comment