Last Seen Blogs
hopeperspectives
hope. perspectives.
w47i0
Sin título
lok1needsahug
“Im Echo”
marcosvini2020
Sem título
cautiousabandon-blog
CautiousAbandon
Text
Three Years Later & Russia Still Stumps Free World
As the 2014 Winter Olympic Games – which together with the Summer Olympics comprise humanity’s celebrated quadrennial exhibition of peace and fraternity – were winding down, host country Russia abruptly shattered global peace and stability. Moscow launched its blitzkrieg to re-subjugate Ukraine and the other x-captive nations and restore the iron curtain.
The free world was staggered by Russia’s invasion of an independent European country. But all along Moscow has been forthright with its intentions regarding what it perceives as its sphere of influence. The Kremlin habitually asserted its authority on its so-called near abroad and warned that the countries will face dire consequences it they violate its directives or seek to accede to EuroAtlantic political, military or economic pacts.
Vladimir Putin personally warned Kyiv and his in-country gauleiter Viktor Yanukovych against leaving Moscow’s orbit in the summer of 2013 during the commemorations of the millennium of Christianity of Kyiv-Rus. Yanukovych feigned Ukrainian patriotism but ultimately rejected EU accession igniting the national Revolution of Dignity.
The free world declined to consider seriously Putin’s threat but the Russian leader held fast. As the Ukrainian nation was defeating Russia on the streets of Kyiv and sending a strong signal to the world that only it will be the master of its destiny, Moscow invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea.
The free world was again aghast, wondering why Putin decided to invade Ukraine, disrupt global affairs and international relations, and sow distrust among nations.
This confusion stems from a historical lack of appreciation of the invader and misplaced belief. Today’s mediators are addressing the Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17 as a conflict between two rational opponents. In reality, it is far from that. For centuries, Russia – tsarist, communist or federal – has sought to conquer and subjugate Ukraine and other neighboring countries for the glory of Mother Russia. The same holds true today.
The Russian national mentality and that of its leadership oozes visions of imperial aggression, which today is strengthened by pure hatred.
During a discussion at the recent global security conference in Munich that was broadcast by TV 112 Ukraine, President Poroshenko offered this succinct clarification:
“Putin hates Ukraine deeply and sincerely. He denies distinctiveness and unique identity of the Ukrainian people. I know that personally. He publicly proclaims Ukrainian identity as a part of Russian dominant identity. He sees no place for Ukraine at the political map of Europe, and he wants to draw a place for Ukraine in Russian colors. But, it would be a mistake to think that the Russia’s appetites are limited to Ukraine only.”
Indeed, Russia in all of its imperial phases, personified today by Putin, built and reinforced its prison of nations.
The past three years have seen a real – not hybrid, ersatz or cyber – war in Ukraine. The mere photographs of war-torn eastern Ukraine reveal the devastation caused by Russia’s military assault against Ukraine that rival images of postwar Europe.
“The appalling number of victims highlights the immorality of Kremlin’s war against the Ukrainian people: over 9,800 Ukrainian people were killed, about 23,000 wounded and almost 1.8 million of internally displaced persons. 7.2 % of Ukrainian territory has been seized by Russia and millions of the citizens of Ukraine live there under occupation and endless terror. Russia persists in sending new fighters, weaponry and ammunition to Ukraine through the section of the Ukrainian-Russian state border of 409.7 km long, which remains out of control of the Ukrainian government,” the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine said on this anniversary.
In Crimea, Russia seized the land, terrorized and imprisoned Crimean Tatars, staged a fabricated referendum and annexed the peninsula for itself. Crimea became occupied territory, where Russia regularly violates the people’s cultural, spiritual and human rights. Following in the footsteps of the draconian tsarist and communist phases of Russian imperialism, today’s Kremlin rulers are persecuting, arresting and imprisoning anyone in Crimea who criticizes or opposes the occupation regime.
“Occupied Crimea, closed for any form of international control and monitoring, is now an area for systemic violation of human rights and fundamental freedoms, targeting, first of all, the Ukrainian activists and the indigenous people of Crimea – Crimean Tatars. The citizens of Ukraine are being groundlessly detained and imprisoned, activists are disappearing, their families and friends are facing intimidation. The Mejlis, a representative body of the Crimean Tatar people, was banned,” the Ukrainian government said.
Furthermore, in the course of the past three years, Russia has been busy militarizing the peninsula in the Black Sea by stationing aircraft capable of carrying nuclear weapons.
Russia’s violation of the UN Charter and international law and order as well as its invasion of Ukraine are common knowledge but the world is incapable of forcing Moscow to withdraw. With a few exceptions, such as the United States, Canada, and Great Britain, other countries haven’t condemned Russia’s latest belligerence. Such a disunited front merely bolsters Moscow’s resolve to pursue its invasion of Ukraine as Lithuania’s Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius has pointed out.
France, Germany, Russia, Ukraine as well as Russia’s domestic and regional mercenary-terrorists have concluded a few ceasefires that have been consistently trampled by Russia. European powers again are betting on the ultimate success of today’s ceasefire, but if history is a teacher it is also bound to fail because of Russian military violations and escalations. The time, money and effort wasted on the quadrilateral negotiations would have been better served if they were earmarked to rebuild Donbas schools destroyed by Russian bombardment.
The latest ceasefire began on Monday, February 20, amid a bloody escalation in fighting that began in January. Since then at least 30 civilians died in what Kyiv describes as Russia’s unsuccessful offensive against the city of Avdiyivka. According to the Ukrainian military, more than a dozen Ukrainian soldiers were killed and about 100 were wounded at the same time.
Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry observed: “Russia remains unwilling to implement the Minsk Agreements thus undermining all efforts taken by Ukraine and the international community towards de-escalation and stabilization in the region. Moscow’s propaganda has no limits to lie, falsification and doublespeak. Human life has no value for the aggressor. Besides their actions in Ukraine, the Russian structures were regularly spotted interfering in the internal affairs of other sovereign states. The aggressive policy of the Russian Federation poses a threat for the entire world order.”
NATO recognizes Russia’s guilt in the war with Ukraine and notes that Moscow has become more assertive than in the past. NATO Secretary General Jens Soltenberg told CNBC at the Munich Security Conference. “We have seen a Russia that has invested heavily in new military capabilities, which has tripled spending on defense over the last years, and — most importantly — which has been willing to use military force against neighbors in Georgia and Ukraine. And that’s exactly why NATO is responding in a measured defensive way.”
Is it possible that Russia has an unbreakable stranglehold on the free world?
As the Russian war against Ukraine begins its fourth year, Ukraine is confronted by a new White House administration that has not yet taken a clear stand in support of Ukraine’s rightful, sovereign place under the sun. President Donald J. Trump has expressed more support for Putin and Russia than Poroshenko and Ukraine. Trump’s trusted captains Paul Manafort and his connections with Yanukovych and Putin as well as Michael Flynn and his rendezvous with Russian Ambassador Sergey Kislyak are the stuff of John le Carre’s novels. The policies Inside the Beltway reflect what I’ve labeled a Kremlin on the Potomac rather than the White House.
A few Cabinet members have expressed support for Ukraine, among them Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, Ambassador Nikki Haley and Secretary of Defense James Mattis. Vice-President Mike Pence is also a vocal member of the pro-Ukraine chorus.
In Munich, Poroshenko expressed confidence in US support, observing: “I had a wonderful conversation with Vice President of the United States Mike Pence. We share the same values, and Pence is informed about the situation in eastern Ukraine in detail. He also knows the reasons for failures in the implementation of the Minsk agreement and that Russia is responsible for those failures.”
I have my doubts because the Trump is the President and he calls the shots not spokesman Sean Spicer, who made pro-Ukraine references at press conferences on behalf of Trump. To the point, when Trump had the opportunity to personally declare support for Ukraine, insist that Russia returns Crimea to Ukraine and end the “conflict” at his first 77-minute long news conference, he didn't. Trump did mention Ukraine a few times in his remarks in reference to Manafort’s work in Kyiv but he faltered about what Manafort actually did in Ukraine, omitting to note that it was detrimental to Ukraine and the USA. The President did use the loathed “THE” Ukraine noun.
Foreign policy experts have been wondering what if Putin expands the war against Ukraine to other x-captive nations – as they expect he will. Will President Trump then continue to stand with Putin? If so, Trump will completely bankrupt America’s moral credibility around the world.
The free world must consider these venues of critical assistance for Ukraine.
Sanctions: As it rattles its saber around the world, Russia continues to wage its war in Ukraine even in the face of economic sanctions against its leaders. Fortunately, on this point, the free world is united: sanctions will not be lifted until Russia withdraws from Ukraine and Crimea. Sanctions must be continued and intensified. Complete, unconditional Russian withdrawal from Ukraine and surrender of its mercenary-terrorists will allow Kyiv to rebuild Ukraine. Anything less will contribute to organized or sporadic acts of Russian terrorism across Ukraine for years to come.
Weapons: Ukraine urgently needs more military aid from the United States and other allies, some of which are helping Kyiv with training and non-lethal materiel. The free world must publicly recognize the frontline in the defense of the European Union is in eastern Ukraine, where NATO is getting a free lesson about Russia’s military tactics.
Poroshenko, who advocates peaceful solutions, said as much in an interview with Bild German newspaper.
“You know that I am the President, who advocates peace, but now we are talking about the protection of our country and the people. To do this, we urgently need defensive weapons," he said, adding he believes that the US and Europe are aware of this need.
Legislatures: Ukraine must continue to depend on the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus and other legislative advocates for Ukraine on Capitol Hill. Congressmen Sander Levin (D-MI), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), and Andy Harris (R-MD) recently sponsored a resolution (H. Res. 88) in the US House of Representatives calling on the Russia to stop the violence in eastern Ukraine, cease aiding its mercenary-terrorists, honor the Minsk ceasefire agreement, withdraw military weaponry from Ukraine, and repair Ukraine’s infrastructure damaged in the war. The resolution expresses the sense of Congress that additional sanctions might be imposed on Russia if the violence doesn’t subside.
Unity in Banishment: The free world must regard Russia as a criminal pariah that must be banned from all global events. This stigma must remain in place until Russia atones for its crimes against humanity.
0 notes
Text
Capitol Hill Responds to Russian Escalation of War vs Ukraine
Despite President Trump’s doubtful support for any legislation critical of Vladimir Putin’s Russia, several elected officials have stood up against Russia’s global threats and aggression.
Congressman Bill Pascrell, Jr. (D-NJ) today responded to the news that Trump has eased sanctions on Russia imposed by President Obama in the wake of cyberattacks during the 2016 election, warning that such a move would bolster Putin’s illegal occupation of Ukrainian Crimea.
“After the worst escalation in two years by Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine, the Trump Administration has inexplicably decided to reward this behavior by easing sanctions imposed on Russia for their cyberattacks here in the United States,” Pascrell said. “This move will only strengthen Mr. Putin’s grip on Crimea, emboldening his decision to destabilize the region and contribute to the thousands of civilian deaths in Ukraine. The Congress must hold hearings and quickly respond by passing legislation to tighten sanctions on the Russians and prevent any further weakening by this Administration.”
Pascrell said for someone like Trump, who “purports to be the ultimate dealmaker,” lifting sanctions prematurely is “raw deal.” The Congressman said President Trump should stand up for American allies like Ukraine, “not cozy up to those who have meddled in our elections and continue to cause chaos around the world.”
Also today, Congressional Ukrainian Caucus Co-Chairs, Reps. Andy Harris (R-MD), Marcy Kaptur (D-OH), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA) and Sander Levin (D-MI), issued the following statement on the escalation of Russian military assault against Ukraine.
“We call on Russia-controlled separatists to immediately stop the violence in Eastern Ukraine, honor the ceasefire, and withdraw heavy weapons. We reaffirm our support for the Minsk accords, and stand in strong opposition to all efforts that would encourage military action against Ukraine.
“As Co-Chairs of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, we are deeply concerned with loss of life and the deteriorating humanitarian condition in Avdiyivka, in eastern Ukraine, since heavy fighting broke out on January 28. According to Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE), at least eight people have died in the last three days, and 17,000 civilians, including 2,500 children, do not have access to water, electricity, or heat in below freezing temperatures. With each continued day of fighting, their condition becomes more dire.
“The United States must stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our European allies and with the Ukraine people, who have demonstrated time and again their will for a sovereign and democratic country, free from Russia’s interference. We strongly urge Russian authorities to respect human life and abide by the ceasefire.”
0 notes
Text
Senator Menendez Exclusive: No Retreat from Supporting Ukraine
Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ), in an exclusive cyber-interview with The Torn Curtain 1991, assured Ukraine and Ukrainian Americans that he and his like-minded colleagues on Capitol Hill will not retreat from supporting Ukraine and other countries that face Russian aggression.
Menendez further said opposing political winds in the United States would not sway him from advocating on behalf of Ukraine. He noted Russia’s aggression against Ukraine was emboldened by the mere hint of the Trump Administration’s softened stance toward Russia.
Menendez is the senior member and former chairman of the powerful Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and the architect of Russian sanctions legislation.
The full transcript of the interview follows. It was submitted to Senator Menendez before the latest escalation of Russian hostilities against Ukraine this past weekend.
The Torn Curtain 1991: The biggest question on the minds of Ukrainians (in Ukraine and Ukrainian Americans) as well as citizens of the former captive nations is should they fear that the United States will abandon its traditional support of their independence and sovereignty with the inauguration of Donald Trump as President? Will lawmakers such as you and your colleagues in the Ukrainian Congressional Caucus have the political strength to continue supporting those countries that are in the shadow of a belligerent Russia?
Senator Menendez: I have and will continue to stand with Ukrainians and all the Baltic and Eastern European peoples who live in fear of Russian aggression. I stand strongly in favor of democracy, the rule of law, and the territorial sovereignty and safety of independent countries in the face of subversion, threats of invasion, and — in the case of Ukraine—actual invasion by the Russian military. My fundamental belief in these principles will not be swayed by political winds in the United States. I have expressed alarm at any hints of warming to Russia under Vladimir Putin and many of my colleagues on both sides of the aisle have joined in expressing concern and doubt as well. I have faith that my colleagues who have been supportive of Ukraine in the past will continue to be.
Additionally, it is clear that we cannot back down in our support for democratic countries in the face of Russian aggression. At the mere hint that President Trump would take a softer stance towards Russia, we have seen pro-Russian forces emboldened and renew fighting in places like Avdiyivka in Eastern Ukraine.
The Torn Curtain 1991: Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2014, almost three years ago. That’s half the duration of World War II. Why do you think the free world’s combined response has been so lukewarm? Should the free world condemn Putin like it did Hitler seven decades ago?
Senator Menendez: My own response, along with many of my colleagues, to Russia’s destabilization of the post-war order was strong and decisive. In 2014, I led co-sponsorship of the Ukraine Freedom Support Act, which imposed sanctions on individuals and companies that contributed to instability in Ukraine or provided support for Russia’s invasion. The legislation also authorized military assistance directly to Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression. Internationally, several of Ukraine’s Eastern European neighbors certainly understand how Russia’s aggression threatens the sovereignty and territorial integrity of independent nations at large. However, I do believe the world must indeed do more to condemn and counter Russia’s annexation of Ukraine. We must have a united front to counter Putin’s overarching strategy of dividing and fracturing the Western alliance system. We must apply the lessons that bullying must be met with steadfast resolve. Division must be met with unity amongst the nations of the free world.
The Torn Curtain 1991: President Poroshenko and Ukrainian Americans are urging the White House and Congress to send lethal weapons to Ukraine and other tangible assistance under HR 5094. Do you favor that and how will it help Ukraine?
Senator Menendez: The United States must support Ukraine as the endangered and embattled democracy that it is. When I visited Ukraine and met with President Poroshenko at the height of Russia’s invasion, I committed to using my voice, my influence, and my vote to do everything possible to assist Ukrainians, both in terms of resisting further Russian military advances and rebuilding the country’s shaken economy and institutions under attack. I authored legislation in 2014 that authorized military assistance to Ukraine in the face of Russian aggression and I maintain that is the correct approach, when necessary, coupled with material, economic and non-lethal assistance. I also sponsored the STAND for Ukraine Act in the Senate at the end of last Congress. I believe it is in the fundamental national security interests of the United States to protect and defend Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and to send a clear signal around the world that those facing aggression will have a strong friend in the United States.
The Torn Curtain 1991: The Minsk truce that Russia signed and violated numerous times is not bringing Russia’s war against Ukraine closer to a conclusion. Are sanctions the only effective way to force Moscow to withdraw from all occupied regions of Ukraine – Crimea and Donbas? Should Russia also be banned from the global table until it does?
Senator Menendez: Sanctions can be the most powerful and peaceful leverage we have in our arsenal of diplomatic tools. Sanctions must be coupled with resolve and a credible threat of stronger actions. We must not roll back sanctions against Russia until Russia proves it is a willing partner in the global international order, respects the territorial sovereignty of its neighbors, and stops international provocation. Last month, in fact, my colleagues and I introduced the Countering Russian Hostilities Act, which would expand sanctions on Russia for its continued occupation of Ukraine, for its interference in our own electoral process, and provide support for those in its immediate sphere.
The Torn Curtain 1991: Are you concerned that Vladimir Putin will escalate the war against Ukraine with a major westward push toward Kyiv, Lviv and even Vilnius or Warsaw?
Senator Menendez: We must take Russian aggression and threats of aggression seriously. Russian forces continue to amass along the border of these countries, and reports show that they could move with some swiftness across the border of these countries. We must support Eastern European countries as they enhance their militaries, and protect critical infrastructure, both physical and cyber. Additionally, as the Countering Russian Hostilities Act does, we must provide support for democratic institutions, public diplomacy efforts that support a free press and the free flow of information in the face of Russian disinformation campaigns aimed to disrupt and undermine democratic governance structures and institutions.
The Torn Curtain 1991: As Ukraine transitions from a Soviet mentality, the government and population still endure a corrupt mindset. How can the United States help Ukraine overcome corruption without harming its ability to successfully defend itself against Russian aggression?
Senator Menendez: Governance institutions that promote democracy, the rule of law, and a free and reliable press are the foundations of a strong country everywhere in the world. A democratically elected government with a robust judicial system and media in which all citizens place faith will be a critical component of countering Russian aggression. These institutions also help promote stable economic development, which will be critical for building a wealthy society where citizens are secure, and help maintain support for a capable and robust military presence. Russia will only be more successful in penetrating Ukrainian society if Ukrainians have reason to turn on their own institutions as not supportive of the people and their aspirations.
0 notes
Text
Trump Draws First Blood
The eyes of the free world and the former captive nations have been on the Oval Office ever since Donald J. Trump became the 45th President of the United States.
The reason is that Trump alienated himself from many American voters by expressing tolerance for Vladimir Putin’s aggression in Ukraine and threats against other countries. Trump also denied that Crimea was invaded, occupied and illegally annexed by Russia.
Trump singlehandedly overturned the seven-decade long pro-captive nations stance of the Republican Party.
On the campaign trail Trump revealed his acceptance of Putin by blatantly praising him, raising predictable disdain in Europe and the US. His support for the Russian leader held fast despite the shocked outcry by voters. Meanwhile, American intelligence and law enforcement officials’ announcement that they would look into contacts between Trump’s national security adviser Michael Flynn and a top Russian diplomat.
If that weren’t enough, Trump shocked Ukraine and Ukrainian Americans by saying that he would break ranks with European allies and cancel sanctions on Russia for invading Ukraine if the Kremlin agreed to reduce its nuclear arms.
Behind the Kremlin walls, with the votes tabulated, Trump’s praise of Putin led Russian officials and USA watchers at many inauguration parties to publicly hope for warmer relations under Trump’s presidency. In other words they hoped that the US commander in chief will look the other way when Russia invades peaceful neighbors or violates human rights at home.
After his election, Trump began building a team that included officials who share his point of view and those who don’t.
Trump’s candidate for secretary of state, Rex Tillerson, the former top Mobil-Exxon executive with very close ties to Russia and Putin, was seen as typical of Trump’s benevolent view of Putin and tolerance for Russia’s imperial adventurism. The line in the sand was drawn early in the new President’s term as Democratic and Republican lawmakers sought to brow beat the opposing lineup with strongly-worded warnings.
Senators John McCain, Marco Rubio, Lindsey Graham and others had led the charge for the GOP against Tillerson’s appointment while Sen. Charles Schumer and his colleagues did so on behalf of Democrats. Obviously, the new President wasn’t budging. He repeated his pledge that he would work to Putin, deal with him, and plan a future with him rather than without.
President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and leaders of the other former captive nations expressed disquiet that they would be losing the vital and visible support of the United States at a time when Russia is waging a war in Ukraine and rattling its sabers in Eastern Europe.
The memory of Vice-President Joe Biden’s five trips to Ukraine and strong advocacy for the countries that freed themselves from Russia’s prison of nations is still fresh in the region’s capitals.
Throughout his tenure at the White House, Biden played the unofficial role of President Barak Obama’s special envoy to Ukraine, and since the 2016 election, he has worked to instill Ukraine’s importance on the new administration. Asked by reporters if he thought his efforts were successful, Biden responded only that “hope springs eternal.”
Indeed, the x-captive nations have been in that state of earnest hope for decades if not centuries.
Kyiv officials are worried that Trump could relegate their country to Russia’s sphere of influence, denying Ukraine’s Western aspirations. Ukrainian officials and citizens – as well as Ukrainian Americans – have long feared that the West could “sell out” Ukraine by forcing a bad peace. But no one suspected that unfaithfulness would come from Washington. And forcing a bad peace on Ukraine turned out not to be a far-fetched idea. Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry this week protested after media reported that Kyiv would be excluded from US-Russia talks about the war and its future.
Ian Bateson, a freelance journalist, cited the following in The Huffington Post: “Commentators constantly refer to the Munich 1938 agreement, implying that the West will once again attempt to appease the aggressor,” Kostiantyn Fedorenko, a political analyst at the Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation, told The World Post. “This, in their view, would be done via [the] lifting of US sanctions on Russia.”
In an op-ed in The New York Times, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin expressed hope that Trump would be a strong leader for Ukraine as well as for the United States. Poroshenko, in his remarks after meeting with Biden, said he looked forward to working with the Trump administration, and Ukrainian media reported that Ukrainian Ambassador to the US Valeriy Chaly said he also emphasized Ukraine’s importance in a conversation with Trump.
At last Saturday’s women’s marches in Washington, New York City and elsewhere, Ukrainian American women and their righteous brothers joined the protests by demanding that Putin withdraw Russian armies and mercenaries from Ukraine and that Washington under President Trump would continue supporting Ukraine.
On Monday, January 23, opposition to Trump’s pro-Russian and anti-Ukrainian posture suddenly crumbled like a house of cards. The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted in favor of Tillerson’s appointment as the secretary of state. All Republicans that had criticized Trump’s “reset” policies with Russia and Tillerson’s too-close-for-comfort relationship with Putin caved and supported his candidacy like obedient schoolchildren. On the other hand, all Democrats on the panel held fast and voted against him.
What is baffling about this battle of wills is that Tillerson’s views and testimony may not be firmly pro-Ukrainian, but he is also not toeing the line of his boss. Tillerson said he didn’t accept Rubio’s description of Putin as a war criminal but he did say Russia had no legitimate claim on Ukraine. He also said he would have provided Ukraine with defensive weapons and make a show of US and NATO border surveillance and intelligence-sharing. Tillerson was non-committal about lifting sanctions, preferring to say it would be better to maintain the status quo.
As for GOP mea culpa, McCain and Graham attempted to explain their betrayal of Ukrainian interests by jointly stating:
“After careful consideration, and much discussion with Mr. Tillerson, we have decided to support his nomination to be secretary of state. Though we still have concerns about his past dealings with the Russian government and President Vladimir Putin, we believe that Mr. Tillerson can be an effective advocate for US interests.
“Now more than ever, with America's friends growing more discouraged and our enemies growing more emboldened, we need a secretary of state who recognizes that our nation cannot succeed in the world by itself. We must strengthen our alliances and partnerships across the globe, and marshal them to defend our shared vision of world order. It is the American people more than anyone else who have benefited from this long tradition of US global leadership. The views that Mr. Tillerson has expressed, both privately and publicly during the confirmation process, give us confidence that he will be a champion for a strong and engaged role for America in the world.”
Rubio, who was considered a solid hold out against Tillerson, explained that his support of Tillerson’s selection focused not just on his qualifications, but also on his views about the role of democracy and human rights in shaping our foreign policy.
“I have no doubts about Mr. Tillerson’s qualifications and patriotism. He has an impressive record of leadership and the proven ability to manage a large and complex organization. What I focused on from the beginning is whether as secretary of state he will make the defense of liberty, democracy and human rights a priority,” Rubio said in a statement.
He was also encouraged by some of his other answers. “He acknowledged that Russia conducted a campaign of active measures designed to undermine our elections. He stated that Russia’s taking of Crimea was illegal and illegitimate. He affirmed that our NATO ‘Article V commitment is inviolable.’ He endorsed the Magnitsky Act. He accurately characterized the conflict in eastern Ukraine as a Russian invasion, and he supports providing defensive weapons to Ukraine,” Rubio said.
However, Rubio admitted, Tillerson’s answers on a number of other important questions were troubling. But that didn’t keep him from voting for his approval.
Tillerson did not share Rubio’s view that Putin should be called a war criminal and he did not condemn Russia’s repeated violations of the Minsk II agreement. He also noted Tillerson’s comment that he would support sanctions on Putin for meddling in US elections but only if they met the impossible condition that they not affect US businesses operating in Russia.
“Given the uncertainty that exists both at home and abroad about the direction of our foreign policy, it would be against our national interests to have this confirmation unnecessarily delayed or embroiled in controversy. Therefore, despite my reservations, I will support Mr. Tillerson’s nomination in committee and in the full Senate,” Rubio said.
Sen. Rob Portman (R-OH), also an endorser of Tillerson, said in response to his questions Tillerson declared his support for “defensive lethal assistance to allow the Ukrainians to defend themselves, which would be a welcome change from the Obama administration position. Because of these commitments, I am pleased to support Mr. Tillerson’s nomination and I look forward to helping him implement the policies needed to fulfill them.”
Portman’s reference to Tillerson’s support for sending lethal weapons to Ukraine, a major form of military aid that would doubtlessly help Ukraine in its war with Russia, was abnormally omitted by the other lawmakers.
In voting against Tillerson, Sen. Bob Menendez (D-NJ) said: “Finally, as I said at the hearing, at a time when Russia’s continuing aggression around the world and interference in our election must be at the top of America’s diplomatic agenda and of chief concern to our secretary of state, it is incredibly troublesome that Mr. Tillerson and President Trump had not discussed the specifics of their Russia policy.”
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) explained his negative vote by saying: “On Russia more broadly, I am concerned as to whether Mr. Tillerson would counsel President Trump to keep current sanctions in place – which includes leading our European allies in this most important of endeavors. He showed little interest in advancing the new Russia sanctions legislation I’ve introduced with Senator McCain and colleagues on both sides of the aisle. Russia attacked us through cyber warfare and has committed even greater atrocities in Ukraine, Syria, and Eastern Europe. They must be held accountable and our bipartisan legislation is an important tool to do so.
“Strangely, he was quick to caution about easing sanctions on Cuba because it would benefit a repressive regime, but seemed indifferent to doing business with Russia knowing that that business helped finance their ongoing violations of international norms.”
Both yea and nay voting senators used the same characteristics of the candidate to substantiate their decisions to support or reject Tillerson’s appointment.
So what happened in the hearing room? There are more questions than there are answers. Is Tillerson a ringer for pro-Ukrainian advocates? Were the senators trying to enforce their will on a stubborn President? Do the x-captive nations have nothing to fear?
Judging by this administration’s track record, Ukrainians’ great expectations could still be gone with the wind. With the Cabinet divided between pro and anti-Ukrainian officials, critical administration decisions could be frozen when Putin orders his tanks to move west or worse Trump will dictate his pro-Putin point of view. What can the free world expect from the United States and its officials when ardent American supporters of the former captive nations succumb to the President’s pressure or charm and abandon their valiant positions on the barricades of freedom? America first is not a forceful solution to threat of global subjugation.
By drawing first blood, Trump, whose stated opinions on Russia are not clouded in mystery, has demonstrated that he has political stubbornness and power to force his will upon the Washington establishment. This does not bode well for the x-captive nations, which have hoped for a better destiny a quarter of a century after they regained their sovereign independence.
Freedom-loving Americans will have to mobilize their memberships and take this righteous campaign on the road to the offices of their elected officials, the Congress and White House just like they did defending human rights activists during the Soviet phase of Russian imperialism.
Now, with Trump in office, Russia certainly will not abandon its aggressive policies
to rebuild the glory of mother Russia and repair the torn curtain. But without Washington’s unwavering support, Ukraine, Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and the others will be left to arm and defend themselves against Russian imperialism.
0 notes
Text
Ambassador Power’s High-Ground Legacy
Emblematic of her historic oratory as US Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Ambassador Samantha Power concluded her high-ground career the way she began it. In her final address on January 17, she figuratively grabbed the international community by its lapels and shook it – diplomatically – so it wouldn’t neglect the fate of the world and the former captive nations.
The Ambassador did not waste the opportunity to warn incoming President Donald J. Trump and the new officials Inside the Beltway that Russia is the single major threat facing the United States.
After citing the friendlier moments from US-Russian contentious relations, including mutual concerns regarding radical Islamic terrorism, Ambassador Power declared: “Having said that, anyone who has seen my debates in the UN Security Council with Russia knows that I and my government have long had serious concerns about its government’s aggressive and destabilizing actions.”
She went on to detail how Russian President Vladimir Putin has weakened the “rules-based order” that has benefitted the global community for seven decades.
“Our values, our security, our prosperity, and our very way of life are tied to this order. And we – and by we, I mean the United States and our closest partners – must come together to prevent Russia from succeeding,” she declared.
The US diplomat listed the following musts: better understanding and education the American public about how Russia is changing this historic order; reaffirming American commitment to the rules and institutions have undergirded this order for many years; using new tools to counter Russian tactics for undermining this order; and addressing the vulnerabilities in America’s democracy that Russia’s attacks have exposed and exacerbated.
“To do this, we cannot let Russia divide us. If we confront this threat together, we will adapt and strengthen the order on which our interests depend,” Power urged.
While she didn’t mention any US official by name, including President-elect Trump, even a cursory viewing of the today’s news would reveal that America is more divided today than any time in the past. Russia’s fifth column activity and psychological operations have certainly contributed to this dangerous state that can make the US ripe for picking by Moscow as I wrote in a previous blog.
Ambassador Power clarified that the international order that Russia is threatening includes the UN Charter and its rule that the borders between sovereign states should be respected, an obvious allusion to Russia’s numerous recent invasions of sovereign UN member-states.
“The vast majority of countries recognize that we all benefit from having rules of the road that constrain certain kinds of behavior to enhance our shared security – rules that must not be rewritten by force,” she said.
To be sure, she continued, the United States has not always lived up to what it preaches. However, she said, despite shortcomings under President Obama, the Unites States has shown its commitment to investing in and abiding by the rules-based international order.
“The same cannot be said for the Russian government today. For years, we have seen Russia take one aggressive and destabilizing action after another. We saw it in March 2014 – not long after mass peaceful protests in Ukraine brought to power a government that favored closer ties with Europe – when Russia dispatched its soldiers to the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea. The ‘little green men,’ as they came to be called – for Russia denied any ties to them – rammed through a referendum at the barrel of a gun, which Mr. Putin then used to justify his sham annexation of Crimea,” Power recalled.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, first in Crimea and a few months later in the Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts, has been a recurring theme of Ambassador Power’s speeches at UN Security Council meetings. In her remarks she often cited evidence of Russia’s arming, training and fighting alongside the separatist-terrorists. Moscow’s reply was standard: It denied any role, flouting, as she said, the international obligation to respect territorial integrity of its neighbor.
Power also included Russia’s support for Bashar al-Assad’s brutal war in Syria and then participation in the assault against Syrian people which resulted in killing thousands of innocent civilians in her list of Moscow’s evil doings.
But the list doesn’t end there.
“We saw it in Russia’s efforts to undercut the credibility of international institutions like the UN. For example, in an emergency UN Security Council meeting last month, then-Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told the member-states that the Assad regime forces and Iranian militias were reportedly disappearing men as they took parts of eastern Aleppo. In response, the representative of Russia – which was providing air cover for the offensive – not only claimed that Russian investigations had uncovered ‘not a single report of ill treatment or violations of international humanitarian law against civilians of eastern Aleppo,’ but also accused the Secretary-General of basing his information on ‘fake news.’ Minutes later, Syria’s representative echoed Russia’s line, holding up as proof what he claimed was a photograph of a Syrian government soldier helping an elderly woman. The only problem was that the photo was taken six months earlier, in June 2016. In Fallujah, Iraq,” she said.
Russia’s assault against the world continued apace. Power said Russia sought to systematically sow doubt and division in democracies, and drive a wedge between the US and its closest allies, and supported illiberal parties like France’s National Front, which has a xenophobic, anti-Muslim platform.
Russia also took aim at Germany. The Ambassador cited German intelligence agencies to disclose that groups linked to the Russian government carried out a massive May 2015 attack targeting the German parliament, energy companies, telecoms, and even universities. Recently, Germany’s domestic intelligence agency reported an alarming spike in “aggressive and increased cyber-spying and cyber-operations that could potentially endanger German government officials, members of parliament, and employees of democratic parties,” which the agency attributed to Russian hackers. The head of Germany’s foreign intelligence service said the perpetrators’ aim is “delegitimizing the democratic process.”
This abominable list of crimes and dirty actions belong to Putin’s Russia, which President-elect refuses to acknowledge while continuing to favor Moscow versus US government officials and evidence to the contrary.
“It is in this context that one must view the Russian government’s latest efforts to interfere in America’s democracy,” Ambassador Power forebodingly warned.
“As our intelligence community found, we know that the Russian government sought to interfere in our presidential election, with the goals of undermining public faith in the US democratic process, denigrating one candidate, and helping the other candidate. Our intelligence agencies assess that the campaign was ordered by President Putin, and implemented by a combination of Russian government agencies, state-funded media, third-party intermediaries, and government-paid trolls.”
Disputing thoughts that the string of Russia’s global interventions is unrelated, Power pointed out that the common thread is not in anything the Russia supports but rather in what Moscow is against.
“Not in the rules it follows, but in the ones it breaks. Russia’s actions are not standing up a new world order. They are tearing down the one that exists. This is what we are fighting against – having defeated the forces of fascism and communism, we now confront the forces of authoritarianism and nihilism,” she said.
Her previous comment points, as I have written in this blog, to a common thread of authoritarianism, nihilism, aggression, belligerence, repression, subjugation, persecution and murder that runs through all that wield power in the Kremlin regardless of era or politics.
One reason why Russia has unleashed such a destructive campaign against the world order, she surmised, “is to regain a sense of its past glory, or to get back at the countries that it blames for the break-up of the Soviet Union, which President Putin has called the ‘greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the twentieth century.’”
In other words, to repair the torn curtain and rebuild its prison of nations.
So what is the world going to do to address this threat, she asked.
First, Power said, is to work in a bipartisan fashion to determine the full extent of Russia’s interference in the US recent elections, identify the vulnerabilities of the American democratic system, and come up with targeted recommendations for preventing future attacks.
She explained that the purpose of such an effort is to identify the gaps in American defenses that Russia exploited – “as well as other gaps that may not have been seized upon in this attack, but that Russia or others could take advantage of in the future. And the purpose is to determine the steps needed to close such gaps and strengthen the resilience of our system.”
She said it would be naïve and negligent to consider that just because Russia was once caught committing these crimes that it or any other country wouldn’t do it again.
“Allowing politics to get in the way of determining the full extent of Russia’s meddling and how best to protect our democracy would undermine our core national security interests,” she said.
Next, she continued, the US has to do a better job of informing Americans about the seriousness of the threat the Russian government poses. Unity here is crucial, she emphasized, because when making conflicting messages about a threat Russia poses, the American people receive mixed messages.
This consequently leads to confusion and national confusion about what is the threat, who is the enemy and what’s to be done about it gives the perpetrator – Russia – the opportunity to intensify its assault not only against the US but also Ukraine, the x-captive nations, and the free world.
Ambassador Power cited an alarming statistic that 37% of Republicans today hold a favorable view of Putin, up from just 10% in July 2014. Any favorable opinion of Putin is deplorable, but coming from the GOP is more disgraceful. Where are Goldwater, Nixon and Reagan when the US needs them?
She urged the new Administration to maintain Washington’s robust support for NATO while making clear America’s steadfast commitment to treat an attack on any NATO member as an attack on us all as well as expectations that all NATO allies will do their part in keeping the alliance strong.
“That also means maintaining the sanctions placed on Russia, including those imposed by President Obama in response to Russia’s meddling in our election. Now, some have argued that the most effective way to get Russia to start playing by the rules that undergird the international order is actually by easing sanctions. If only we reduce the pressure, they claim, Russia will stop lashing out against the international order. But they have it backwards: easing punitive measures on the Russian Government when they haven’t changed their behavior will only embolden Russia – sending the message that the best way to gain international acceptance of its destabilizing actions is simply to wait us out. And that will not only encourage more dangerous actions by Russia, but also by other rule-breakers like Iran and North Korea, which are constantly testing how far they can move the line without triggering a response,” she said.
Power also discounted any suggestion that the United States should put recent transgressions aside and announce another “reset” with Russia.
She warned against continuing to use the same tactics and means against Russia that seem to have succeeded in the recent past because now cyberspace attacks and fake news have entered the realm of possible weapons. Power noted that Russia’s willingness to lie turned reporting into an “on the one hand, on the other hand” story, even in respected outlets like the New York Times, the BBC and CNN.
“In other words, lying is a strategic asset. It didn’t matter whether Russia’s accounts were accurate or even consistent; all that mattered was that Russia injected enough counterclaims into the news cycle to call into question who was responsible,” she added.
In a pithy phrase: “Deny and lie.”
Another method of fighting Russia’s assault, Power said, is to continue to seek ways to engage directly with the Russian people and their government.
“It can be easy to forget that virtually all the tactics the Russian Government is using to undermine democracy abroad are ones they fine-tuned on the Russian people, to devastating effect. After all, when Russian soldiers are killed fighting in a conflict in eastern Ukraine that their government denies it has any role in – it’s Russian mothers, widows, and orphans who are denied the benefits and recognition they deserve as the family members of slain soldiers. The mafias that the Russian government uses to sow corruption abroad profit most off the backs of the Russian people. And it is Russian journalists and human rights defenders who have been harassed, beaten, and even killed for uncovering their government’s abuses,” she said, cautioning that it is important to distinguish between the Russian government and people.
The US should continue engaging with the Russian government by collaborating on issues of shared interest to demonstrate that both countries have more to gain by working to shore up the system of shared rules and principles than by destroying it.
But at the same time the US should be vigilant and responsive to its ongoing transgressions.
By renewing American people’s faith in the democratic system and principles that the Founding Fathers created, which Russia intends to destroy, will help Washington persevere against Moscow, she said.
“But we know not only what we are against; we know what we are for. So, just as we are clear-eyed about the threat Russia poses from the outside, and unified in confronting it, we must also dedicate ourselves to restoring citizens’ faith in our democracy on the inside – which always has been the source of America’s strength, and always will be our best defense against any foreign power that tries to do us harm,” she concluded.
Ambassador Power will be retiring from her post on Friday, January 20. Without a doubt, her departure from the hallowed halls of the United Nations and US government will leave a large gap that must be filled by her successor. Ukraine and the former captive nations will lose a strong advocate in the face of Russia’s ceaseless aggression. The free world will lose a steadfast champion for human rights, liberties and the moral high road.
Without presupposing the future, the incoming Administration is not of this vital mindset. The designated US Permanent Representative, Nikki Haley, has not yet revealed her beliefs.
However, the US and Haley must be inclined to pursue Ambassador Power’s high-ground policies not merely for the benefit of the former captive nations but because Washington is honor bound not to shirk from its moral values of preserving and fostering democratic principles, human rights and morals in a world gone haywire.
0 notes
Text
Will Putin Push Russian Troops west to Kyiv, Lviv & Beyond?
The Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17 has been going on for three years and it has resulted in the occupation of Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk regions of Ukraine. Its duration so far is about half of World War II, Europe’s last continental military conflagration. So, will Vladimir Putin continue driving Russia’s military machine across Ukraine into Western Europe?
The simple answer is yes, he will, and wishing it weren’t so won’t make it so.
Russian global expansion is its historical manifest destiny – regardless of who is in the Kremlin – and trampling Ukraine’s independence and sovereignty is the means by which Moscow will rebuild its empire. After all, Russia is continuing to mobilize troops on both sides of the Ukrainian border, which doesn’t bode well for peace and stability in Ukraine and the region.
According to Ukrainian Defense Minister Stepan Poltorak, a 40,000-strong diversified Russian army has recently been formed in occupied Donbas, of which 5,000 are Russian regular troops.
Poltorak said Russia has massed about 600 tanks, 1,300 combat vehicles, 860 artillery systems and 300 multiple launch rocket systems on Ukrainian territory. Military affairs observer and member of Verkhovna Rada Dmytro Tymchuk also warned of large-scale Russia military buildup along the border with Ukraine.
“Of course, with this military build-up, it is very difficult to talk about peace, especially with those who do not wish to fulfill the Minsk agreements or is very aggressively against Ukraine,” Poltorak said in an interview with TV Channel 5.
During the past few weeks, including during Christmas observances, which was designated as a holiday truce, Russian forces and their mercenary terrorists have been attacking Ukrainian positions in eastern Ukraine, killing many defenders. Ukrainian military spokesmen have said that the assaults marked a significant escalation in deadly engagements.
With the fighting spiking, the only question that remains is when will Russia unleash the full fury of its imperial assault?
Dr. Adam Lelonek, in an article earlier this month on the Polish-language website Defence24.pl, expressed the point of view that such an expansion is inevitable because Russia will not permit Ukraine to integrate itself in EuroAtlantic structures.
However, Lelonek pointed out, Russia will not yet commence a major ground war but will rather unleash an overwhelmingly vile campaign of dirty operations meant to destabilize Ukraine and camouflage its intentions from Western capitals.
Lelonek cited Ukrainian experts and pundits who believe that while a full-blown war may not come in 2017, that doesn’t mean that Russia hasn’t already begun planning for such an eventuality. After all, he reminded readers that launching a war is not a spur of the moment idea. Wars and invasions take months if not years of preparations before soldiers are put in harm’s way.
Russia’s invasion of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea wasn’t arbitrarily done two weeks after the conclusion of the 2014 Winter Olympics. Planning began many months earlier, while free world leaders were probably busy glad-handing Putin at a conference or summit.
While Russia is busy with Syria and elections in Western Europe, Putin understands that at the present time it is a cheaper and safer option to destabilize Ukraine, dishearten the Ukrainian population, discredit the government, isolate it from the West, create a viable fifth column operation, and weaken all levels of the country to the point where Moscow can just pick up the pieces and stick them in its pocket.
According to Lelonek, Moscow’s master plan also calls for destabilizing the internal situations and foreign policies of Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia, Polish, Belarus, Slovakia, Moldova, the Czech Republic and Germany.
As recent history shows, this operation doesn’t require an army. Destabilization could be the result of fake news, hacking, sabotaging elections, or sleeper agents. Even confusion and indecisiveness can slow down the wheels of government enough to destabilize a country.
“Western experts still seem to mostly ignore the fact that Russian plans, including military campaigns, are prepared for the long run. Scenarios for the annexation of the Crimea or military actions in Donbas were prepared long before the Revolution of Dignity, and the dismantling of the Ukrainian defense structures and infiltration of the Ukrainian state structures by the Russian secret services were being done years in advance for the benefit of the future,” Lelonek observed.
The Polish author added that Russia is also counting on a worsening of relations among Washington, Moscow and Beijing that would distract the world’s attention from Ukraine as well as the West’s ultimate fatigue and boredom with the issue of Ukraine.
Another flashpoint that will be exacerbated by Russia to destabilize Ukraine will be inciting conflicts between the Moscow Patriarchate’s Orthodox Church in Ukraine and the Ukrainian Orthodox Church as well as between the Orthodox Church and the Ukrainian Greek Catholic Church.
“There is no indication of the probability of a tragedy this year, however, the majority of Ukrainian experts (theoreticians and practitioners) are nonetheless convinced that a full-scale war is only a matter of time. If Russia recognizes that it cannot stop Ukraine’s progress to the West, most likely, it will decide to apply maximum effort to destroy or seize as many resources as it can including demographic, intellectual, technological and natural,” Lelonek projected.
Andrey Illarionov, a Russian economist and Putin’s former economic policy advisor, was quoted by UA Today and channel 112 as saying that Moscow will take advantage of the interregnum in the United States to intensify provocations against Ukraine.
“This November, before and after the November 8, is the best situation for destabilization. We understand that the US presidential election is the time when neither American administration, nor the political powers in the US and Europe will care about Ukraine. The world will be focused on the developments in the US, and election results,” Illarionov said.
According to him, the world’s attention will be distracted by the US elections and inauguration, creating an ideal situation for Russia “with little or no risk to hold its campaigns in the various countries of the world.” Even a cursory review of American newspapers will reveal that the US is in such an unsafe state of flux about where are its foreign loyalties.
Illarionov reminded that Russia is capable of launching conventional and non-conventional weapons from its well-stocked arsenal against Ukraine – “Nothing can be ruled out” – in order to stop Kyiv’s westward movement.
In an interview with well-known columnist Paul Goble, Illarionov further clarified that Russia’s invasion of Ukraine cannot be called a conflict, but rather it is a war. “This is not a crisis. This is a war. The war in the simplest meaning of the word,” he said.
“This is a Russian-Ukrainian war. To be more precise, this is Putin’s war against Ukraine. Most Russians do not support the war. Putin’s war against Ukraine is already a long-term one.”
I have been referring to it as the Russo-Ukraine War for a couple of years.
Like Lelonek, Illarionov also said he was sure that preparations for the war took years – at least 11 years. “Since 2003. I can say that certain questions relating to the future war with Ukraine were discussed in my presence. I didn't think the talks would really lead to a real war,” he said.
This observation must sink in for western leaders. While they were shaking hands with Putin, toasting him with Russian vodka, signing agreements, and praising his accomplishments, he was busy planning his invasion of Ukraine and other countries.
Illarionov recalled that in year 2004 preparations were already discussed for the future occupation and annexation of Crimea but were suspended during the Orange Revolution. In 2008, Russian Journal published the leaked plan of the military command “in which you will see a detailed draft project of a war against Ukraine.” Information about actions to support separatists in Ukraine began to appear in 2009, he added.
“So, they were preparing the war for a long time. The other matter is that it is a long war that has been continuing for more than 16 months. It was officially launched on July 27, 2013, by Putin's speech in Kyiv on the occasion of the anniversary of the baptism of Kyivan Rus. You can find here clear remarks about the start of the hybrid campaign, an intervention, but not a war,” Goble observed on the basis of Illarionov’s remarks.
Indeed, in the July 29, 2013, edition of The Torn Curtain 1991 newsletter, I also forecast that Putin’s arm twisting of Ukrainian leaders at that event would ultimately lead to Russia’s violent attempt to rebuild the torn iron curtain one way or another: “In Ukraine for the commemoration of Christianity of Kyivan Rus (ancient Ukraine), Putin made it a point to urge Ukraine to unite with Russia because, after all, they’re ‘one people.’ Nothing smacks of a restoration of the Russian prison of nations and the iron curtain more than that.”
Goble wrote in his current column that Illarionov believes the war won’t end in the nearest time.
Illarionov made similar observations to Paul Roderick Gregory in Forbes. The Russian pundit said Putin has already begun waging another type of war throughout Ukraine, one that is being conducted by Russian Spetsnaz (special operations) forces and KGB (now called FSB) agents and its aims is to topple the pro-Western government in Kyiv – destabilization.
The Spetsnaz’ orders include the sowing of civil unrest throughout Ukraine via strikes, demonstrations, staged incidents, and street battles. Putin’s subversive forces will also orchestrate neo-Nazi incidents with Nazi regalia and swastikas on full display. Their mandates also include the deliberate killing of Russian soldiers and of ethnic Russian civilians to prove the hatred and extremism of radical Ukrainian nationalists. These orders come from Putin himself, Illarionov said. Their mission is to create an image of intolerable chaos and loss of civil authority to justify a Russian takeover of all Ukraine. Putin’s goal is the destruction of pro-Western authority in Ukraine, the total humiliation of the West, and a makeover of the geopolitical balance.
Illarionov’s assessment is similar to that of Lelonek. Destabilize Ukraine and make it ripe for the picking.
His urgent advice to President Poroshenko of Ukraine is to place all your efforts into preserving civil order and avoid falling for the Spetsnaz provocations. In other words, the nation shouldn’t become a patsy.
Ukrainian authorities must immediately close all borders with Russia to slow the infiltration of Spetsnaz and FSB destabilization units. The American government has also advised this and is in the process of providing Kyiv a range of sophisticated border control systems.
The free world is also tasked with containing Russian expansion. Illarionov urges the West to understand Putin’s grand vision for restoring the “historic glory of Mother Russia.” He and others are convinced that if Russia is successful in re-subjugating Ukraine, the balance of power in Europe and the world would change for the worse and lead to further “restorations” of the former Soviet Union and ultimately to rebuilding the prison of nations.
So it’s merely a matter of time when Putin will unleash his hordes to reconquer Ukraine and the other x-captive nations.
Illarionov also explained to the Lithuanian Tribune that it’s not only about Ukraine. Russian laws essentially define four categories of Russians, he said: ethnic Russians, irrespective of whether they reside in or outside Russia; Russian-speakers, irrespective of their nationality; all former citizens of the Soviet Union and their offspring living in the territories formerly covered by the USSR; and former citizens of the Russian Empire (pre-1917) and their offspring living in the territories once covered by the Russian Empire.
“Such a legal base allows the Russian army to protect all the Russians listed in the law. Therefore, for the Russian side, such actions of the Russian army beyond Russian borders might seem completely legitimate,” Illarionov elaborated.
The x-captive nations appreciate the dangerous situation they are in and have been increasing their military budgets in hopes of building armed forces strong enough to counter a full-scale Russian blitzkrieg.
Russia’s thirst for new conquests or return of its empire will not be sated by President-elect Trump’s misguided belief in Putin’s wholesomeness and integrity. The free world should not hesitate to vigorously thwart Putin’s war by preparing accordingly.
Some US officials, congressmen and pundits have been warning Russia about this dangerous, destabilizing trend. They have placed their hope for a safer world on a new round of intensified sanctions against Moscow that will force it to withdraw from occupied Ukrainian regions.
As in the past, so too in the future, this generation will be asked, what did you do to oppose Russian expansion and protect the world from new colonialism?
0 notes
Text
Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17 Continues
As Russia’s crimes mount faster than world leaders can track them, I’d like to return to the raging Russo-Ukraine War of 2014-17.
Except for Ukrainian and x-captive nations’ news media, very few western traditional or cyber media are still conscientiously reporting on Russia’s military advances against Ukraine and the defending troops’ valiant retaliations. Stories from the front have been supplanted by Russian prevarications about its invasion of Ukraine, occupation of Crimea, bombardment of Aleppo, hacking of America’s cyber infrastructure, and other visible and invisible crimes. Some of the accounts even seem to absolve Russia of any culpability for its obvious wrongdoings.
Well-intentioned, mortified and angry US officials and lawmakers are incessantly and justly demanding sanctions against Russia and its tyrant leader for hacking US political parties’ computers.
Get in line. The Russian leadership has been committing a long list of crimes for which it must be held accountable.
But back to the war that Russia launched against Ukraine in February 2014 by invading and occupying Crimea and then invading eastern Ukraine. Intense fighting is continuing, Ukrainian soldiers and civilians are being killed by regular Russian troops, mercenaries and traitors in Ukraine. Russia is still pulling military weapons across the border and positioning them for bloody shelling of Ukrainian military and non-military targets.
While the Ukrainian government has not yet adequately replied to Russia’s invasion by declaring war against Russia and expelling and arresting its diplomats in Ukraine, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and its Permanent Mission of Ukraine to the UN have been doing what they can to mobilize global support for Ukraine and keep Russian feet to the coals until Moscow withdraws its military from all occupied regions of Ukraine.
The Permanent Mission, on December 14, 2016, the 42nd anniversary of the adoption of the UN General Assembly Resolution on the definition of aggression, reminded UN member-states of Russia’s unending belligerence.
“Having illegally occupied the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol and carried out further military intervention in the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, the Russian Federation initiated an unprovoked military aggression against Ukraine. The Russian Federation thus has blatantly violated its international obligations and commitments as envisaged by the UN Charter, the 1975 CSCE Helsinki Final Act, the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, and the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation.”
Furthermore, the Ukrainian diplomats stated that Russia has not only violated the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of Ukraine – which is a significant global crime in itself, Moscow “has threatened international peace and security at large. The third year of Russia’s military aggression continues to bring pain and suffering to the people of Ukraine of all ethnic backgrounds. The total number of victims of this undeclared war in the heart of Europe exceeds 10,000.”
The Kremlin’s crimes enumerated by Ukraine at the UN are severe enough to elicit global condemnation of Russia and its leadership as well as sanctions that would ban it from the global table and isolate it from all partnerships. It is the height of folly to invite Russia, a global lawbreaker, to partner in anti-ISIS coalitions.
Ukraine’s statement noted that the Ministry of Foreign Affairs “continues to affirm, in clear and unequivocal terms, that the occupation and subsequent attempt to annex the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol, as well as Russia’s illegal actions in eastern Ukraine, fall squarely under the United Nations’ definition of an act of aggression.
“Such actions constitute the most serious crime against international peace, which entails international responsibility of the Russian Federation as a state and international criminal responsibility of its senior leadership,” the Permanent Mission declared.
Indeed, while many people of goodwill belittle the goings on of the UN, nonetheless, the respected global body has a definition of aggression, which Russia has violated. And this is in addition to the UN’s official condemnation of Russia, a member of the UN Security Council, as an “occupier” of foreign lands just like Nazi Germany and other tyrannical empires were. (Read my previous blog of December 20, 2016.)
The Ukrainian statement also said the political and military leaderships of Russia bear full responsibility for the planning, preparation, initiation and waging of this aggression, “as well as responsibility for numerous human casualties, material damage and destruction.”
Indeed, Russian war reparations are well within the bounds of reasonable Ukrainian demands after Russians withdraw back to its country.
“No political, economic or military considerations can justify the treacherous Russian aggression against Ukraine. War cannot be a means of doing politics in the twenty-first century,” the statement went on to say.
The Ukrainian delegation expressed its gratefulness to the member-states of the United Nations, notably the United States, Great Britain and Canada, for their “consistent and strong support in countering Russian aggression and overcoming its consequences.”
Ukraine also called for increasing international pressure on Russia in order to stop the aggression and bring about complete withdrawal from the territory of Ukraine of “the Russian armed forces, Russia-controlled illegal armed groups and mercenaries, along with weapons and military equipment deployed in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine) or illegally transferred to the terrorist organizations "DNR" and "LNR", as well as to revoke all acts aimed at legitimizing the attempted annexation of the Crimean peninsula and to undertake its further de-occupation.”
“Only Ukraine’s full control over the entire length of its state border and firm guarantees of its sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence can safeguard international peace and security,” the statement concluded.
This is also the only way that the borders of the former captive nations, Europe, Canada and the United States can be secured in the face of expanding Russian threats.
The free world is maintaining sanctions against Moscow amid calls for new sanctions but Russia is not budging. In addition to ongoing transgressions against the Minsk Accords, Russia has even violated a three-day Christmas truce by escalating attacks against Ukrainian positions.
According to a report on December 27 by Col. Oleksandr Motuzyanyk, Ministry of Defense spokesperson, “The past 24 hours have shown that the adversary is not going to respect agreements on complete and comprehensive ceasefire. Since December 24, militants have continued firing on Ukrainian positions.”
Two days later at the Ukrainian Crisis Media Center, Motuzyanyk said hostilities intensified in the vicinity of Krymske in the Luhansk region. “The most active combat actions took place in far outskirts of Krymske. The enemy fired on our positions three times from weapons of armored fighting vehicles and machine guns. One armed provocation, involving the use of grenade launchers, took place in Krymske,” he said.
The Russia-backed terrorists also violated the ceasefire in Stanytsia Luhanska and to the north from Stanytsia Luhanska. All told, they violated the ceasefire six times in the Luhansk sector.
Russian mercenaries are also pulling up heavy arms. They deployed the Grad multiple-launch missile systems (truck-mounted 122 mm multiple rocket launcher) near the so-called Svitlodarsk rim at the Donbas frontline, reported UNIAN.
“The Svitlodarsk rim remains to be a zone with never-ending shelling against our positions, and they increase and decrease in number ever and again," ATO spokesperson Col. Andriy Lysenko said.
The ceasefire in eastern Ukraine that was supposed to go into effect during this holiday season has failed, and the Ukrainian military said they are not the reason for its failure.
Motuzyanyk said Russian-backed terrorists continue to violate ceasefire in the ATO zone.
“The past 24 hours proved that the enemy does not comply with the agreements reached previously on the full and comprehensive ceasefire, starting December 24. The enemy continues to shell Ukrainian positions, which have traditionally been the hottest spots in the past weeks,” said Motuzyanyk.
“As we've been reporting, the newest ceasefire, which was supposed to go into effect on December 24, never took hold. Though fighting has been less intense this week than last, there have been significant casualties.”
By mid-February 2017, Russia will be waging war against Ukraine for three full years. Will there continue to be no end in sight? If the free world continues to interact with Russia on many levels as if nothing is happening and refrain from designating it as a pariah, criminal state, then the Russian war and Russia’s acts of terrorism will continue.
If Ukraine refuses to declare war against Russia and sever diplomatic relations with it, the free world will continue to be confused by Ukraine’s response to Russia’s aggression and the war and acts of terrorism will continue across the country.
The free nations’ 2017 New Year’s resolution must be to bring this to the attention of world leaders in order to end Russia’s criminal bloodletting in Ukraine.
0 notes
Text
UN Labels Russia ‘Occupier’ for All Generations to Know
The United Nations has officially condemned Russia, a member of the UN Security Council, as an “occupier” of foreign lands just like Nazi Germany and other tyrannical empires were.
What is significant about this resolution is that while Ukraine, the United States and a few other countries favorably inclined toward Ukraine have condemned Russia for its illegal annexation of Crimea, a resolution by the UN, a global representative body, casts a different light on this crime. Just like the albatross in “The Rime of the Ancient Mariner,” Russia, the Kremlin and Vladimir Putin have been publically stigmatized as global lawbreakers for current and future generations to see.
The international community must also appreciate that an occupier is a state that has crossed international frontiers without consideration of laws, or invaded a foreign land, and has willfully taken what it wanted.
This resolution sends a clear message to Russia and Putin that as “occupying authorities” they are responsible for the persecutions and violations of the human rights of the residents of Crimea and will be brought to justice.
The 71st General Assembly adopted on Monday, December 19, a resolution on human rights in Crimea, titled “Situation of human rights in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (Ukraine),” which was initiated by Ukraine and supported by the UNGA Third Committee. Seventy-three UN member-states, including Ukraine, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Poland, Latvia, Lithuania, Estonia and others backed the document, 76 abstained, and Russia plus 22 others voted against it.
The resolution cited the word “occupier” in relation to Russia’s enslavement of Crimea four times.
Most importantly, the resolution condemns “the temporary occupation of part of the territory of Ukraine —the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol (hereinafter “Crimea”) — by the Russian Federation.” It also notably reaffirmed its “non-recognition” of Russia’s unlawful annexation of the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea after a fabricated and rigged referendum.
The General Assembly called on the Russia “to take all measures necessary to bring an immediate end to all abuses against residents of Crimea, in particular reported discriminatory measures and practices, arbitrary detentions, torture and other cruel, inhumane or degrading treatment, and to revoke all discriminatory legislation.”
It also urged Russia to “immediately release Ukrainian citizens who were unlawfully detained and judged without regard for elementary standards of justice, as well as those transferred across internationally recognized borders from Crimea to the Russian Federation.”
Russia must also “address the issue of impunity and ensure that those found to be responsible for abuses are held accountable before an independent judiciary.”
The world body insisted that the Russian occupying authorities “create and maintain a safe and enabling environment for journalists and human rights defenders to perform their work independently and without undue interference in Crimea; to permit the reopening of cultural and religious institutions.”
Coming at the end of the year, the UN vote capped an intense campaign by Ukraine and global organizations, including Amnesty International and other organizations, to shed light on Russia’s occupation of Crimea and violation of human rights. See my blog post “Russian Oppression in Occupied Crimea Takes Center Stage” of November 15.
The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine welcomed the resolution, pointing out that this important document provides a clear definition on the status of Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol as part of the territory of Ukraine, condemns the temporary occupation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and does not recognize its attempted annexation by the occupying state.
“That’s why the fixation and condemnation by UN resolution of the systematic human rights violations carried out by the Russian occupation authorities, including extrajudicial executions, abductions, politically motivated persecution and restriction of basic political rights of Crimean residents should become an important step towards defending rights and civil liberties of citizens of Ukraine that live under this occupation.”
The ministry said one of the key elements of the resolution is the call to ensure the unimpeded access of international human rights monitoring mechanisms to enslaved Crimea to monitor and report on the situation according to their mandates. Within the context of the terrible human rights situation in Crimea due to its occupation by Russia, it attached particular importance to the reference in the resolution to the Geneva Conventions of August 12, 1949, which underscores the humane treatment of the population, which lives in occupied territory and the need to protect its rights under international humanitarian law.
With this document in its folder, Ukraine, its allies and civic organizations around the world can appeal to individual member-states to condemn Russia’s enslavement of Crimea and to continue sanctions against Moscow until Russia withdraws all of its armed forces from Crimea and Ukraine. That should be the free world’s New Year resolution.
0 notes
Text
Ukraine Defends National Interests at the UN
Ukraine continues its undaunted diplomatic battle in the hallowed halls of the United Nations to defend its independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, safeguard the fate of Ukrainian citizens, protect human rights, and condemn numerous Russian gross violations of the UN Charter and international law and order. Ukraine is steadfastly supported in this mission by Ambassador Samantha Power, US permanent representative to the UN, and several other member-states.
Ambassador Volodymyr Yelchenko, permanent representative of Ukraine to the UN, on November 22 enlightened the world body about why Moscow is depriving the residents of enslaved Crimea of a valuable life-giving commodity, one that is protected by numerous UN resolutions as well as Goal 6 of the Sustainable Development Goals – water.
Yelchenko first of all reminded the UN member-states that Russia invaded the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in February 2014 and has occupied and enslaved it ever since, incidentally as well as two eastern oblasts of Ukraine.
“The territory of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea as of today remains under occupation of the Russian Federation and under international law it is the occupying power that bears full responsibility for the consequences of its illegal actions,” the Ukrainian diplomat noted.
He explained that the Russian delegation in an earlier statement had demonstrated the inability of the Russian occupation authorities “to address in any satisfactory manner the essential needs of the local population.” Instead of admitting its unlawful actions and attempting to correct the wrongs it committed, Yelchenko continued, “The Russian side opted to use the issue of water supply in Crimea as a propaganda tool.”
Today Moscow is using water as a weapon of control, while in 1932-33 the Russian Federation’s Soviet predecessors used food as a weapon of control that killed some 7-10 million Ukrainians.
Yelchenko challenged the sincerity of the Russian occupiers by saying if Moscow was genuinely concerned about the issue of water, it should cease diverting scarce water resources in Crimea to supply the needs of the growing military infrastructure and military personnel on the peninsula.
Ukraine and other global military observers have reported on numerous occasions Russia’s massive military buildup on Crimea, turning the once popular resort to a dangerous, armed warm water encampment with enough troops, sailors and weapons to strike targets in the Black Sea, the Med and even Atlantic.
Once Russia stops misappropriating water for military purposes, Yelchenko concluded, “The next logical step would be to start the process of de-occupation of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and city of Sevastopol, thus contributing in a positive way to addressing the issue of water availability in Crimea.”
A day earlier, the Ukrainian ambassador explained to the UN General Assembly that the so-called Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) is a bogus institution and Kyiv will not support any UN measure that would give the CIS credibility.
The CIS is an ill-conceived structure formed 25 years ago, when Ukraine declared its independence and the USSR was crumbling, in order to hasten Ukraine’s push for independence and sovereignty. However, in reality, it is merely another façade to promote the Russian empire.
Yelchenko presented Ukraine’s case why the UN cannot and should not cooperate with the CIS.
“To our disappointment this organization demonstrated its complete failure to take appropriate measures to respond to the Russian aggression in Ukraine. The CIS is still pretending that there is no Russian aggression, no illegal occupation of Crimea, no war crimes committed by the Russian Federation,” he said.
The Ukrainian ambassador pointed out that Ukraine declined to sign the decision of the Council of Heads of State of the CIS of December 24, 1993, regarding measures to ensure international recognition of the CIS, with regard to granting observer status for the CIS in the General Assembly. He said Ukraine acted on the basis of the Statement of December 20, 1991, of Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada concerning the conclusion of the Agreement on the CIS, which stated that Ukraine refused to grant the CIS the status of a subject of international law.
He said the CIS is not subject of international law but rather it’s an international, interregional formation which not only lacks definite status but actually includes a military and political alliance established on the basis of the Tashkent agreement on collective security of May 15, 1992, which binds only some members of the Commonwealth.
The CIS was entrusted with strengthening regional cooperation in such areas as trade and economic development while its principal sponsor, Russia, has undertaken targeted illegal and discriminative steps on trade with Ukraine, Yelchenko continued.
The CIS was also mandated to combat terrorism and manifestations of extremism but it has also failed in that respect, he said.
“We express our disappointment that although the Commonwealth positions itself as an active fighter against terrorism and extremism, it has displayed itself with the total absence of response to the actions of one of its most influential members — the Russian Federation — an aggressor and occupier country, which controls, finances and directs the actions of illegal armed groups in certain areas of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine, supplying them military equipment and weapons and constitutes a serious threat to international peace and security,” the Ukrainian official said.
Yelchenko said Ukraine’s abstention from putting to a vote draft resolution A/71/L.5 was based on the understanding that its adoption should not be interpreted as de jure recognition of the CIS as a regional arrangement, as defined in Chapter VIII of the United Nations Charter.
Ukraine’s position on the CIS was spot-on. There is no reason for Russia to have another fake, hollow institution perpetuating its lies and fabrications in the United Nations.
The 71st UN General Assembly and the GA President Peter Thomson should not ridicule themselves by bowing to Russian pressure and endorsing the CIS as a subject of international law.
0 notes
Text
General ‘Mad Dog’ Mattis and Ukraine
In the aftermath of Donald Trump’s presidential election victory and his perplexing uncritical support for Russian tyrant Vladimir Putin, American voters will be closely watching his every foreign policy step especially the one that pertains to Russia, Ukraine, the former captive nations and NATO.
The other day, President-elect Trump revealed his choice for Secretary of Defense – former four-star General James “Mad Dog” Mattis of the US Marine Corps. The Secretary of Defense and the Department that he heads are vital not only to the country’s defense but also the free world’s security. Traditionally, it has kept vigil over destabilizing developments in the Kremlin and publically or quietly supported Ukraine and the other former captive nations.
Mattis has earned a laudatory reputation as a tough Marine Corps officer, a battlefield hero and a military scholar. Many have equated him to General George Patton, who liberated Europe from Nazi Germany.
So what are his views about Russia and Ukraine? I checked the record today and found the following positive quotes about him or by him:
From The New York Times
In some important policy areas, General Mattis differs from Mr. Trump, who has been filling the top ranks of his national security team with hard-liners. General Mattis believes, for instance, that Mr. Trump’s conciliatory statements toward Russia are ill informed. General Mattis views with alarm Moscow’s expansionist or bellicose policies in Syria, Ukraine and the Baltics. And he has told the president-elect that torture does not work.
From the Daily Wire.com
Regarding Russia, Mattis asserted that Russia’s taking of Crimea and backing separatists in Ukraine was “much more severe, more serious” than Washington and the European Union treated it.
From the Vox.com
Mattis sees Putin very differently than the new president does,
Mattis is also a Russia hawk of sorts — a position that would potentially leave him at odds with the president-elect.
During the campaign, Trump repeatedly praised Russian strongman Vladimir Putin as a strong leader and took positions — including endorsing Moscow’s support for Assad in Syria and refusing to commit to defending NATO allies against a possible future Russian invasion — that are closely in line with the Russian leader’s long-held strategic goals. Putin, Trump said last December, is “highly respected within his own country and beyond.”
Mattis, echoing the assessments of most of the Pentagon’s top brass, has a sharply different assessment of Putin, whom he sees as a clear threat to both the US and many of Washington’s closest European allies.
According to an article by the US Naval Institute, Mattis used a speech to a conservative think tank last May to warn that Russia’s annexation of Crimea and continued meddling in eastern Ukraine was a “severe” and “serious” threat that was being underestimated by the Obama administration.
From Hotair. com
Here’s Mattis on Russia and the wider Pax Americana in May of last year:
Speaking in Washington, D.C., retired Marine Corps Gen. James Mattis said, “the perception is we’re pulling back” on America’s commitment to its allies and partners, leaving them adrift in a changing world. “We have strategic atrophy.”
He said Russia’s military moves against its neighbors—taking Crimea and backing separatists in Ukraine is “much more severe, more serious” than Washington and the European Union are treating it…
He said since World War II the United States helped create a world order—diplomatically [United Nations] , economically [World Bank and International Monetary Fund], culturally and militarily.
By renewing that combination of inspiration and intimidation, “I have no doubt we can turn this around.”
The Hoover Institute
General Mattis reviewed the military situation on the ground in Crimea, east Ukraine, and the periphery of NATO states. He described Putin’s hybrid warfare, which is not new but has been perfected by Russian military planners. Mattis emphasized the importance of the propaganda component of Russia’s hybrid war, which Russia is clearly winning over the West. Mattis also focused on the costs of the Ukrainian war on Russian forces, which have had to be drawn from all corners of Russian, leaving potential trouble spots, such as on the southern border, uncovered.
Mattis noted that Russia at first hoped that it could occupy East Ukraine without loss of life as it did in Crimea but was surprised by the Ukrainian forces fighting back with vigor. The Russian military had to increase its logistic and military support for its rebel forces and then, in August, had to use regular troops to save the encircled Donetsk and Luhansk “people’s republics” from defeat.
With regular Russian forces involved, Ukrainian forces have been outmatched, notably by deadly artillery weapons (such as dual-purpose missiles, banned by the United States) that explode multiple warheads overhead. So far, Russia has been able to fight a tank war owing to the lack of antitank weaponry on the Ukrainian side. Mattis elaborated the military equipment Ukraine needs to defend itself, most of which is available from various NATO states and from other countries. The U.S. supplying lethal defensive weapons would represent a major breakthrough, although Europe is now less inclined to follow US leadership.
Mattis estimated Russia’s nonmilitary to military effort in fighting the Ukraine war at approximately four to one, highlighting the importance of nonmilitary instruments, such as propaganda, in support of the military effort. Ukraine is stretched to its limits with no operational reserves, and its front-line units are depleted.
Mattis noted a nuclear context to this war, which he emphasized is a war. He believes that Putin desires “anarchy protection” (which others have called frozen conflicts) on its borders. NATO expansion did not persuasively demonstrate to Russia the value of having democratic neighbors under the rule of law. In fact, Russia under Putin likely considers neighboring rule-of-law countries a threat to Russia’s nondemocratic, anti-rule-of-law governance.
Change of Heart?
Does this mean that the new President has changed his personal views about Russia, Putin and Ukraine? Trump began appointing or considering men and women for administration and cabinet posts that on the surface satisfy some people while upsetting others. National security adviser Michael T. Flynn seems to regard Putin in the same light as does Trump. Mitt Romney, a possible secretary of state choice, and Mike Pompeo, the next CIA director, believe Putin is a tyrant and global threat. And now there’s General Mattis.
The difference of views about Russia, Putin and Ukraine between Trump and Romney, Pompeo and Mattis are certainly wide, actually they’re diametrically opposed. It would seem that the divergence is insurmountable.
Imagine a Cabinet meeting in the foreseeable future about a significant escalation of Russia’s war with Ukraine that threatens Poland. Don’t discount such a possibility because no one also believed that Putin would invade Crimea and eastern Ukraine in the first half of 2014.
President Trump expresses a wait and see attitude because he trusts his buddy Putin while the three or more anti-Russian hawks want to send in US troops to halt Moscow’s assault.
Whose point of view prevails? Based on Trump’s intolerable stubbornness, the hawks sadly will toe the line with their boss or else he’ll fire them.
0 notes
Text
Revolution! – Maidan 2013 – 2016
The feelings of hope and anger, anticipation and desperation began to quake deep in the hearts, minds and spirits of Ukrainians. Twenty-two years after the latest declaration of independence of their Ukraine, the nation was not to be deprived of their dream of living in a country of their choice, free of Russian imperialism and subjugation and heading toward Europe, not back into the Russian prison of nations.
They were not to be stopped, not by their corrupt, treacherous President Viktor Yanukovych or by his mentor Russian fuhrer Vladimir Putin.
In the fall of 2013, when Yanukovych began to exhibit his true turncoat colors and reject the aspirations of the nation, Ukrainians from every corner of their country, from villages and towns to major metropolises, Ukrainian speakers and non-Ukrainian speakers, Christians, Jews, Muslims and others started their trek to the capital, determined to strike their chord for Ukraine’s freedom.
The chapters quickly unfolded: Ukraine’s subjugation by Russia, the nation’s desire for accession to the European Union, Yanukovych’s acquiescence, Putin’s opposition and finally Yanukovych’s last-minute reversal. The nation couldn’t stand the government’s duplicity and subservience to Moscow. The people demanded that the accession process go forward and that ex-convicts like Yanukovych by removed from power.
The first Lenin statue that tumbled to cobblestones of a Kyiv street three years ago marked not only the inevitable end of Yanukovych’s reign as Putin’s governor but also the nation’s most recent reaffirmation of its predecessors’ independence struggles and proclamations.
It was nothing else than the Ukrainian nation’s latest revolution against foreign and domestic captivity and tyranny.
With the world watching events in Ukraine unravel, cheering as the beleaguered but undaunted nation fight for its existence, and fearing a Russian counterattack, more than a million men, women and youth came to Kyiv’s Maidan to defend their independence and sovereignty. Defying incredible logistical problems, the protesters – no, Ukrainian revolutionaries – were clothed, fed, housed, cared for and mourned by strangers who came together in a historical exhibition of national unity.
In a brief commentary in the December 2, 2013, edition of The Torn Curtain 1991, titled “Revolution,” I wrote:
“Yuriy Lutsenko declared it yesterday, demonstrators echoed it and by now many news outlets have picked it up as the identifying motto of today’s Ukraine.
“Rightly so. The nation is fed up with Yanukovych’s policies. He has disgraced and discredited himself and his regime and going forward will not be treated seriously by other governments or institutions. And he has bloodied the nation.
“Ukrainians from all corners of Ukraine have been staging demonstrations in their towns or descending on Kyiv to express their protest.
“As we said last week, the US and other countries should institute sanctions against Yanukovych and his cabal to force them from office. This would be a worthy sign of support for Euromaidan.”
The nation did not budge from their positions despite rumors of a Russian military infiltration. Winter was setting it and Russian storm troopers on rooftops began shooting peaceful protesters. Other Putin security officers forced captured protesters to strip naked in the frigid weather. Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) arrived on the scene to offer his and America’s moral support to Ukraine’s fight for freedom.
The nation stubbornly persevered.
In another brief commentary on December 9, 2013, I opined:
“In memory of Nelson Mandela and in tribute to Euromaidan:
‘When a man is denied the right to live the life he believes in, he has no choice but to become an outlaw.’
“Toppling the Lenin statue was not the goal but it was a major symbolic feat for Ukraine and the ex-captive nations. It was also a warning for Russia. As Georgia’s Saakashvili said at Euromaidan, Ukraine’s triumph will be Russia’s final chapter.
“Yanukovych is discredited and disgraced in Ukraine and around the world.
“So far the demonstrators are peaceful and have peacefully endured the brutal attacks by the police. At the same time Prime Minister Azarov is warning of a coup d’état and state of emergency.
“Before that happens, Yanukovych should heed the pleas of Euromaidan and leave office quietly.”
Putin’s gauleiter his henchmen finally fled to Russia and other hideouts.
Before the end of the year, the Maidan revolutionaries issued their own appeal to the world titled “Arise, Ukraine,” declaring their principals and goals. They affirmed:
“People of the World! The events of recent days have shown everyone that Ukrainian authorities have embarked on an unconstitutional course.
“Dispersal of peaceful demonstrations, beatings, courts manipulated by the ruling powers have undermined the Constitution of Ukraine, which declares that life, health, honor and dignity of citizens of Ukraine are the highest values of the state. Today, in the course of two hours, Ukrainian authorities, through the militia and the specialized police squad Berkut have been destroying democratic values and people’s right to peaceful assembly. It is symbolic that this took place immediately upon the completion of International Human Rights Day. They are detaining peaceful protesters, journalists are prevented from doing their jobs. Democracy in Ukraine is in danger! Free people of the country are in danger! Is this comprehended by politicians of the world, human rights activists, journalists, and people of good will?
“Ukraine! Arise, Euromaidan is summoning you!
“Everyone to the peaceful protests! Everyone who is at home telephone all churches and monasteries across the country and ask for the bells to toll. Kyiv large, Ukraine large and not all in Maidan can hear. But let the world hear: democracy in Ukraine at risk, but the Ukrainian people cannot be broken. Ring the church bells, let Europe hear and witness how they are destroying Kyivan Maidan.
“Together till the end!”
As has become Ukraine’s destiny, Maidan substantiated Thomas Jefferson’s adage about courage and liberty: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots.”
The historic images of the Ukrainian nation arising against foreign and domestic tyrants three years ago this week and manifesting its invincible will to live free as well as the accompanying emotions were rekindled today with the jubilant commemorative demonstrations in Kyiv and other Ukrainian towns.
We recall the numerous parades, speeches, rallies, fires, dedication, police depravity and barbarism, beatings, bravery, heroism, patriotism, gunshots, and blood that contributed to the nation’s victory.
Subsequent generations of Russians will have to answer a host of muted questions about their country’s role in trying to quash liberty in Ukraine just like today’s Germans are attempting to cope with the legacy of Nazism. Likewise, future generations will have a glimpse of one episode – Maidan – from a millennium of examples of Ukrainians’ unconquerable, freedom-loving spirit to live in their own independent, sovereign, democratic and indivisible Ukraine.
Social media was the instrument for capacity building in Kyiv. It summoned Ukrainians of all walks of life to Kyiv to voice their disgust and opposition to Russia’s corrupt, anti-Ukrainian colonial administrators in Ukraine. National opposition swelled from a few hundred protesters in the center of the capital to several thousand to more than a million, testifying that this was, in fact, a popular, national revolution for freedom.
The nation once again awakened to stop those who sought to subvert Ukraine’s fate. The marchers emphasized that Ukraine, as a European nation, is part of the European Union and the nation’s youngest generation demanded that Ukraine finds its rightful place among European countries and not in the Russian prison of nations.
The protesters were emboldened into believing that they could change the country. Fed up with Yanukovych’s corruption and submission to Moscow, their movement evolved into a revolution whose goal was to depose the government and liberate Ukraine from Russia’s bonds. Their daring and power grew from their unwavering national beliefs and expanding numbers. They were determined to fight for Ukraine and that victory would be theirs.
Busloads of demonstrators from across Ukraine participated. Doctors from around the country came to Kyiv to treat the wounded and dying. Ukrainian and non-Ukrainian speakers, including Russian speakers, were equally vocal in their disdain for Moscow’s subjugation of Ukraine. Serhiy Nigoyan, an Armenian, was the first to shed his blood for Ukraine’s freedom. Among the Maidan Defense Units were Jewish Maidan Defense Unit and Women’s Maidan Defense Unit. All religious hierarchs, representing the broad swath of faiths of Ukraine, Ukrainian Greek Catholic, Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Jewish, Moslem, Buddhist and others prayed in unison for the nation’s salvation. Teenagers and even younger Ukrainians in t-shirts emblazoned with the Ukrainian national emblem – the Tryzub – and images of national heroes Bandera and Shukhevych, were actively involved in the movement.
Then there was also the upright blue-and-yellow piano and scores of pianists that kept everyone’s spirits high.
The revolutionaries maintained the highest level of moral behavior during the revolution. Drugs and alcohol were not seen in their encampments. The participants were peaceful and unarmed as they faced the depraved barbarism of the Berkut security officers as they repeatedly charged into the nonviolent protesters wildly swinging their truncheons without regard for life or limb. For the first time since 1240, the bells of the St. Michael Sobor tolled anxiously, summoning more and more people to join the protests on Maidan.
Despite repeated waves of baton-wielding officers, the revolutionaries persevered. None of the protesters broke rank and fled. They were committed to their mission, realistically noting that if they abandon their cause now, eventually they would be hunted down and eliminated. In a comical, futile effort to protect themselves against the police, protesters covered their heads with kitchen utensils, pots, pans and colanders.
The Revolution of Dignity as it is called today lasted 93 days during which 125 innocent, peaceful Ukrainians of all walks of life were murdered on the orders of officials in the Kremlin and Kyiv. They indisputably earned the moniker “Heavenly Hundred.”
Infuriated by the slow evolution of events, Volodymyr Parasiuk, a young defense unit commander, seized a historic moment, jumped on the stage and grabbed the microphone. He declared that Yanukovych must present himself to the crowd on Maidan and resign by 10 am the next day or else he would lead the nation in storming his multi-million dollar estate and removing him by force.
Yanukovych secretly fled to Russia the next day, February 22, and almost simultaneously the Russian army invaded the Crimean peninsula of Ukraine and then regions in eastern Ukraine. The fight for Ukraine’s freedom continues and the men and women in the Ukrainian armed forces, fighting and dying in the eastern oblasts, are not doing so for the government but for Maidan, the nation and Ukraine.
Maidan symbolizes the generation that stood on Maidan for three months and faced the enemy without weapons. It was the latest generation of Ukrainian patriots to refresh the tree of liberty with their blood.
Had the revolution never occurred, Maidan would have remained a simple municipal concrete, brick and marble plaza. However, with the revolution, Maidan and everything that the simple word evokes today and tomorrow will always signify glory for the Ukrainian nation and eternal shame for Russia.
0 notes
Text
Will Trump Preserve Ukraine’s Independence & Sovereignty?
Several weeks before the 2016 Presidential Elections that saw Donald Trump achieve an astounding, historic victory over Hillary Clinton, Newt Gingrich, his stalwart advocate, assured Ukrainians and the world that President Trump would support selling lethal weapons to Ukraine.
A simple business decision for the billionaire businessman-turned politician?
Gingrich didn’t allude to that conclusion nor did he state that Trump is a genuine supporter of Ukraine’s independence. In a conversation with Yuriy Panchenko during the 13th annual meeting of Yalta European Strategy (YES) that appeared in the Ukrainian e-magazine European Pravda, the former Speaker of the House, said he and Trump have opposed the ban on selling Ukraine lethal weapons with which it could defend itself against Russian aggression.
“I am sure that the Ukrainian people have the right to defend themselves and their country. Conducting assistive policy towards Ukraine only ‘in words,’ without giving appropriate modern weapons for protection is a defeat for the United States. Trump will make it different.” Gingrich assured.
Trump’s advocate and adviser repeated this view, saying “we can say for sure that President Trump would ‘unlock’ the issue of weapons in favor of Ukraine. Trump can say nice things about Putin, but in the meantime, he will sell Ukraine arms.”
Gingrich concluded his remarks about Ukraine by emphasizing that “Yes, most likely, the weapons would be sold. I think that Ukraine will be asked to delay payments.”
Can Ukrainians, Ukrainian Americans, Russians and the global community really expect the Trump Administration to live up to this line of thinking? Sadly, there is nothing in Trump’s record that says the incoming President will support such a compulsory sale while at the same time his friend in Moscow will pursue global belligerence.
Unfortunately for the global community, American conservatives and neoconservatives, with a few exceptions, as well as Trump supporters, adhere to an “America First” mojo to the exclusion of all other countries. In the interview that I cited previously, Gingrich exactly pointed that “Mr. Trump intends to put the American interest in first place. US interests first, and then – negotiations with other countries. Today US interests are influenced by some confusing international programs.”
This rabid, blind form of isolationism is dangerous for everyone. Focusing on America to that degree will not only turn the US into an impenetrable fortress surrounded by two huge bodies of water, blind and deaf to others, but it can also give rise to global threats like Russia and ISIS. It will abandon Ukraine and the other x-captive nations to the aggressive whims of Russia, whose intentions cannot be overlooked – again.
In Trump’s record there is the Paul Manafort specter, which polluted the traditional pro-captive nations ideology of the Republican Party and indeed all of America. His pro-Russian meddling in the GOP platform during the convention reduced support for Ukraine to drivel.
Throughout the campaign, candidate Trump failed to address adequately his relationship with Russian fuhrer Vladimir Putin, denying in the face of his own contradictory statements that he knew the Russian leader.
Trump must also refute his callous disregard for Russia’s invasion and occupation of Crimea and reassert support for sanctions against Moscow until it withdraws from invaded Ukrainian regions.
Then after winning the elections, Trump began appointing or considering men and women for administration and cabinet posts, satisfying some and upsetting others. National security adviser Michael T. Flynn seems to regard Putin in the same light as does his boss. Mitt Romney, a possible secretary of state choice, and Mike Pompeo, the next CIA director, believe Putin is a tyrant and global threat.
In reality, based on Trump’s intolerable character, all of them will toe the line with Trump or he’ll fire them.
Finally, Trump’s talking points about US-Russia relations point to his total misjudgment about the evil empire. In the aftermath of the let’s makeup telephone call between Putin and Trump last week, the coverage highlighted the unsatisfactory state of relations and their will to normalize them. The Kremlin cheered that the two leaders will strive “to normalize them and bring them to the framework of constructive cooperation. Stressed was, among other things, the importance of the creation of a stable foundation for bilateral relations by developing their trade and market component.”
Yes, US relations with Russia have been strained but not by anything that Washington initiated but because of Moscow’s rampant militarization and uncontrolled imperialism. By building bridges between Moscow and Washington for the sake of friendship and commerce, Trump must accept Russia’s crimes and shake Putin’s blood-stained hands.
Trump’s complete disregard for Russia’s ongoing belligerence demonstrates his naiveté or ambivalence about Russia’s crimes against humanity. As President of the United States – he has removed himself from the moniker of leader of the free world because of his isolationist bent – he cannot continuously deny in the face of irrefutable evidence that Russia violates human rights, murders its opponents, and invades its neighbors.
Ukraine’s fate inside The Beltway will depend on the strongly-worded, supportive congressional resolutions. Senators and congressman are already banding around pro-Ukrainian campaigns that must be conspicuously supported by freedom-loving Americans.
Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), among others, last week warned against any attempt to revise US-Russia relations under Trump’s presidency.
“With the US presidential transition underway, Vladimir Putin has said in recent days that he wants to improve relations with the United States. We should place as much faith in such statements as any other made by a former KGB agent who has plunged his country into tyranny, murdered his political opponents, invaded his neighbors, threatened America's allies, and attempted to undermine America’s elections,” McCain said in a statement.
Senior Democratic and GOP lawmakers are insisting that Washington respond to Russia’s interference in the US election and actions in Ukraine and Syria, despite Trump’s hope to improve relations.
Sen. Ben Cardin (D-MD) said last week he was working on what he described as “comprehensive” legislation to respond to Russian actions contrary to U.S. interests in Europe and Syria, as well as cyberattacks blamed on Moscow during the campaign.
“Russia presents a very serious challenge for America. They're not our partner. They're a bully,” Cardin, the top Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said.
“I therefore ask Trump to take seriously the assessments from our intelligence community and security professionals regarding Russia’s actions. I implore the Trump administration to see Russia for what it is — a global bully and adversary. And I encourage the incoming national security leadership to understand who our real friends and true allies are, and that they count on us to provide leadership against Moscow’s aggression,” Cardin said.
Other lawmakers have also called for action against Russia. Sen. Lindsey Graham (S-SC), one of his party’s senior foreign policy voices, told reporters he wanted Senate hearings on whether Putin interfered in US election. “We can’t sit on the sidelines,” Graham said.
Trump’s unforeseen election to the presidency of the United States has panicked the x-captive nations.
Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said he has “no doubt” that Trump will refuse to recognize Russia’s annexation of Crimea, and will cooperate with his country.
When asked about the possibility of “an agreement” with Trump and Putin about recognizing Crimea, Poroshenko responded: “I am absolutely sure that the new president-elect is completely strong enough in an effective cooperation with Ukraine … no doubt.”
Hopefulness without back up.
Former NATO Secretary-General Anders Fogh Rasmussen has sought to assuage Ukrainian and Baltic fears about the incoming President’s risky policies, saying: “The Baltics and Ukraine are close friends of the US, and neglecting them will have far-reaching consequences and mark the beginning of the end of the US-led system.”
At the same time European leaders reaffirmed their strong support for continuing sanctions against Russia until it withdraws from occupied Ukrainian territories, sending a hopeful message to the new White House about its convictions.
Lithuania warned that Putin may test NATO in the weeks before Trump is inaugurated as President. Foreign Minister Linas Linkevicius said he was “very afraid” for the Baltics and other regions, as well as the Syrian city of Aleppo.
Back home, President Obama added his point of view about Trump’s policies toward Russia, stating he hoped his successor “is willing to stand up to Russia when they deviate from our values and international norms.”
The next four years do not look good for Ukraine and the other former captive nations. After decades, even centuries of captivity in Russia’s prison of nations and only a few years in freedom, losing them on Trump’s watch will be an astounding, catastrophic stain on the 45th President’s legacy.
Freedom loving peoples in the United States and around the world will have to keep a close watch on Trump’s steps – or missteps – in handling Russia’s belligerence and then, if necessary, fight him tooth and nail for changes.
0 notes
Text
Russian Oppression in Occupied Crimea Takes Center Stage
Russian Oppression in Occupied Crimea Takes Center Stage
As has been Russia’s style, its brand of liberation oppression swept across the Ukrainian peninsula of Crimea in the wake of Moscow’s invading “green men” nearly three years ago. They seized government buildings, schools and civic organizations, banned the Crimean Tatar language and religion, arrested, imprisoned and killed Tatar leaders and activists as they raised the Russian tricolor over what has become occupied Crimea.
A climate of daily brutality that has been condemned by the free world enveloped the peninsula. Russia orchestrated a fabricated referendum that led to its illegal annexation by Moscow. In a blitzkrieg act of aggression, Ukraine and the free world lost administrative control over political, economic and social developments in Crimea. As a result, human rights abuses have become a consistent part of life in Crimea.
Crimean Tatar leaders have revealed that under Moscow’s laws and policies, any resident of Crimea who refuses to take Russian citizenship and a Russian passport, or who tries to retain Ukrainian citizenship, forfeits his or her right to live, to work in, or even to visit the peninsula.
The Atlantic Council, in the executive summary to its 2015 report titled “Human Rights Abuses in Russian-Occupied Crimea,” wrote: “This first land grab on European soil since World War II exposed the Kremlin’s imperialist ambitions and posed a serious threat to the post-Cold War international order. Since the onset of Russian occupation, Crimea’s residents have faced increasingly grave civic, political, and human rights violations. These include discriminatory policies against Crimea’s ethnic Tatar minority, infringement of property rights, and intimidation of independent voices through selective use of the law and physical force.”
The Council further noted that there is “an alarming deterioration of human rights” in Crimea. Russian authorities have resurrected its Soviet predecessor’s inhuman practice of punitive psychiatry against Tatar political prisoners.
“For their refusal to recognize the authority of the de facto government, Tatar leaders have been exiled or banned from public life, their public commemorations prohibited, and their media muzzled. Activists and journalists who simply speak up for human rights have been subjected to torture, intimidated into emigration, and have had their property illegally confiscated. Some have gone missing, with authorities offering little to no evidence that they are investigating the disappearances,” wrote Andrii Klymenko, chief editor of Black Sea News and chairman of the Supervisory Board of Maidan of Foreign Affairs, in the summary.
With willful disregard of international law and order unseen seen Nazi Germany’s invasion of Europe some eight decades ago, Russia has brought war to Europe, occupied Crimea and eastern Ukraine, and spreads repression and terror in with its armed forces and mercenary terrorists.
In a draconian declaration of its thorough authority over the imprisoned inhabitants of the peninsula, the so-called colonial Supreme Court of Crimea on April 26, 2016, and the Supreme Court of Russia on September 29, 2016, declared the Mejlis, the self-governing institution of the Crimean Tatars, to be an extremist organization and banned its activities.
The invasion and occupation of Crimea, just like the war in eastern Ukraine, have been in the forefront of news media since February 2014 and have been the focus of numerous global, United Nations and regional forums. The United Nations reaffirmed its support for Ukraine in a resolution in support of the territorial integrity of Ukraine.
The UN General Assembly again will have the opportunity to address this issue on Monday, November 14. The Congressional Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe – the Helsinki Commission – will also review Russian abuses in Crimea at a briefing on Capitol Hill on Thursday, November 10.
Since the illegal annexation of Crimea, the European Parliament, among other institutions, condemned Russia’s aggression against Ukraine. The members of the parliament “condemn the unprecedented levels of human rights abuses perpetrated against Crimean residents, most notably the Tatars, an indigenous people of Crimea, and the severe restrictions on the freedoms of expression, association and peaceful assembly.”
“The Russian Federation, as an occupying power, has a responsibility to ensure the safety of the whole population and should, together with the de facto local authorities, investigate effectively, impartially and transparently all cases of disappearances, torture and human rights abuses by the police and paramilitary forces active in the Crimean peninsula since February 2014,” the European Parliament said.
Despite global denunciation of Russia’s invasion of Ukrainian Crimea, Moscow has not withdrawn from its occupied territories even in the face of economic sanctions that are not expected to be lifted. Nonetheless, the free world must continue to keep a spotlight on Russia oppression of Crimea and eastern Ukraine and keep the Kremlin’s feet to the hot coals until it unconditionally withdraws from all occupied regions of Ukraine.
Human Rights Watch, a respected global observer, also noted “Since Russian forces began occupying Crimea in early 2014, the space for free speech, freedom of association, and media in Crimea has shrunk dramatically. In two years, authorities have failed to conduct meaningful investigations into actions of armed paramilitary groups, implicated in torture, extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, attacks and beatings of Crimean Tatar and pro-Ukraine activists and journalists.”
“Under international law, the Russian Federation is an occupying power in Crimea as it exercises effective control in Crimea without the consent of the government of Ukraine, and there has been no legally recognized transfer of sovereignty to Russia. The referendum, held without the authorization of the Ukrainian government or any broad-based endorsement by the international community, and Russia’s unilateral actions afterward cannot be considered to meet the criteria under international law for a transfer of sovereignty that would end the state of belligerent occupation,” the human rights monitor stated.
The resolution that will be discussed in the UN General Assembly has been endorsed by the following countries: Australia, Austria, Belgium, Bulgaria, Canada, Croatia, Czechia, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Palau, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, Ukraine, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and United States.
The resolution, when adopted, is expected to:
Condemn the temporary occupation of the part of the territory of Ukraine;
Condemn the imposition of the legal system of the Russian Federation and the negative impact on the human rights situation in Crimea; and
Condemn the reported serious violations and abuses against residents of Crimea, in particular: extrajudicial killings, abductions, enforced disappearances, politically motivated prosecutions, discrimination, harassment, intimidation, violence, arbitrary detentions, torture and ill-treatment of detainees, their transfer from Crimea to Russia, as well as reported abuses of other fundamental freedoms, including freedoms of expression, religion or belief, and association and the right of peaceful assembly.
The resolution urges Russia to uphold its international obligations, overturn its abusive policies in Crimea and release all imprisoned Ukrainian citizens. It urges Russia to address the issue of impunity and ensure that those found to be responsible for abuses are held accountable before an independent judiciary. The resolution calls on Moscow to revoke immediately the decision on declaring the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatars as an extremist organization and banning its activities and repeal the decision banning leaders of the Mejlis from entering Crimea.
Among other passages in the resolution there is one that recalls UN Resolution 68/262 of March 27, 2014, on the territorial integrity of Ukraine, that affirms the General Assembly’s commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders; and relevant decisions of international organizations, specialized agencies and bodies within the UN system.
There are other worthwhile references but, sadly, there isn’t one that demands the withdrawal of Russian soldiers and officials from Crimea and return of the peninsula to Ukraine’s sovereign rule.
While these and other efforts such as the Minsk process to bring peace and stability to Ukraine and Crimea have been successful and Ukrainian civilians and soldiers are being killed defending their homeland, global efforts such as those that I mentioned here must continue so that no one forgets Russia’s crimes against humanity and, hopefully, it will be brought to justice.
Congressman Pascrell recognized with Shevchenko Freedom Award
Congressman Bill Pascrell (D-NJ), a staunch champion of independent Ukraine and critic of Russia for its crimes against humanity, was rewarded for his efforts with the Shevchenko Freedom Award
On Wednesday, November 3, leaders of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America visited the congressman in his Paterson, NJ, office to present him with the award. Pascrell has been the sponsor and co-sponsor of numerous resolutions in support of Ukraine and visited many local Ukrainian events. He is also a member of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus, a group of lawmakers committed to advocating pro-Ukrainian issues.
1 note
·
View note
Text
Considering Russia for any Human Rights Post is Absurd
Without delving into its historic crimes of the previous century, Russia’s crimes against humanity in the past 16 years should be enough to ban it from being included on a human rights body.
In the 21st century alone, Russia has waged wars in the Caucasus, and at home violated the human rights of fledgling democracy groups, persecuted members of the LGBT community, denied religious rights of non-Orthodox believers, victimized and arrested Ukrainian community activists, and killed opposition leaders.
Mocking humanity by legalizing oppression, the Russian parliament rubber stamped Putin’s demand that it adopt a law that would eliminate troublesome NGOs by declaring them to be foreign agents, which in Russian means traitor. So far Russia’s Justice Ministry has designated 145 such groups as “foreign agents,” and more than 20 chose to shut down rather than accept this label. In November 2015, it branded Memorial’s sister organization, Memorial Human Rights Center, a “foreign agent,” accusing it of using overseas funding to harm Russia. Also in 2015, the authorities filed suit to have Memorial dissolved over a bureaucratic technicality, and only after high-level intervention, including by the Council of Europe, did they back off.
In February 2014, Russia invaded three regions of Ukraine turning them into Russian fiefdoms and launching a 28-month-long war that has claimed the lives of some 10,000 Ukrainians, shot down a Malaysian passenger jetliner, and began horrific bombardments of the Syrian city of Aleppo that will surely bomb the town into the Stone Age.
Russia’s brutal assault on Aleppo has earned the Kremlin the outrage of many free world leaders. Many governments, including the UK, France and the US, have accused Russia of war crimes for targeting built-up areas and civilian infrastructure, including hospitals, a water-treatment plant, bakeries and emergency response centers, as well as for bombing a UN aid convoy outside Aleppo during a ceasefire on September 19.
Residents and international monitors report that Russian-manufactured cluster munitions – banned under international law because of the indiscriminate damage they cause – as well as napalm, white phosphorous and ground-penetrating “bunker-buster” bombs have been dropped on besieged east Aleppo’s 250,000 residents in the past four weeks.
Pundits have written that there is no reason to believe that Russia’s UNHCR interest will slow the assault. After ignoring the US, Europe and Syria’s neighbors in his single-minded support for Assad, they said, there is no reason to expect that Russian President Vladimir Putin would pause for the council. If the recent past teaches us anything, it is that Putin can remain secure that his aggressive activities will draw many complaints, but little action.
As for the latest wave of crimes in Ukraine, Iryna Gerashchenko, first deputy chairperson of Ukraine’s Verkhovna Rada and Ukrainian envoy for humanitarian issues at Minsk peace talks, speaking at a UN Security Council on October 25, offered shocking testimony that 495 Ukrainian women and 68 children have been among the killed since Russia invaded Ukraine.
“Women and children are the most vulnerable groups in war. According to the latest data, there are 1,700,000 internally displaced persons in Ukraine, of which approximately 900,000 are women and 236,000 are children,” Gerashchenko said in her impassioned address.
But most unforgivable of other violence, Gerashchenko related this Russian war crime: “This is the symbol of the war in Donbas – Russian men fight against Ukrainian women and children, kill and mutilate them, take them captives.”
This should be highlighted for the world to read ahead of the UN vote on Russia’s bid to join the vaunted Human Rights Council.
Gerashchenko noted that “violence against women and girls has always been the part of conflicts and sexual violence is used as war weapon. The information is available about human trafficking in the occupied territories, sexual violence and exploitation, cases of involvement of young people in military actions that are incompatible with human rights standards and unacceptable in the modern world.”
“Every fourth person who has been in captivity of the pro-Russian militants became a victim or a witness of gender-based violence. Human rights advocates underline that sexual violence is used as a part of tortures to spread panic and fear,” she said.
In Crimea, Russian occupiers have outlawed the Tatar language and religion, and arrested, imprisoned and killed Crimean Tatar leaders.
Does Russia with its blood-soaked hands deserve global consideration for a seat on the UN Human Rights Council? Surely not.
The UN General Assembly will select new members of the Human Rights Council on Friday, October 28, and Russia, which is ranked “not free” by the democracy watchdog Freedom House, will be competing with two “free” countries – Hungary and Croatia – for the two Eastern European seats on the 47-member body.
While Russia in principle could be outvoted, sadly, given the history and pattern of voting at the UN the chances of that happening are very slim.
Voting for a place on the Geneva-based Human Rights Council takes place in the full UN General Assembly, in a secret ballot vote, which protects countries from being challenged about – or embarrassed by – their vote choices. Membership is granted by a simple majority vote, 97 of the General Assembly’s 193 members, so it is possible for a candidate, even in a closed slate, to fail to pass that threshold, although it has hardly ever happened.
Human Rights Watch said Russia’s membership bid risks undermining the credibility of the UN and its Human Rights Council and its ability to hold rights abusers accountable for their crimes. How can a perpetrator hold court against other perpetrators?
“The UN Human Rights Council’s ability to successfully expose and hold violators to account is under threat because a number of countries use it to thwart attempts to expose their own crimes and abuses,” said Louis Charbonneau, UN director at Human Rights Watch.
A number of human rights and aid organizations have urged the United Nations this week to deprive Russia of a seat on the council. More than 80 global organizations have signed the appeal, with such groups as Human Rights Watch, CARE International and Refugees International among them.
The signatories asked the UN member-states to “question seriously whether Russia’s role in Syria which includes supporting and undertaking military actions which have routinely targeted civilians and civilian objects renders it fit to serve on the UN’s premier inter-governmental human rights institution.”
The appeal has been submitted ahead of elections to the UN’s human rights.
Why should the man and woman on the street care about human rights and Russia’s criminal track record?
Firstly, allowing Russia a seat at the council would desecrate human rights principles, the Human Rights Council, the UN and all crimes committed in local neighborhoods. It would be akin to reserving a place at the table for Adolf Hitler. It would contribute to civilization’s submersion into a vile existence on our watch.
Codifying respect for human rights, the UN has noted that human rights are rights inherent to all human beings, whatever our nationality, place of residence, sex, national or ethnic origin, color, religion, language, or any other status. In other words, we are all equally entitled to our human rights without discrimination. These rights are all interrelated, interdependent and indivisible and they are also incorporated into the principles of the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals – Agenda 2030.
The principle of universality of human rights is the cornerstone of international human rights law. This principle, as first emphasized in the Universal Declaration on Human Rights in 1948, has been reiterated in numerous international human rights conventions, declarations, and resolutions. The 1993 Vienna World Conference on Human Rights, for example, noted that it is the duty of states – national governments – to promote and protect all human rights and fundamental freedoms, regardless of their political, economic and cultural systems. The government of Russia has chosen to perennially violate human rights on all levels.
The UN also noted that human rights entail both rights and obligations. States assume obligations and duties under international law to respect, to protect and to fulfil human rights. The obligation to respect means that states must refrain from interfering with or curtailing the enjoyment of human rights. The obligation to protect requires states to protect individuals and groups against human rights abuses. The obligation to fulfil means that states must take positive action to facilitate the enjoyment of basic human rights. At the individual level, while we are entitled our human rights, we should also respect the human rights of others.
The following are some of the most important characteristics of human rights: Human rights are founded on respect for the dignity and worth of each person; Human rights are universal, meaning that they are applied equally and without discrimination to all people; Human rights are inalienable, in that no one can have his or her human rights taken away; and others.
Finally, by guaranteeing life, liberty, equality, and security, human rights protect people against abuse by those who are more powerful. According to the United Nations, human rights “ensure that a human being will be able to fully develop and use human qualities such as intelligence, talent, and conscience and satisfy his or her spiritual needs.” More categories of violations by Russia.
Michelle Maiese, addressing human rights violations and wars or conflicts, noted on the website BeyondIntractability.org: “Many conflicts are sparked by a failure to protect human rights, and the trauma that results from severe human rights violations often leads to new human rights violations. As conflict intensifies, hatred accumulates and makes restoration of peace more difficult. In order to stop this cycle of violence, states must institute policies aimed at human rights protection. Many believe that the protection of human rights ‘is essential to the sustainable achievement of the three agreed global priorities of peace, development and democracy.’
“Respect for human rights has therefore become an integral part of international law and foreign policy. The specific goal of expanding such rights is to "increase safeguards for the dignity of the person. To protect human rights is to ensure that people receive some degree of decent, humane treatment. Because political systems that protect human rights are thought to reduce the threat of world conflict, all nations have a stake in promoting worldwide respect for human rights.”
The UN operates on a different level than national governments but humanity’s indignation with the possible election of a criminal state, Russia, to the respected UN Human Rights Council must be vocally expressed. Contact your elected officials and say this possibility is a great moral blasphemy that must be quashed by the free world. Ban Russia from the UN Human Rights Council and other global events.
0 notes
Text
Is Free World Finally Seeing Russia as Evil Empire?
It’s been 33 years since President Ronald Reagan branded the Soviet Union – a euphemism for Russia – as the evil empire. His historic observation about Russian imperialism can be compared with Winston Churchill’s speech on March 5, 1946, in which he stated that an iron curtain has descended over Europe as a result of Moscow’s plans for global domination.
President Reagan, in his address on March 8, 1983, to the National Association of Evangelicals in Orlando, FL, presented his succinct portrayal of the Soviet Russia, stating: “Yes, let us pray for the salvation of all of those who live in that totalitarian darkness—pray they will discover the joy of knowing God. But until they do, let us be aware that while they preach the supremacy of the state, declare its omnipotence over individual man, and predict its eventual domination of all peoples on the Earth, they are the focus of evil in the modern world.”
Reagan, a highly regarded champion of independence for Ukraine and the other captive nations and an anti-communist, also said: “I urge you to beware the temptation of pride—the temptation of blithely declaring yourselves above it all and label both sides equally at fault, to ignore the facts of history and the aggressive impulses of an evil empire, to simply call the arms race a giant misunderstanding and thereby remove yourself from the struggle between right and wrong and good and evil.”
For decades since the end of World War Two the freedom fighters of the captive nations had sought to convince the free world that the end of war will not quell Russia’s passion for aggression. Hitler’s quest to dominate the world was quashed by a united effort but, sadly, Russia continued and continues to pursue its relentless imperial pursuit of global subjugation with impunity.
Russia meticulously absorbed Eastern European nations into its empire while the free world watched with disbelief and merely restrained criticism. There were few noteworthy attempts to raise awareness about Russia’s global threat along the lines of the Captive Nations Week Resolution or Public Law 86-90 of 1959. However, nothing seemed to be able to halt Russian expansion. The US Congress countered Russia’s human rights violations with proclamations and denunciations but Moscow’s arrests and imprisonments of activists persisted.
During the 2012 Presidential Election Campaign GOP candidate Mitt Romney reminded us that “Russia is our number one geopolitical foe” but that admonition did not elicit the type of reaction from free world leaders that would force reforms in the Kremlin.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in February 2014, two weeks after the conclusion of the Winter Olympics, caught world capitals by surprise and wondering how to bring about an end to the latest European war. Should they force Ukraine to submit to Russia’s demands? The United States and free world allies instituted punitive sanctions against Moscow but stopped short of sending lethal weapons to Ukraine that would help it subdue and expel Russian soldiers and terrorists back to Russia.
Russia continued its war against Ukraine while the free world failed to make a solid united stand against Moscow’s persistent attempts to resurrect the imperial glory of Russia. Russia’s political and business leaders were still being welcomed by their counterparts around the world.
And then the world was shocked to its core by Russia’s brutal bombardment of Aleppo that according to TV accounts will wipe the city and its residents off the face of the earth.
World leaders, having endured enough the gruesome photographs of children decimated by Russia’s bombardment, have finally condemned Russia with words that haven’t been used against Moscow in decades. Secretary of State John Kerry and others, expressing their exasperation with Russia’s continuous lies and violence, have called Russia’s heartless shelling of Syrian towns a war crime and called for an investigation in Russia’s latest aggression. Their aggravation was compounded by intelligence reports that Moscow ordered damaging hacking attacks of the United States.
The United Kingdom’s Prime Minister Theresa May, assessing the shelling of Aleppo, posed a solution to Russian aggression that shouldn’t be belittled by her colleagues. May castigated Russia for its merciless shelling, saying EU countries must work together and put pressure on Russia to stop its “appalling atrocities, its sickening atrocities” in Syria, which, according to the Financial Times, raise the prospect of further sanctions against Moscow.
Condemning Russia for destroying Aleppo and killing its residents, May said on the eve of an EU summit Russia’s aggression showed the need for the UK and the EU to show a “robust and united European stance.”
May’s remarks came as a Russian naval taskforce, including the aircraft carrier Admiral Kuznetsov, was being shadowed by the Royal Navy as it headed toward the eastern Mediterranean and on to Syria presumably to bolster Moscow’s aerial bombing of Aleppo.
The significant point is that a major European political leader understands the global threat posed by Russia and has wisely called for a needed united European stance to halt its devastating bombardment. Russia’s violence in Syria is not different than its belligerence against Ukraine and European leaders would do well to consider including Russia’s war versus Ukraine in their condemnation. A united European stand against Russia on both counts would be a positive, fresh step to overcome Moscow and return peace and stability to the region.
Ukraine’s Foreign Minister Pavlo Klimkin alluded to such a unified tendency in a recent interview with The Wall Street Journal.
Ahead of talks on Ukraine and a summit of European leaders, he and other Ukrainian officials said last week they believe there is increasing support in Europe for a harder line approach to Russia. Klimkin said frustration with Russian actions in Syria has helped convince European leaders that Moscow has been following similar approaches in Ukraine and Syria.
“Syria and Ukraine are two separate tracks, they don’t directly overlap,” Klimkin said. “But in the sense of understanding the whole picture of course there is a kind of cross influence.”
“Let’s stop shelling, let’s pull back heavy weaponry, let’s give the OSCE missions the possibility for the access the whole territory of Donbas,” he continued. “The Russian regular troops should be out and the OSCE should be in.”
In the wake of Russia’s bombardment of Aleppo, I have discovered similar epiphanies among pundits and politicians.
Among them, Eli Lake wrote in Bloomberg News that the world would not be better if Russia and the US were friends. Calling Russia a pariah, Lake accused it of regularly poisoning global relations.
“But as Secretary of State John Kerry has learned in his fruitless engagements, Russian promises are worthless. Everyone in U.S. politics, with the exception of Donald Trump and a few other extremists on the left and right, understands this. Russia is a pariah.
“Pariahs are not asked to cooperate on challenges to the global commons. They shouldn’t get to host events like the World Cup, as Russia is scheduled to do in 2018. They should not be diplomatic partners in U.S. policy to disarm other pariahs like Iran. No, pariahs should be quarantined. With Russia, it’s the very least the U.S. and its allies can do to save the international system from a country that seeks to destroy it,” Lake wrote.
An anonymous US official was quoted by Reuters as admitting that Russia’s Putin is intent on restoring the torn iron curtain and the ill begotten Russian prison of nations.
“The Russians have been engaged in a sustained campaign to recapture what Putin considers their rightful buffer in Eastern Europe, and to undermine not just NATO and the EU, but the entire democratic foundation of both institutions,” said the official who claimed he has studied Russian behavior since before the Soviet Union’s collapse in 1991.
The reason the official requested anonymity is shocking: The White House has ordered officials not to publicly discuss hostile Russian activities.
President Poroshenko also joined the chorus of officials urging the global community not to be naïve about Russia’s intentions. Just as Britain’s May, Poroshenko earnestly presented a case for a united effort to stop Russia. In an op-ed appropriately titled “The End of the Masquerade” in the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung, Poroshenko wrote: “We should finally stop being so naïve with respect to Russia’s true intentions, as we were in 2008 or in 2014-15. It has no desire to end its aggression if we do not stop them together. Fraud and manipulation are only effective if solidarity and foresight are lacking.”
Apparently, Aleppo has become the final straw for the world as it condemns Russia for its wanton belligerence. While Russian aggression and killings in Ukraine and elsewhere predate its Syrian attacks, it is nonetheless vital now for a united front to declare Russia to be a pariah and war criminal, and banish it from the international community until its people emerge from their darkness and force reforms and democratization in the Kremlin.
0 notes
Text
Assurances Lead to Expectations
On the one hand, statements and declarations in support of besieged Ukraine are welcome and bolster the global sense of goodwill and approval Ukraine is enjoying today.
On the other hand, words of support, especially expressed by government leaders, carry an obligation and a commitment to do something to justify the words. By articulating support for Ukraine at a time of war, Ukrainian officials and citizens are naturally filled with an expectation that something beneficial will soon take place. Ukrainian Americans voters also share this same expectation.
Otherwise, these assurances are merely for the news media, hollow, and any forthcoming expectations are unwarranted.
US Secretary of State John Kerry voiced strong support for Ukraine at an event hosted by The German Marshall Fund and the US Mission to the European Union in Brussels on Tuesday, October 4. His words were truly inspiring and should have resounded frighteningly throughout the halls of the Kremlin.
Kerry’s latest warning to Russia, unwavering support for Ukraine and reaffirmation of American principled advocacy of the downtrodden could be deemed historic as they touched all of the correct buzzwords. However, Russia has turned a deaf ear to Washington’s repeated rebukes.
Warning Russia in the person of its Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, Kerry emphatically declared the US will stand its ground on behalf of freedom. He said:
“But the willingness of NATO and EU countries to search for common ground with Russia doesn’t relieve us of the obligation to stand our ground on behalf of freedom and international law, which is why we remain steadfast in our support for a stable, united, and democratic Ukraine.”
The Secretary of State created the foundation for a global duality in US foreign policy. There is Russia, with which the US and others desire to work; there is Russia, which the US and others condemn, and there is Ukraine, which the US and others will steadfastly support.
“And Moscow should have no doubt on this point: we will stand our ground. Blatant aggression is not something that any of us are prepared to accept, and no place in the world should understand it better than Europe.”
Kerry warned Moscow not to underestimate the US determination. While the US wants to search for common ground with the Kremlin, Washington will stand its ground in supporting Ukraine. Note, he didn’t say defending Ukraine. One American hand will deal with a criminal and the other with the victim.
“So we have imposed sanctions and we are insisting on a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Donbas and the illegal annexation of Crimea – even as we encourage the government in Ukraine to stay the course and accelerate the pace of reform.”
He underlined economic sanctions as the height of America’s arsenal against Russian transgressions and set the bar on diplomacy to resolve the conflict – avoiding the word war – in Ukraine. Then to show that the US will not play favorites, he intimated that Kyiv still needs to do more to hasten reforms and eliminate corruption.
“Our priority should be an open and competitive market that doesn’t play favorites and that contributes to the prosperity of all countries and doesn’t use this in some antiquated 18th or 19th century power game between states. We’ve made real strides, I think, in the last four years in creating energy options for Ukraine, Moldova, the Baltic states, southern Europe; and now we have to continue our work to bring energy independence to the countries in Central Europe that have too few choices in their supply.”
In other words, according to Kerry, Washington will remain wary of Russian intentions, critical of the Kremlin’s behavior, supportive of Ukraine, while striving to build open and competitive markets that don’t play favorites. Can the White House simultaneously cheer the lions and Christians?
Faced with these options, Russia would be remiss if it didn’t instinctively continue its war against Ukraine, accept American admonitions with a grain of salt and build competitive markets.
And Lavrov voiced the same opinion during an earlier press encounter with Kerry at the President Wilson Hotel in Geneva on August 26. The Russian said the two countries should sweep the Ukrainian issue under the carpet because there are many similar troubling concerns.
“As you can understand, there is quite a plenty of them in the current circumstances, but I believe that the genuine interests of Russia and United States boil down to the fact that we have normal relations between the two states and the two peoples. I do hope that our today’s meeting was another step in that direction,” Lavrov said.
The Voice of America picked up on this disturbing concept of let’s play nice with the enemy in its story about Kerry’s speech in Brussels. Its lead paragraph read: “US Secretary of State John Kerry says Western alliances are willing to work with Russia to seek solutions to end the unrest in Ukraine, but will stand firm on principles based on freedom and international law.”
Sincere words of support for Ukraine traditionally reach a crescendo during the anniversary of Ukrainian Independence Day on August 24. These words also generate expectations in the minds of victims.
For example, President Obama observed: “Today, we reaffirm that the United States will continue to stand with the Ukrainian people as they protect their sovereignty and territorial integrity, embrace the vision of a strong and united Europe, and deepen their commitment to democracy, anti-corruption, and respect for human rights. I offer my best wishes to all the people of Ukraine. On this occasion, we are reminded that even in the most difficult moments, the glory and freedom of Ukraine—and the indomitable spirit of the Ukrainian people—lives on.”
Rep. Evan McMullin (R-UT), among other lawmakers, said during this year’s independence observance that the US “will revive and expand America’s strategic partnership with Ukraine, enhancing bilateral military, intelligence and diplomatic cooperation, and will fight for the right of the Ukrainian people—not Moscow—to decide whether they will seek membership in NATO, the European Union, and other regional organizations.”
The US “will support the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and will work to ensure all territories of Ukraine illegally annexed or occupied by Russia must be returned to the rightful government,” McMullin said.
Candidate Hillary Clinton noted through a spokesperson: “Through her multiple visits to Ukraine, Secretary Clinton has seen firsthand the passion with which Ukrainians fight for these ideals in the face of persistent adversity. She remains a staunch ally and advocate as they continue to defend their sovereignty.”
Secretary Kerry marked the date by saying: “Today we mark not just a quarter-century of your independence, but also of the fruitful partnership between our nations based on our shared commitment to freedom and the rule of law. The United States will stand by you as you continue to strengthen your democracy. With our European partners, we will also press for full implementation of the Minsk agreements to end Russian aggression in Donbas and return the international border to Ukrainian control. We remain steadfast in our refusal to recognize Russia’s attempted annexation of Crimea.”
Words of support such as these are coupled with daily reports about Russia’s continuing military onslaught against Ukraine, and Ukrainian military and civilian deaths signal that something isn’t right. The assurances don’t match reality. Why are the White House’s views belittled by the enemy?
High-ranking US officials have been emphasizing that Ukraine has a true friend and staunch ally in the United States, that the US will stand by Ukraine as Ukrainians defend their independence, that the US will press for Minsk implementation to end Russian aggression, that the US will be steadfast in its refusal to recognize Russia’s occupation of Crimea, and that the US will provide defensive – and perhaps lethal – weapons to Ukraine.
Assurances have special meanings not least of all in the minds of the victims. Ukrainian American voters also read these pledges and wonder why is Russia continuing its war against Ukraine? Why are there Russian tanks, missiles and soldiers in Ukraine and occupied Crimea? Why are Ukrainian civilians and soldiers still being killed? Why is Russia allowed to invade a neighbor, violate human rights, commit a host of other crimes with impunity? Why are sanctions levied against Russians without consequences? Why is the free world willing to condemn Russia, support Ukraine and then make commercial and political deals with the criminal?
It’s time that the friendly assurances truly help Ukraine and Ukrainians, and subdue and expel Russia from Ukraine.
0 notes
Text
X-Captive Nations Recall War In Ukraine at 71st UN GA Talks
Leaders of Latvia and Estonia reminded the international community of the Russian war in Ukraine during their addresses today during the second day of general debates during the opening of the 71st session of the UN General Assembly.
Below are the relevant excerpts:
Latvia, President Raimonds Vÿjonis
We must remain vigilant and insist that all States abide by their obligations under international law.
Russia has undermined the foundations of international law by changing borders of sovereign States through the use of force.
Latvia together with the international community will continue to stand for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine. The illegal annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation will not be recognized and must end. Any discrimination against the Crimean Tatars and ethnic Ukrainians in Crimea requires a firm UN reaction.
The international community must work to facilitate the peaceful resolution of the conflict in the eastern Ukraine. All parties must fulfill their commitments under the Minsk Agreements and make the Minsk process work.
Latvia continues to support Ukraine in its reform process and its humanitarian needs.
Estonia, President Toomas Hendrik Ilives
Certainly the world was more stable then, before the economic crisis, the migration crisis; current conflicts in the wider Middle East or Russia’s aggression against Georgia and Ukraine; before the war on truth and facts that seems to have taken over in many places. Despite our concerns at the time, we lived in a world more stable, where optimism was not yet naivete. Today, in too many parts of this world, we find a conflict either emerging, raging or frozen. Terrorism, always a scourge, dominates our daily headlines in all parts of the world.
Not all of today’s conflicts and crises could have been prevented. Yet the effect of many could have been mitigated had we acted sooner, had the proper mechanisms to resolve them been in place. When I addressed this assembly in the wake of the Russia’s invasion of Georgia in 2008, I warned not to apply international law selectively. International law had been clearly violated, yet little was done. Six years later, in 2014, we saw a repeat performance in Ukraine. Part of a sovereign state was annexed, part turned into a warzone. For the first time since World War II borders in Europe had been changed through use of force. The prohibition on the use of force to change borders lies at the heart of the UN Charter. It was blatantly violated and yet the UN could not make a difference. Russia’s aggression in Ukraine continues.
Territories of Georgia and Ukraine remain occupied by a foreign military, frozen conflicts remain in Nagorno-Karabakh and Trans-nistria.
X-captive nations must unite to defend themselves against Russian aggression. – TC
0 notes