By Pepe Escobar, posted with permission and first posted at Asia Times.
So Russian President Vladimir Putin, all by himself, and US President Joe Biden, surrounded by aides, finally had their secret video link conference for two hours and two minutes – with translators placed in different rooms.
That was their first serious exchange since they met in person in Geneva last June – the first Russia-US summit since 2018.
For global public opinion, led to believe a “war” in Ukraine was all but imminent, what’s left is essentially a torrent of spin.
So let’s start with a simple exercise focusing on the key issue of the video link – Ukraine -, contrasting the White House and Kremlin versions of what happened.
The White House: Biden made it “clear” to Putin that the US and allies will respond with “decisive economic and other measures” to the military escalation in Ukraine. At the same time, Biden called on Putin to de-escalate around Ukraine and “return to diplomacy”.
Kremlin: Putin offered Biden to nullify all restrictions on the functioning of diplomatic missions. He remarked that cooperation between Russia and the US is still in an “unsatisfactory” state.
He urged the US not to shift “responsibility on the shoulders of Russia” for the escalation of the situation around Ukraine.
The White House: the US will expand military aid to Ukraine if Russia takes steps against it.
Kremlin: Putin told Biden that Russia is interested in obtaining legally fixed guarantees excluding NATO’s eastward expansion and the deployment of offensive strike systems in Russia’s neighboring countries.
The White House: Biden did not give Putin any commitments that Ukraine will remain outside NATO.
Minsk or bust
Now for what really matters: the red line.
What Putin diplomatically told Team Biden, sitting at their table, is that Russia’s red line – no Ukraine on NATO – is unmovable. The same applies to Ukraine turned into a hub of the Pentagon’s Empire of Bases, and hosting NATO weaponry.
Washington may deny it ad infinitum, but Ukraine is part of Russia’s sphere of influence. If nothing is done to force Kiev to abide by the Minsk Agreement, Russia will “neutralize” the threat in its own terms.
The root cause of all this drama, absent from any NATOstan narrative, is straightforward: Kiev simply refuses to respect the February 2015 Minsk Agreement.
According to the deal, Kiev should grant autonomy to Donbass via a constitutional amendment, referred to as “special status”; issue a general amnesty; and start a dialogue with the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.
Over the years, Kiev fulfilled less than zero of these commitments – while the NATOstan media machine kept spinning that Russia was violating Minsk. Russia is not even mentioned (italics mine) in the agreement.
Moscow always respected the Minsk Agreement – which establishes Donbass as an integral, autonomous part of Ukraine. Russia has made it very clear, over and over again, it has no interest whatsoever in promoting regime change in Kiev.
Before the video link, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov remarked, “Putin will listen to Biden’s proposals on Ukraine ‘with great interest.'” Even the White House states Team Biden did not propose for Kiev to obey the Minsk Agreement. So regardless of what Team Biden may have said, Putin, pragmatically, will adopt a “wait and see” approach, and then act accordingly.
In the run up to the video link, maximum hype revolved around Washington seeking to stop Nord Stream 2 if Russia “invades” Ukraine.
What never transpires out of the “invasion” narrative, repeated ad nauseam across NATOstan, is that hawks overseeing an immensely polarized US, corroded from the inside, desperately need a war in what military analyst Andrei Martyanov calls “country 404”, a black hole contiguous to Europe.
The crux of the matter is that imperial European vassals must not have access to Russian energy: only American LNG.
And that’s what led the most extreme Russophobes in Washington to start threatening sanctions on Putin’s inner circle, Russian energy producers, and even disconnecting Russia from SWIFT. All that was supposed to prevent Russia from “invading” Country 404.
Secretary of State Tony Blinken – present at the video link – said a few days ago in Riga that “if Russia invades Ukraine”, NATO will respond “with a range of high impact economic measures.” As for NATO, it’s far from aggressive: just a “defensive” organization.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, in early December, at the OCSE Ministerial Council meeting in Stockholm, was already warning that “strategic stability” in Europe was “rapidly eroding”.
Lavrov said, “NATO refuses to consider our proposals on de-escalation of tensions and prevention of dangerous incidents…On the contrary, the alliance’s military infrastructure is moving closer to Russia’s borders… The nightmarish scenario of military confrontation is returning.”
So no wonder the heart of the matter, for Moscow, is NATO encroachment. The “invasion” narrative is crass fake news sold as fact. Even the CIA’s William Burns admitted that US intel had no intel to “conclude” that Russia will dutifully answer the War Inc. prayers and finally “invade” Ukraine.
Still that did not prevent a German sensationalist rag from presenting the full contours of the Russian blitzkrieg, when the actual story is the US and NATO attempting to push “country 404” to commit suicide by attacking the people’s republics of Donetsk and Lugansk.
That legally binding guarantee
It’s idle to expect the video link to produce practical results. As NATOstan remains mired in concentric crises, the current level of high tension between NATO and Russia is a gift from heaven in terms of maintaining the convenient narrative of an external Slavic evil. It’s also an extra bonus for the military-industrial-intelligence-media-think tank complex.
The tension will continue to simmer without becoming incandescent only if NATO does not expand in any shape or form inside Ukraine. Diplomats in Brussels routinely comment that Kiev will never be accepted as a NATO member. But if things can get worse, they will: Kiev will become one of those NATO special partners, a desperately poor, hungry for territory, rogue actor.
Putin demanding from the US – which runs NATO – a written, legally binding guarantee that the alliance will not advance further eastward towards Russian borders is the game-changer here.
Team Biden cannot possibly deliver: they would be eaten alive by the War Inc. establishment. Putin studied his history and knows that Daddy Bush’s “promise” to Gorbachev on NATO expansion was just a lie. He knows those who run NATO will never commit themselves in writing.
So that allows Putin a full range of options to defend Russian national security. “Invasion” is a joke; Ukraine, rotting from the inside, consumed by fear, loathing, and poverty, will remain in limbo, while Donetsk and Lugansk will be progressively interconnected with the Russian Federation.
There will be no NATO war on Russia – as Martyanov himself has extensively demonstrated NATO wouldn’t last five minutes against Russian hypersonic weapons. And Moscow will be focused on what really matters, geoeconomically and geopolitically: solidifying the Eurasia Economic Union (EAEU) and the Greater Eurasia Partnership.
Great article as always. Unfortunately it looks like the Biden regime is going to double down on stupid again.
On Monday, CIA Director William Burns said US intelligence agencies have not concluded that Putin is planning an invasion of Ukraine, thus contradicting recent US media reports.
OK so all the hype from NATO Jens Stoltenberg and Fogh Rasmussen, including most western MSM that Russia was planning to invade Ukraine, was pure Fake news propaganda.
On Tuesday. Republican Senator Roger Wicker told Fox News:
There is over 200 US Troops in Ukraine right now.
There is absolutely nothing wrong in getting our troops into NATO countries that is allies of ours.
I will not rule out US military Action.
Senator Wicker knows damn well that Ukraine is not part of NATO. So all the later bravado in this interview only refers to attacks on NATO Nations.
I hope the president keeps that option on the table, in the event that he has agreed with President Putin to reverse his mistake on Nord-Stream2 – If that is what came out of the discussion today – .
So Biden made the “mistake” to accept the commissioning of Nord-Stream 2 during the conference.
Military action could mean that we stand off with our ships in the Black Sea and rain destruction on Russian military capability. I would not rule out American Troops on the ground, and we don’t rule out First use nuclear Action.
Her wicker is still concentrating on Attacks on NATO Nations, and non of his propaganda bravado refers to Ukraine, because Ukraine is not part of NATO.
I support Democrats who say we need to be tougher. We have a fear in Congress that losing a free democratic Ukraine to a Russian Invasion would be a Game changer for a free Europe.
Is the Senator threatening to invade and occupy Europe, if Ukraine is invaded by Russia?
That would indeed be a game changer for a free Europe.
On Wednesday, President Biden told reporters that he is not considering sending troops to Ukraine, if Russia invades Ukraine. “That is not on the table,” Biden said.
OK So Biden will not send US troops into Ukraine even if Russia invades Ukraine.
President Biden noted that Ukraine is not a member of NATO and has no security guarantees from the US or NATO. “We have a legal obligation to our NATO allies if they were to attack under Article 5.
That obligation does not extend to Ukraine,” he said.
Ok so here we finally have the reality. Ukraine has no guarantees of military support from the US or NATO.
Next we have to excuse Biden for his dementia: NATO is not allowed to attack under article 5.
NATO is bound by article 5 to defend of any NATO Nation being attacked by non NATO Nations.
Signs to look for:
Evacuation of NAZI stooges via Kiev airport.
German Court accepts the registration of NS-2 AG in Germany.
Score Putin vs Biden: 4-0
A valid summation of that meeting. Whereby USA and Nato have been neutered. They will bleat and stomp around. Ukraine will react from within. However USA was brilliantly blindsided by the Russia, India agreement. A chess move that has created an inevitable checkmate on the neocons. Yes a war is imminent, but the entire world now sees that truely the empire has no clothes.
@Pat. Agree. The US probably wasn’t expecting the India Russia deal, with Putin Lavrov and Shoigu all arriving in person….
Here’s what particularly got missed:
The US is running about screeching it’ll cut Russia from SWIFT…..
Meanwhile, hours before the Putin TeamBrandon zoom, >>>>
Russia, India abandon US dollar in mutual settlements
Alexander Mikheev, Director General of Russia’s state arms exporter, Rosoboronexport, announced, on Tuesday, that Russia and India have abandoned the use of the US dollar in mutual settlements, with all payments made in rubles and rupees.
Mikheev told reporters in New Delhi, “By tradition, we name all transactions in dollars for ease of calculation.
In real work, Rosoboronexport has moved away almost 100% from settlements in the US currency.
As for India, all settlements are carried out in rubles and rupees.
In addition, we are actively practicing offset projects, which are also present in the contracts signed today.
This is normal modern practice, one of the trends in the world market.”
With such an approach, the sides “do not face the risk of delays in payments when fulfilling our contractual obligations to our partners,” he added.
India’s Foreign Minister announced Monday that Russia has begun delivering to his country the Russian S-400 ground-to-air missile defense system, against which the US threatened to impose sanctions.
“Supplies have begun this month and will continue to happen,” Indian Foreign Secretary Harsh Vardhan Shringla confirmed after Russian President Vladimir Putin’s visit to New Delhi.
China and Russia exchange yuan and rubles. The trade between these two is by far much more than between India and Russia. So in of itself, this is no big news.
Russia, China, and India must, together, forfeit all transactions in the dollar, to put a hurt on the dollar. And this trio must adhere to this geoeconomic strategy religiously. In essence, all of the main Asian nations must unite. That means a comprehensive peace across nations like Iran, Pakistan, China, India, Russia, all dealing in a basket of currencies as China has been proposing, along with Russia for some time. See. AIIB (Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank), that is farther reaching than the World Bank and the IMF. This requires vision. Xi’s along with later, Putin’s.
Really, the U.S. does not care if India indulged itself in a 5.5 billion dollar(convertible of course) deal with Russia That is really nothing at all-India will most likely go to the U.S. or Europeans for future deals anyways. At the behest of the U.S., India stopped importing much-needed oil, from Iran, a nation that desperately needs the liquidity. So it’s too soon to throw a big party about India. And India’s lack of foresight into the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor (CPEC) is troubling and speaks volumes.
Russia has a few cards up her sleeves. She is the second-largest exporter of crude to the U.S. the no# 1 supplier of diesel to the U.S.(which desperately needs diesel uninterrupted amounts of it for its battered trucking industry and supply chain which has all but ceased to function)and the main exporter of LGN to Europe. These all are crucial for the west to function, lest they cease to function. So I highly doubt Russia will be taken off the SWIFT system. Iran may be, Russia no. Too big, too powerful.
The Biden Admin is full of bluff and bluster, but also somewhat on the looney side, as are all U.S. Admins.
If the U.S./NATO put what they like to call defensive missile systems in Ukraine or it’s peripheral (The baltic States), then Russia, by all means, take them out because these systems could get a minor software change-out making them very, very deadly to Moscow, and most of western Russia. Hypersonic weapons will do, even supersonic cruise missiles. And let the chips fall where they may. The meaning of red – lines is exactly that, red lines. Not to be crossed. Russia is nobody’s fool. Russia has strong friends, like China, with whom it just signed a defense pact.
‘ When one is on the defensive, the best one can hope for is a stalemate ‘. And that can go any way on this one. I seriously believe the east has the upper hand over the west here.
The US, rotting from the inside, consumed by fear, loathing, and increasing poverty, will remain in limbo…
Or will it?
The Z-Man addressed this in cultural and intellectual terms today. It would be interesting to hear what folks make of it.
As much as I admire Russia, allowing the Ukraine to be regime-changed under the Russian noses is a catastrophic failure of diplomacy and military power. The worst for decades!
Asking the Zio-Atlantacists for a legal declaration that they will not move ‘one more inch’ towards Russia is little more than a call of reason to a swamp crocodile.
Somehow Russia has to empower the Russia leaning people within Ukraine to regime change back again, or at least to seek neutrality.
Economic/passport incentives will be an advantage. Perhaps splitting the profits from Ukraine gas transit amongst the Ukrainian-Russian passport holders?
Whatever the solution, Russia now has a diabolical problem on its hands, arising from a failure in Russian leadership. Surely they saw this situation arising, amongst the shadows of Nuland and her Thieves!
R55, good points.
“Putin demanding from the US – which runs NATO – a written, legally binding guarantee that the alliance will not advance further eastward towards Russian borders is the game-changer here.” Really?
Why didn’t Russia (Vladimir Putin) demand this guarantee earlier from Trump (2017) or in the first meeting with the Biden? Why wait this long? Even if it gets it in writing, what makes Russia think that the Empire will live up to the guarantee?
The Empire can have many meetings to keep Russia in the line and then offer after Russia hasn’t done anything to promote multilateralism or strengthen its relationship with China. This way Russia is boxed and the Empire works towards capturing China. The guarantee will be meaningless when Russia is alone, China threat addressed, and Russia completely dependent on the Empire for its markets and economy.
The Empire has abused Russia and kept it under control through threats of SWIFT, NS2, sanctions, wars,… Will the no advance eastward guarantee be added to this list. Russia controlled through threats until captured.
“Asking the Zio-Atlantacists for a legal declaration that they will not move ‘one more inch’ towards Russia is little more than a call of reason to a swamp crocodile.”
We don’t know the long game. I think they did not expect rebellion in Donbas, but the regime change could be as well beneficial, if temporary.
Because Russia’s long-term game is not a Ukrainian buffer state but part of Ukraine to join Russia.
Ukraine vehemently rejects the Minsk Agreement. However the US keeps pushing it. Most probably this would lead to a coup in Ukraine against the comedian and it would lead to a civil war, which would make Ukrainians regret more about their stupid choices.
Such a scenario would be advantageous for Russia as it would make Russia seem a Paradise for Ukrainians. Consider the large no. of Ukies fled to Russia. A civil war would increase that figure by several magnitudes and provide the pretext for Russia to get the Ukrainian regions up to Odessa under its flag.
I posted this earlier on Martyanov’s blog:
This is important exclusion from the talks yesterday in the video meeting.
Crimea and Donbass were not spoken of at all.
Interpretation: the US concedes Russian Federation sphere of influence embraces Donbass and Krim.
What they are negotiating is how much else of Ukraine is Russian sphere of influence.
Underneath that interpretation is how much Ukraine turf is NATO and US willing to fight for, shed their blood for, and risk a wider war for?
We know they will fight to the last Ukie, but the issue is, a few days after the Russians move forward, will NATO and US stand down and watch Ukraine disappear?
They have one opportunity now. They can neutralize and disarm Kiev, abandon any thought of Ukraine inside the West’s zone, leave it as a wide gray zone, though in reality within Russian influence, no longer a EU wannabe nor a NATO platform.
If the US and West continue to hold onto Ukraine, present it as a possible NATO platform, Russia will break Kiev.
Putin obviously has offered western Ukraine for them to take. He will fill it with the nazis, and the saga of Ukraine will end.
All that once was Russian will return in time if the West accepts the offer.
The alternative offer is Mr. Kalibr, Mr. Iskander and war crimes trials which were present, sitting at the table alongside Mr. Putin. Silent partners in the deal.
I agree with your assessment and this statement in particular:
“They have one opportunity now. They can neutralize and disarm Kiev, abandon any thought of Ukraine inside the West’s zone, leave it as a wide gray zone, though in reality within Russian influence, no longer a EU wannabe nor a NATO platform.
If the US and West continue to hold onto Ukraine, present it as a possible NATO platform, Russia will break Kiev.”
But I certainly don’t expect any such actions from non-agreement-capable Washington. All the neocons know how to do is threaten and double-down on their threats. And sadly, there is such an absence of leadership that both political parties are essentially in agreement that Russia is the aggressor, an enemy to “freedom and democracy” that must be continually threatened and punished. The endless propaganda from MSM has constructed so many false narratives that few people here can see beyond them.
As things continue to break down here in the US, I expect the war drums will continue to beat louder and louder, until the alternative offer is accepted all hell breaks loose in Ukraine. Perhaps the land bridge to Crimea will also be restored?
Larchmonter 445 wrote: I posted this on Martyanov’s blog:
The link is already above. Mod.
Great post and video, including the video interview Col. Mc. Greggor:
Some people in the US are still using their brain.
“Interpretation: the US concedes Russian Federation sphere of influence embraces Donbass and Krim.”
UK part of UKUS duopoly will go nuts over this betrayal, as taking Crimea is their obsession since forever.
First reactions already emerges:
“We have to ‘up the punch’ we bring across all domains as increasingly, the political need is for ‘high impact and low footprint’ operations”
Jolly good, jolly good…
I agree with you but this article show a different picture. What your think?
I fear Russia shoulder the burden single-handedly. EU follows Nulan advice (f …)
The author is someone I have little regard for. He is not a friend of Russia. I know a lot of folks think otherwise, but I disregard his writings. He’s a waste of time. Zero insights.
“Putin demanding from the US – which runs NATO – a written, legally binding guarantee that the alliance will not advance further eastward towards Russian borders is the game-changer here…. Putin… knows those who run NATO will never commit themselves in writing”.
I cannot for the life of me see why so many people ascribe some kind of special sanctity to lies in writing. If Washington makes promises verbally, it will break them whenever it feels like it. Why would written promises be treated any differently?
Washington has a stack of lawyers about ten miles high, all ready to trot out and swear that any violation of a treaty or agreement was really the fault of Russia.
Besides, if you break an agreement by firing missiles and dropping bombs, no one will care in the least about the agreement.
The only question for Russia is, “When they come for us – can we stop them?”
I’m pretty sure the deal with Iran (JCPOA) was in writing when Trumpy canceled it.
Writing isn’t more enforceable, but it is better evidence of there having been an agreement, and what the agreement was, when one side breaches.
“Putin studied his history and knows that Daddy Bush’s “promise” to Gorbachev on NATO expansion was just a lie.”
Daddy Bush promised no such thing. According to James Baker, the US lead negotiator, the request from Gorbachev was passed on to Bush and he said no. It was Gorbachev’s inattentiveness and incompetence that caused it to not be put in writing.
Further, U.S. President George Herbert Walker Bush in private told West German Chancellor Helmut Kohl (who had wanted to go along with what James Baker had arranged): “To hell with that! We prevailed, they didn’t.”.
Now I don’t know what to believe.
Whoever claimed that Bush said NATO wouldn’t move 1 inch Eastward needs to cite their source.
The Americans are one of the people who created the UN and the Hague tribunal f.e,, and now they said, in addition to all signed documents, that they do not recognize them. These words about written guarantees are for internal use in Russia. Smearing the eyes of the public who already see that diplomacy is the weaker side. Years spent, more lifes, more “material” extracted from Russia, more money spent and in the end what awaits them again is what they fled from. Standard AK and foot on the ground.
I would like to quote the speech of NATO General Secretary Mr. Woerner in Brussels on 17 May 1990. He said at the time that: ‘the fact that we are ready not to place a NATO army outside of German territory gives the Soviet Union a firm security guarantee.”
That brookings webpage writes further
What the Germans, Americans, British and French did agree to in 1990 was that there would be no deployment of non-German NATO forces on the territory of the former GDR.
I would like to point to this MIT analysis of the issue which suggests that multiple assurances were made by various diplomats, only to be overturned at a higher level.
Then as now, NATO is dominated by the USA and the US foreign policy is dictated by the Council on Foreign Relations. Whether or not Russia’s negotiators were informed of the backpedaling of the “no NATO expansion eastward” assurance is open to debate. What is not open to debate is that the US had no intention of complying with that policy.
It baffles me that countries still bother to negotiate with the USA, who are as Putin said; “Not agreement capable”.
Wasn’t it RR who was in power when the Berlin Wall fell and when this gentleman’s agreement was made? ie. allowing reunification of Germany in exchange for no NATO expansion eastwards…
Also, it was Clinton and not Daddy Bush who started moving NATO eastwards.
The history of the “not one inch eastwards” assurances has been well documented by credible sources. Here for example is one:
NATO Expansion: What Gorbachev Heard | National Security Archive
Thanks for the link.
So, several assurances were given, not just from US, but also from UK and Germany. They just broke their promise, that’s all.
The claim this was “inattentiveness ” by the Russians and that “no such promise was made” is not true. Perhaps this is an attempt to whitewash the West and shift blame for the fallout of current (and previous) confrontations, but it won’t work.
NATO: A Fascinating release of letters exchanged between Clinton and Yeltsin.
Revealing the Americans were lying, knew they were lying, Yeltsin began to suspect they were lying, but couldn’t quite believe good ole boy Clinton would lie to him, knowing what was at stake.
Shame Boris didn’t know he was encountering “nedogovorosposobnye”….
The US has never been agreement capable.
>…The Yeltsin eruption on December 5, 1994, made the top of the front page of the New York Times the next day, with the Russian president’s accusation (in front of Clinton and other heads of state gathered for a summit of the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe, CSCE) that the “domineering” U.S. was “trying to split [the] continent again” through NATO expansion.
>…The new documents, the result of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by the National Security Archive, include a series of revelatory “Bill-Boris” letters in the summer and fall of 1994, and the previously secret memcon of the presidents’ one-on-one at the Washington summit in September 1994.
>…Clinton kept assuring Yeltsin any NATO enlargement would be slow, with no surprises, building a Europe that was inclusive not exclusive, and in “partnership” with Russia.
In a phone call on July 5, 1994, Clinton told Yeltsin “I would like us to focus on the Partnership for Peace program” not NATO.
At the same time, however, “policy entrepreneurs” in Washington were revving up the bureaucratic process for more rapid NATO enlargement than expected either by Moscow or the Pentagon, which was committed to the Partnership for Peace as the main venue for security integration of Europe, not least because it could include Russia and Ukraine.
>…The final assurance was Clinton’s agreement to come to Moscow in May 1995 for the 50th anniversary celebrations of the victory over Hitler.
In Moscow, Yeltsin berated Clinton about NATO expansion, seeing “nothing but humiliation” for Russia: “For me to agree to the borders of NATO expanding towards those of Russia – that would constitute a betrayal on my part of the Russian people.”
But Yeltsin also saw Clinton would do whatever he could to ensure Yeltsin’s re-election in 1996, and that mattered the most to him.
Only after that Moscow summit would Yeltsin order Kozyrev to sign Russia up for the Partnership for Peace.
The Biden-Putin dialogue and the framing of the crisis by all sides, revealed a few things:
1. By not focusing on Crimea or Donbass, Washington seems to concede the status quo in Ukraine (for now) and drawing the line at any further Russian influence.
2. By dealing directly w Biden regarding Ukraine/NATO, the Kremlin has conceded that it recognizes that the US runs Europe including Ukraine and the best it can hope (for now) is not an independent Ukraine but at least one free or offensive weapons.
The second point would be a blow to Russia which has hoped in past dealings with Germany and France to have at least a more independent Europe to negotiate with. That hope, for now, is dead.
Merkel, who while personally not liking Putin or not politically sympathetic to Russia, was at least a serious leader whose pronouncements carried weight within Europe and the US, and who Russia could at least negotiate with. Now she’s gone leaving core Europe a bigger clown show than ever.
Germany is now led by some coalition non entity whose main focus is domestic and to consolidate power till the next election. Macron has further revealed himself to be a puffed up school boy with pretensions of being Napoleon reborn who is also consumed domestically and no one outside (or even inside) France takes seriously. Johnson is a buffoon (who seems to revel in the buffoonery) trying to re-animate the glory of the British Empire while pissing off his closest neighbors in Europe. Italy gets a new leader every week.
Meanwhile the leaders of the smaller nations of core Europe are little better. All of this has left by default the otherwise incompetent Biden administration, a fig leaf for the far more determined DC establishment, the least dysfunctional of the West and consolidating its power over Europe with its diplomatic, intelligence and military personnel.
For Putin, the last remaining statesperson in greater Europe, the rest of Europe’s abject powerlessness must be a bitter pill to swallow, but as a pragmatist, he has realized that the only hope for Russian security is to deal directly with Europe’s master, the US, rather than the satrapies.
Problem is, if NATO starts something big and Russia retaliates with hypersonic missiles, that leaves Russia’s weapons stockpiles somewhat depleted which gives the warmongers(US), a weapons advantage
Really? So there is no continuous production line and your comment implies no depletion of NATO stockpiles. Illogical comment.
If the Russians deplete their stock of hypersonic and other SOTA defensive and offensive weapons as you speculate, I would suggest depletion will not be an issue for Putin and Russia because it means they will have been used to inflict widespread pain and destruction on US & NATO as follows:
– the US and NATO navies would be resting on the ocean floor
– the US and NATO air forces including their airfield and bases would lie in piles of charred and smoking debris
– the command and control infrastructure of the US and NATO militaries would no longer exist
– casualties on the Western side will run into the 10s of thousands KIA, a situation no Western army has experienced since WW2.
At this stage, the US & NATO can go nuclear (the kamikaze option) or they can try and overwhelm Russia with what remains of their conventional ground forces. Good luck with that!
Putin should give Brussels some excuse to cancel Nordstream 2.
China will be happy to take the gas off of Russia’s hands. The Chinese need a 1000 mile pipeline?
After that, let the US try to supply the EU with LNG. They can’t. The gas isn’t there. Shale gas is dead. Most of the fields have been shut down. They were’t profitable in the first place. And Wall Street won’t advance them any more money.
The best shale “plays” have been exhausted. Little of what is left is commercially viable.
Soon the US will be looking for gas supplies itself.
So let Washington/Brussels cancel Nordstream 2.
And then let Brussels explain to EU citizens that they have to buy more blankets. Let them explain to German industries that they have to shop around for new gas suppliers.
It was “game over” when the US left Afghanistan. Ending Nordstream 2 only hastens the ending.
mike from jersey, i’ve never believed the plan was lng from america, bt rather, after winning iraq/syria & demolishing lebanon, therein allowing israel all the lebanonese rights, to then join with qatar & egypt to pipe lng from these sources. that’s why iran’s strength & win win over the nuke deal, along with hezbollah’s success & the houthis is such a big deal loss & why no one chats about it on cnn.
Yes, I am sure you are right.
I think that plan has largely failed. Lebanon seems to be still in play, but not the rest.
I look at all of this and I think, “are the people in the beltway really this clueless?”
It is hard to believe, but it seems that they are.
Why would Putin want to do that?
“The tension will continue to simmer without becoming incandescent only if NATO does not expand in any shape or form inside Ukraine”
What does it exactly means? A symbolic group of advisors moving there or a specific set of dangerous weapons deployed? Maybe a barrage of Tomahawks would justify a strike?
I doubt that Russia would strike for a couple of advisors being shifted to Ukraine. Also, the Zelenski government, along with US, will overplay their “defensive alliance” by parading useless or outdated weaponry since they buy public opinion by doing so.
M. Zakharova has followed up regarding the civil airline v Nato situation recently
Las dos viejas superpotencias se necesitan mutuamente para seguir pareciéndolo. La historia siempre se repite como farsa y en eso estamos con esta parodia de la crisis de los misiles. Muy mal los actores, les ha faltado convicción.
Yandex translation. Mod:
The two old superpowers need each other to keep looking like it. History always repeats itself as a farce and that’s where we are with this parody of the missile crisis. Very badly the actors, they have lacked conviction.
Decades ago CIA -Pentagon created the project “Ukraine – deadly trap for Russia”.
Meticulously prepared this project was planned to be a detonator of the disintegration of Russia
Following disintegration of the USSR. Yet Russia did not take a bite. With time “Ukraine will be Super Vietnam
For Russia “ from promising asset become liability. Now USA is trying to change the Project into propaganda tool .
Error : For USA from asset become liability
As expected, Washington’s muted dialogue led the conversation between Biden and Putin to a complete breakdown, with Biden bragging about telling Putin to be careful with Ukraine or else he would get angry, and Putin recalling to Biden that Russia is worried about Kiev’s conduct. Great revelations, which actually required two hours of discussion. Definitely, in politics, it is fundamental to know how to refuse certain meetings, in order to impose a real dialogue and not to get stuck in this pitiful parody. A parody which, moreover, will bring no advantage either in terms of communication or in terms of real politics to Russia. Perhaps we should get back to governing and get out of all-communication.
In general, the United States does not negotiate, it imposes. They do not seek to understand, in international politics at least, what is happening, they impose the vision of reality that suits them, so that this vision becomes an accepted reality. The Biden / Putin exchange was no exception to the rule and there was no reason he could escape it.
The publications in the media insist on the confrontational dimension, well known, and highlight, through the absence, the common dimension. So, without this exchange ultimately bringing anything in the real world, since the decisions will be taken independently of this interview, it does not bring, in any case for Russia, any added value on the communicational level either.
he question of the “guarantees” demanded by Putin against the enlargement of NATO to the East, which has received a lot of media coverage in Russia, is not even entitled to an allusion in this presentation of the NYT. Which underlines how seriously she is taken.
Biden’s threats against Russia are broadcast in the Russian media as well, which admittedly can foster a movement of support around the Russian President by the people, but those same people are starting to wonder why Russia can be so easily disparaged. And in fact, this speech demanding from Russia a “de-escalation” of tensions with Ukraine, a unilateral speech that does not call into question Ukraine’s military activity, as much as these threats of sanctions, are echoed by the four European leaders from Great Britain, France, Italy and Germany.
For its part, the Russian media discourse insists on the concern expressed by Putin to Biden over the activity of Kiev. But, we do not really feel a serious political will to act. And this weakness, betrayed by permanent hesitation, opens the door to the geopolitical fight waged against Russia.
“So regardless of what Team Biden may have said, Putin, pragmatically, will adopt a “wait and see” approach, and then act accordingly.”
I agree completely. I find Pepe’s analysis better than Andrei’s simply because it’s more prudently pessimistic.
Where I do not agree is that there will be no war simply because a Ukrainian defeat is a foregone conclusion, probably even by the Ukrainians themselves.
Even Pepe misses the point which is this: what if the entire intent of this episode is to allow Russia to destroy Ukraine’s military (if not the Ukraine state itself) in order to achieve “other objectives”? What if, in contrast to the US and NATO public statements that they will not help Ukraine defend itself, the CIA and the neocons are convincing Zelensky that his only way out is to attack Donbass again and that the US and NATO will – in some form – help him survive that conflict? Whereas in reality they intend Ukraine to be defeated so they can pursue further demonization and geopolitical attacks on Russia.
Zelensky is toast if the situation remains as it is. Once the transit fees are no longer paid to Ukraine, its descent into chaos simply accelerates. Hardliner nationalists will dump Zelensky. Zelensky has no choice but to make some sort of move to resolve the situation before it is resolved for him. The CIA and the neocons will be happy to tell him what he must do.
Even assuming Zelensky doesn’t start the war now, what happens when a more hardline regime takes power which is almost inevitable? Does anyone think Ukraine’s political decline is going to reverse itself and become more conciliatory towards Russia and Donbass?
War between Ukraine and Russia is inevitable – either in the next few months or later. The situation can’t continue in a freeze. Unlike the situation with the US and Iran – where the threat of Hezbollah against Israel limits the US and Israel’s options against Iran until Hezbollah is dealt with (if possible) – there is no third constraint precluding a conflict between Ukraine and Russia. It simply festers and gets worse with every year. History shows that such enmity between two countries inevitably leads to war.
Nord Stream 2 is no longer needed – and neither does Ukraine: the paradoxical consequences of the Biden-Putin debate .
The West discusses the implications of the conversation between Russian and US Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden. The clamor in the Western press about an alleged “Russian invasion” of Ukraine and threats to block Nord Stream 2 are in fact nothing more than wind mixing. Because it turns out that Moscow is no longer very interested in Ukraine.
The discussion between Russian and US Presidents Vladimir Putin and Joe Biden was productive and focused on issues of international politics so important that the issue of Nord Stream 2 was never addressed.
At least, that’s what Yuri Ushakov, an adviser to the Russian head of state, said of the talks. Of course, he doesn’t have to reveal every detail of the conversation.
Interestingly, however, immediately after the chairmen of the two superpowers online discussion, it was reported that the US Congress removed sanctions against Russia and Nord Stream 2 from the defense budget.
This is the common position of the upper and lower houses of the US parliament. It is clear that the decision could not be taken after the discussion between the Russian and American presidents, it had been prepared in advance.
However, it was clearly held up until after the negotiations. This shows that the Biden administration understood the instability of its negotiating position and tried to increase the pressure on the Kremlin – saying it could impose sanctions if necessary.
However, in fact, instead of actual sanctions, members of Congress and senators have included a rather toothless “condemnation” of Russia’s “harmful activities” in the text of the defense budget proposal.
This is “any effort to use gas supplies as a weapon to advance its geopolitical agenda and negatively influence European allies and partners”.
It sounds a lot like an attempt to ‘save face’, to ‘play nice with a bad game’. Washington has used a “back door maneuver” to avoid that impression on the American electorate, which increasingly views Biden as a wimp – especially compared to Putin.
Nord Stream 2 as an anti-Russian lever
According to the American press, the White House has decided to compete with Putin in “geopolitical judo”. An attempt to use the ambitious Nord Stream 2 project against Moscow arouses just such associations.
Victoria Nuland, famous Maidan host and now US Under Secretary of State for Politics, was the first to speak.
“I think if President Putin invades Ukraine, we expect the pipeline (Nord Stream 2) to be closed,” Nuland said during a US Senate hearing.
The US President’s National Security Assistant Jake Sullivan quickly took over.
“The West can use it to put pressure: if Vladimir Putin wants gas to be delivered through this pipeline, then perhaps he should not take the risk of invading Ukraine,” he said. said during a press briefing in Washington.
The US Financial Times, citing a diplomatic source, reported that Germany has also almost agreed to shut down Nord Stream 2 in the event of an “invasion of Ukraine.”
“Eventually, a consensus could be reached that if an invasion of Ukraine occurs, Nord Stream 2 will become unacceptable,” the newspaper said, quoting an unnamed diplomat.
What this “invasion” is, only American politicians and media seem to know. This massive speculation on the subject of the Russian intervention actually resembles the preparations for a provocation in the Donbass.
Who needs a war in Ukraine
Clearly, an escalation of hostilities in the Donbass involving Russian troops will be beneficial to the United States, as it will provide, they believe, a compelling reason for the Europeans to abandon Nord Stream 2. The current Ukrainian regime will also benefit from it. ‘escalation.
President Volodymyr Zelensky no longer looks like an insecure actor at the head of state, but a genuine Ukrainian official. At the same time, however, he lost the support of at least two-thirds of his electorate.
His popularity plummeted from 75% in the second round of the 2019 election to 25%. It has to increase if Zelensky is still to run for a second term, and there is nothing better for him than a little victorious war.
Shattering declarations such as the declaration of war against the oligarch Rinat Akhmetov or the introduction of a “Ukrainian economic passport” do not work: it is clear that the former falls under the category “honey against bees”, and the second is so far-fetched that many voters simply won’t see it happen.
However, a large-scale attack on the positions of the DPR and LPR and, at the very least, the establishment of control of Kiev over the state border with Russia, and ideally the capture of Donetsk and Lugansk could bring real results.
However, in order to do so, Russia must first be “removed” from the process. All pundits and politicians, even in the West, admit that the Ukrainian army is incapable of achieving a victory, even a local one, over Russia.
Washington is trying to make it clear that the threat to unplug Nord Stream 2 would make it too costly for Russia to force Ukraine into peace – evidenced by phrases constantly used by American politicians such as “Moscow will pay an unacceptable price”.
However, it is already clear to anyone who knows how to do the math: even setting aside the catastrophic political consequences of abandoning the Donbass, the damage caused by the elimination of Nord Stream-2 will be negligible for Gazprom – the project being fully amortized even before its launch.
Who needs Nord Stream 2
In the case of the sensational gas pipeline, which has become the most powerful geopolitical defeat of the United States with Afghanistan, the main thing is to understand that this is not a Russian project, as its opponents shout, but of a European project.
In fact, Russia is only the executor, although it has assumed the risks of ownership of the pipeline. The project is above all necessary for Europeans who want to acquire cheap energy resources.
Gazprom previously noted that the construction of Nord Stream 2 cost $ 9.5 billion, with half of that being paid by European investors in the project. So the Russian company spent less than $ 5 billion of its own money on the pipeline.
But Gazprom’s excess profits in 2021 more than offset those costs. The average annual cost of gas exports to Europeans this year will be around $ 550 per 1,000 cubic meters.
This is more than three times more than in 2020, when the figure was 143 dollars per thousand cubic meters, and more than twice as many as in 2019 and 2018, when prices were respectively
221 and 224 dollars.
Russian gas sales volumes, meanwhile, have remained roughly the same. This means that Gazprom’s gas sales profits, which were $ 41.63 billion in 2019, will at least double in 2021.
This is an additional $ 40 billion or more, obtained without any increase in gas production costs. If one remembers that the frenzy of the EU gas market was caused in large part by the obstruction of Nord Stream 2 by the United States, it can be said that the project paid for at least four times nothing than this year.
Moscow has shown that it can do without the NS2, but also the Ukrainian gas transport system, reducing pumping through it almost to zero.
Donbass therefore need not worry: Russia will not have to pay an “unacceptable price”, Europe has already paid for everything.
And if, God forbid, Russian troops have to interfere in the Ukrainian conflict in order to protect the Russian-speaking population of Donbass, even a complete cancellation of Nord Stream 2 will not be a substantial loss for Moscow.
I would add that if correct, this analysis demonstrates that a war between Ukraine and Russia over Donbass would be beneficial to the neocons, who get a Pyrrhic victory when NordStream 2 is closed, but who also get a geopolitical victory in terms of propaganda, but is also beneficial to Russia in economic terms by transferring its gas to Asia and Central Asia while at the same time integrating the Ukrainian heavy industry region of the Donbass into its economy.
The only losers are the Ukraine regime and the EU. But the Ukraine regime, whether they replace Zelensky or not after the defeat of the Ukrainian military, will benefit by strengthening their hostility to Russia to displace their culpability for an economic and military disaster. The only problem there is how long they will be able to do that before the Ukrainian population of the rump state decides to turn on them. Not that anyone outside of Ukraine will care.
For Zelensky, he has no choice but to go to war. He’s done for if he doesn’t. If he does and Russia destroys Ukraine’s military, he can at least blame Russia for the defeat as well as complain that he didn’t get enough help from the US and NATO. He’ll probably still be deposed, if not arrested and jailed, but at least he will get out of the impasse he’s in now.
Putin has done what he needs to do. He has intelligence sources inside Ukraine and on the contact line to tell him if and when Ukraine decides on an offensive. He has positioned Russian forces to respond within hours once an offensive by Ukraine begins. He can simply sit back and wait the situation out. The next move is the US and Ukraine’s. Russia will handle it whichever way it goes.
There will be no US/NATO military confrontation with Russia because they know Russia has the upper hand in the military balance. So WWIII is off the table. The goal is to see Ukraine sacrificed to Russia for geopolitical and propaganda gain against Russia and dragging the EU back into obedience. That’s it. Typical neocon playbook.
Thank you for this inside of the events. Hopefully the western governments will listen to Mr Putin and with there tail between the legs will reverse there way back and keep the military industry at check. Put this will be a hopeful dream. Never will come true. To many idiots on the helms!
For the neo ziocons it is only all about Israel. Ukraine and Syria are linked. They don’t care about Ukraine.Nuland came to Moscow with the following deal: exchange ukraine for Syria.
Final armagedon (rapture) for both neocons+ evangelists, israelis, jew diaspora is IRAN.
Then their ”messiah” will finally arrive(after a nuclear war which will destroy both goys ans muslims.
The few remaining will become slaves of the Tribe.
Jerusalem will be the NWO capital, and the Tribe will reign on the World.
The US will be destroyed it it helps the final goal.
You think i’m crazy? Joking?Unfortunately no, just read the Torah and the talmud, ask the Pence crowd.
In France crazy zioneocons even talk about on state tv, here J Attali (Macron/Hollande/Sarkozy/Mitterand mentor and ‘real president’)
This is not a conspiracy channel, this is the official tv channel of the senate.
Neocons believe these things, and the guy is everything but idiot.
Jerusalem capitale d’un gouvernement mondial – Jacques Attali
NWO before or after war?
Jacques Attali, the mediator of the oligarchy and of the New World Order, is categorical: everything is reunited in Ukraine for the launch of a 3rd World War, a war that he regularly predicts during his public interventions and which will be according to him the constructive chaos of the New World Order, with then a world capital located in Jerusalem:
Seriously, does anyone really expect the US to abide by a ‘legal agreement’? JCPOA, INF were all ‘legal agreements’ as were some other made under the UNSC; wishfull thinking from Putin or is he trying to confirm that the US is “agreement incapble”?
Let us entertain a definition of: Red Line.
“A Red Line is an unlawful act of malfeasance to serve a secret or planned agenda so egregious to the party of the first part committed by the parties of the second part with full intent and foreknowledge to cause imminent danger of loss of life or property or present or future earnings or public reputation of the first party.
It shall be the right of the first party to respond appropriately with sufficient measure including economic or martial force against the parties of the second part to defend, repel, discourage and prevent any further attempts to cause injury to the first party. A Red Line shall be considered engaged when the offending parties of the second part commit the act forthwith.”
So what are Russia’s Red Lines?
1. Ukraine is accepted into the NATO alliance.
2. NATO moves military assets inside Ukraine capable of being an immediate threat to Russian sovereignty.
3. NATO disrupts undersea Nordstream energy pipelines that are Russian property.
4. Kiev sabotages its own pipelines and blames Russian as an excuse to move against Donbass.
5. NATO lays sea mines inside the territorial waters of its allies and partners: Bulgaria, Romania, Moldova.
6. NATO establishes a “no fly” corridor of its allies and partners airspace within the Black Sea Region.
7. NATO sponsors acts of harassment by third parties against Russian assets in the Black Sea Region.
Perhaps the Russian Foreign Ministry should publish this open-ended list so there is no ambiguity and that NATO understands what will trigger Russian repercussions against it.
a sidequestion for me is…if Kiev attacks and Russia responds…then Nato responds…. what will “friend to both sides ” Turkey do….also hearing in mind its role in Nato-whatever that might be at that time….support a Bosphorous blockade?
In your scenario Ukraine is not a member of NATO so Turkey is under no obligation to intervene between the two belligerent parties (i.e., Ukraine v. Russia).
As far as blockading the Bosporus Strait, that would be outside the authority of Turkey as the controlling Black Sea riparian State since there is no provision to do so in any of Articles of the 1935 Montreux Convention.
Ukraine has one reason for its existence. In 1991, Ukraine was turned into a weapon against Russia. For 30 years, the project has been fed tens of billions of dollars, billions in weapons and training, loans by the billions, and hands off the corruption and crime in Kiev and throughout the military.
7 years ago, the Maidan gave Putin an opening. He assisted the militias in the Donbass to separate from Kiev. He accepted the referendum vote of the people in Crimea and allowed the return of the Crimea to Mother Russia.
In February 2015, he froze the war in Donbass with the Minsk 2 Agreement. It was a choke bone in the throat of Kiev.
His intention was to break the EU/NATO hold on Ukraine and eventually to fracture NATO as threat to Russia.
His patience in the seven years has frustrated the US/West who expected that the ethnic cleansing by Kiev in Donbass and the go-nowhere Minsk 2 talks would force Russia to intervene and attack the Ukies.
Instead, the frustration has broken the US,EU and NATO and forced them to develop a new stance regarding Ukraine.
Meanwhile, Putin moved his attention to Syria. He joined in the war against ISIS and AQ and produced a victory against the West.
Now we have the moment of truth for the US. Putin has made it clear that Ukraine will not be allowed to be a NATO member nor a NATO platform from which US and NATO weapons could be launched against Russia.
At the moment of the highest tension and probing by the US and NATO in the near abroad, at the borders of Russia, but especially along the Black Sea and Ukraine, Putin drew his sword (the Russian military en masse) and declared there will be war if the West does not withdraw back to their Eastern Europe lines and Ukraine becomes neutralized.
The West understands Russia will destroy Ukraine as a state. The EU then will have 20 million refugees rushing into Poland and Germany.
If NATO attempts to stop the Russian military, NATO will be destroyed. The US already has announced it will not intervene with troops to save Ukraine. Norway has checked out of any possible conflict. The cracks in the alliance are showing.
So, Putin is very close to his goal.
He doesn’t want Ukraine. He wants Ukraine neutralized and NATO broken.
Either the “negotiations” that come from the specialist groups from the US and Russia shaping possible solutions produce what Putin wants, or the West will see Ukraine destroyed and NATO, too, if it gets involved.
The choice is completely the decision of the US/NATO and EU.
The simplest thing for them is to get rid of the government in Kiev, replace them with a group that can work with Russia, demobilize the Ukie military, and begin the work of rebuilding the economy.
It is a new 30 year project. Putting the 13 steps of the Minsk 2 Agreement into action, Ukraine will have a future, brought back from the abyss.
The US and Ukraine can do it this easy way or the hard way. Putin gave them the Minsk 2 map out of the quagmire in 2015.
We should know soon.
Putin turned Ukraine into a two-sided weapon, poison to the EU and NATO, and a dagger the US is set to impale itself upon if it forces a war against Russia.
It’s been there for all to see since Debaltsevo.
Tulsi has a message for you.
Good, very good Pepe as always arranged things. The world is rapidly separating from America, which has become a mockery, even European vassals are in a very delicate economic situation, and above all, they are foolishly collapsing themselves. Russia is the country of Asia and that world is building prosperity for humanity, and that is the Happiest thing for humanity.
Ukraine, Taiwan, Covid and Green deal only have one goal:
A limited war with Russia or China is another step in the plan for the great reset and intended to cancel US debt which of course can never be repaid without extrordinary circumstances.
If US default its T-bond debt payment, we shall see a new gold-backed digital currency launch by China.
China ‘likely’ preparing Taiwan invasion – Pentagon
A scene from the movie about the Cuban crisis come in mind. A high ranking US general describes the plan for bombing the new missile sites in Cuba, to JFK. JFK asks what does the general think the soviets will do when the US kill their soldiers in Cuba. The general answers, nothing, they will do absolutely nothing, because their choice is to destroy the world, and they will not do it.
I am paraphrasing, but think about it, it is not far fetched that the US is thinking this way.
That conversation between Biden and Putin felt like Biden drew a temper tantrum and Putin skillfully guided the toddler to bed after he exhausted himself…with a jello pop and his favourite stuffy.
If only it were that funny, the deep state is screaming for war..they still might get it.
Hmmmm..Ukraine politicians seem not to have something new to say after the meeting…..have plans B C D E F etc already been game planned for their various options and scenarios? No thanks from them for possible deconfliction to bring “peace “?
Thursday, US President Joe Biden will tell his Ukrainian counterpart Vladimir Zelensky about the outcome of his talks with Vladimir Putin. Until then, Kiev decided not to officially comment on the talks. Zelensky’s spokesperson Sergey Nikiforov said on Wednesday that Kiev fully trusts its partners. The Ukrainian president’s team brushed off the notion that Biden contacting his counterpart a day and a half after the summit with Putin, which directly focused on Ukraine, was anything extraordinary. First Deputy Chairman of the Verkhovna Rada Alexander Korniyenko noted that the presidents know better when to discuss the situation.
Biden was in Kansas City a day after the video with Putin looking super frail and mumbling something stupid. His administration looks and smells like the 3rd term of Obama. These imbeciles botched Afghanistan, COVID vaccine mandates, and the US economy. People in Europe are a few chess pieces away from having some of Putin’s new toys landing in their back yard.
Where are there any adults to slap back these children in DC?
“The West can use it to put pressure: if Vladimir Putin wants gas to be delivered through this pipeline, then perhaps he should not take the risk of invading Ukraine,” he said. said during a press briefing in Washington.
So if I am correct, Sullivan just said that the empire will retaliate by cutting off gas and freezing Europe this winter. Some one should ask the Germans what they think of that.
Gerasimov speaks today, well aware of what is going on of course.
What Biden really told Putin: “I hear you have dogs. I like dogs. Cornpop had a dog, but it lost a fight so he had to shoot it. Siberia is cold. Is that where you mine your ice cream from?”
It doesn’t seem like the MIC and Biden Inc are good friends; their stridency in the media leads me to believe that is their only desperate option to trigger a war. If they had a lot of pull with Biden Inc they wouldn’t be trying to create a self-fulfilling prophecy, they’d be going full bore on justifying the imminent conflict.
“Putin demanding from the US – which runs NATO – a written, legally binding guarantee. . …” Huh?
That is silly. Putin should ask an American Indian what that is worth.
“…..Kiev is willing to talk to Moscow and make concessions to help secure peace, but it will not compromise on anything it considers to be of “fundamental importance,” Ukraine’s foreign minister said on Wednesday.
Speaking to Britain’s Sky News, Dmitry Kuleba suggested that Kiev would be happy to listen to any “reasonable” demands from Russia.
“We are constructive, and we are ready to make concessions if this is reciprocated by Russia, but we will not be making concessions of issues which are of fundamental importance for the development of the Ukrainian state, such as our European and Euro-Atlantic integration,” Kuleba said, referring in particular to the ambitions of Kiev to become a member state of the European Union and NATO…..”
hmm shame they never engage and listen during the contact meetings.
but but but
Ukrainian navy ship close to Russian waters off Crimea & refusing to change course – Moscow
9 Dec, 2021 19:46 / Updated 1 minute ago
Ukrainian navy ship close to Russian waters off Crimea & refusing to change course – Moscow
Follow RT on
A Ukrainian navy vessel, named the Donbass, has set course to pass through Russian territorial waters off the coast of Crimea and is ignoring warnings to turn around, border officials have reported.
Putin: What is Happening in Donbass Resembles Genocide
1 hour ago
A damaged building in the village of Spartak in the Donetsk Region, affected by shelling – Sputnik International, 1920, 09.12.2021
© Sputnik / Irina Gerashchenko / Go to the photo bank
Large swathes of eastern Ukraine were thrust into armed conflict in the spring of 2014 after Kiev sent troops to crush an independence push by local residents dissatisfied with the outcome of the February 2014 coup. The war has killed up to 31,000 people, with millions more fleeing their homes.
The situation in Donbass resembles a genocide, Russian President Vladimir Putin has said.
“We can see clearly and know what is happening in the Donbass right now. This, of course, very much resembles a genocide, about which you have spoken,” Putin said, speaking to Kirill Vyshinsky, a Ukrainian journalist, former director of Sputnik’s sister agency RIA Novosti Ukraine, and executive director of the Rossiya Segodnya media group.
The Russian president made the comments Thursday at a meeting of the Russian council for the development of civil society and human rights, of which Vyshinsky is a member. “
Putin’s description of “genocide” is electrifying. If he sees more bloodshed in Donbass, he can use that as his legal excuse to enter Ukraine, save the people and kill and arrest the war criminals.
He is very lawyerly and would not use those words without a purpose.
Thank you Mr. Escobar.