They Saw and Heard the Truth — Then Lied About It: Media on Donbass Delegation Omitted Mention of Ukraine’s 8 Year War on the Autonomous Republics

 

Photos from site of Ukraine’s March 14 missile attack on Donetsk. Photo: Eva Bartlett, March 24, 2022.

Source

-by Eva K Bartlett, April 5, 2022

*Following is a lengthy overview of my recent re-visit to the Donbass, on a two day media delegation, with a brief critique of some of the media’s slanted reporting. It is also a follow up from my 2019 visit to hard hit areas of the Donetsk People’s Republic. It is now 8 years of Ukraine’s war on the people of the Donetsk & Lugansk Republics.

Point of impact of March 14 Ukrainian missile attack on Donetsk. Photo: Eva Bartlett, March 24, 2022.

In the last week of March, I stood on a central Donetsk main street next to two of the impact points of a Ukrainian missile attack that had killed 21 civilians and injured nearly 40 more on March 14. The Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) maintains that their military intercepted Ukraine’s Tochka-U ballistic missile, and that not all of the cluster munitions inside had exploded in the city streets, thereby lessening the already terrible bloodshed it caused. Indeed, if all of the munitions had exploded, it would have been a bloodbath more horrific than the 21 killed.

Photo: Eva Bartlett, March 24, 2022.

Near the ATM, there were flowers and candles laid in memory of the civilians murdered that day, with haunting photos nearby depicting the aftermath of the bombing, the grisly scenes of the dead and the maimed—scenes you will generally never see blasted across Western corporate media, just as the same media were silent when terrorism struck civilian areas in Syria.

I’m intimately familiar with war zones, and with Western corporate media’s white-washing of the perpetrators’ crimes (Israeli crimes against Palestinians; Western-backed terrorists’ crimes against Syrians; Ukrainian military and Nazi crimes against the civilians of the Donbass—and also against Ukrainians proper), so the lack of media coverage on this recent Ukrainian war crime doesn’t surprise me.

They don’t report on it, or the myriad Ukrainian war crimes prior, because it doesn’t suit their narrative, a narrative that erases the eight years of Ukraine’s war against the four million people of the Donbass republics, killing at least 14,000 people, to give a modest estimate.

War crimes investigator, Ivan Kopyl, spoke about Ukraine’s March 14 attack, noting, “The warhead of a Tochka-U missile contains 50 cassettes of cluster munitions. We managed to find 28 traces of cluster explosions on the soil…A Tochka-U missile changes its orientation just before landing, so after it flies on a trajectory it makes a turn and falls vertically down before detonating at a certain height. The fragments then shower the surface in a radius of approximately 150 meters.”

I have one of those cluster fragments, a twisted and jagged square-shaped piece of metal—seemingly harmless looking on its own, but deadly when flying through the air at high speed, in great numbers.

The attack occurred around noon, when this central city street—not a military area, but a civilian one—would have been busy. Photos show a gutted bus and gutted cars. Pensioners, Koply noted, would have been lined up at the ATM right where the blasts occurred. “There was also damage to a yard where there are two kindergartens – there were several craters there,” he noted.

The strike on the heart of the city is among the latest in Ukraine’s litany of war crimes.

Ukraine again bombed Donetsk following the March 14 attack. Donetsk News Agency reported on March 30 that the Ukrainian forces’ bombing had killed one person and seriously injured four others. One of the girls injured in that attack fell into a coma, the DPR Ombudsman noted.

And just now, there’s been news of another Ukrainian Tochka-U attack. According to RT, at least 50 people (including 5 children) were killed at a railway station in Kramatorsk, where thousands of people were waiting for evacuation trains. Eduard Basurin, a representative of the DPR People’s Militia, stated that the attack was a missile containing prohibited cluster munitions.

Gonzalo Lira writes:

“This is a fragment of the missile that hit the Kramatorsk train station…The AFU has blamed the Russians, but this picture of the missile shows that it is indisputably a Tochka-U rocket — used exclusively by the Ukrainian side. It’s the same kind of missile that two weeks ago hit the center of Donetsk and killed 27 civilians.

What’s that saying? Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times . . .”

As of March 31, the Ombudsman reported that there’s been 6,010 deaths, including 96 children, since Ukraine’s war began in 2014. And that’s only with regards to the DPR. In the Lugansk People’s Republic (LPR), which has also been under Ukrainian fire since 2014, as of late February, 1,762 civilians had been killed, including 35 children.

During my 2019 visit to the DPR, I went to the northern city of Gorlovka, of which I wrote:

“Gorlovka was hardest hit in 2014, especially on July 27, when the center was rocked by Ukrainian-fired Grad and Uragan missiles from morning to evening. After the dust settled and the critically-injured had succumbed to their wounds, at least 30 were dead, including five children. The day came to be known as Bloody Sunday.

A monument commemorates the Gorlovka victims of Ukrainian bombings and sniping from 2014-2017. Near a sculpture of an angel, over 230 names fill the marble slabs, the first dedicated solely to children, 20 of them.”

Photo: Eva Bartlett, March 24, 2022.

At the site of the March 14 bombing, DPR head Denis Pushilin spoke, outlining the chronology the last 8 years, from the violent coup in Ukraine and subsequent increase in radical Ukrainian nationalism, to the two republics’ decision to push for autonomy, to Ukraine unleashing hell on the 4 million people and continual violations of the (2014 & 2015) Minsk Agreements and the massive amounts of weapons pumped from the West to Ukraine (see also). [*Note: I’ll be adding a subtitled clip of his words in the next day or two.]

School and Hospital shelled by Ukrainian forces

The town of Volnovakha—on the road between Donetsk and Mariupol further south—was secured by DPR forces nearly two weeks prior to our visit. Entering the town, we passed destroyed homes and buildings, which was expected, as there was heavy fighting to liberate the area held by the Ukrainian forces.

As they did in their copy-paste reporting on liberated areas of Syria, most Western media reports on Volnovakha focus on the destruction, without any context as to why it occurred—these residential areas were occupied by Ukrainian forces, and not all of the destruction was from DPR forces’ fighting against the Ukrainian forces: the Ukrainian forces themselves fired on homes, and according to hospital staff, on the hospital itself.

In addition to not giving this context, most Western media in general depict the liberating forces as deliberately and wantonly destroying everything in sight. Some media went as far as to claim that Putin himself had destroyed the town. This cartoonish narrative, so prevalent in Western reports whitewashing terrorism in Syria and now in whitewashing Ukrainian forces’ crimes, unfortunately does achieve its intended effect: duping Western viewers into believing the opposite of reality–that the liberators are the war criminals.

Again, just as terrorist factions in Syria occupied schools and hospitals, so too do Ukrainian forces, including in Volnovakha. When DPR forces had liberated the city, they found foreign weapons used by Ukrainian forces inside the hospital. [See also: Western Media Quick to Accuse Syria of ‘Bombing Hospitals’ – But When Terrorists Really Destroy Syrian Hospitals, They Are Silent]

In a central area of Volnovakha, Russian soldiers handed out humanitarian aid to lines of residents, including: bags of canned goods, fresh bread, water.

According to Alexander Yurievich Kachalov, the interim mayor, Ukrainian forces used civilians as human shields. “They made sure to destroy as much infrastructure as possible. They bombed buildings in order to leave ruins after they left, to make it harder for us to restore.”

This was common in Syria. Terrorist factions destroyed buildings and vehicles when fleeing, while leaving mines and booby traps on streets and in houses, to kill still more civilians and soldiers.

A woman waiting in line for humanitarian aid said, “They say Russia did this. This wasn’t Russia, Ukraine did it, destroyed everything here! They shot at our hospital. I work there. The new children’s and infection units have been destroyed. The outpatient clinic was destroyed. And then they left. They took the medical staff’s car and went away.”

At the destroyed hospital, Chief Physician, Viktor Fedorovich Saranov, said:

“[The Ukrainian Army] were there. There were tanks on our territory. There were guns and Grads outside the territory.  I asked them to act in accordance with the Hague and Geneva conventions. I asked them to leave the hospital. They said it was war.

Many people come to us from nearby houses under fire. About 500-600 people came to our basement. We gave everyone three meals a day.

The second and third floors were occupied here. We were preparing for a long siege, and then it turned out like this: they conducted an attack. They evacuated the soldiers. And they mined the entrance to the intensive care unit. On the last day, when they were leaving, they shot at the intensive care unit.” The ICU, he said, had already been evacuated.

A woman who said she had worked at the hospital as a nurse for nearly 58 years said:

“On the 28th I was home alone. They soon started shelling. How can they do it with their local hospital? With patients here. They were laying in corridors, as they had been evacuated. They said there was no one in the hospital, no staff, no patients. This is a lie.”

Later, researching, I came across this news (*warning, graphic video at the link):

“Foreign mercenaries who were wounded in the Volnovakha hospital were shot by their own before leaving the city so that they could not tell anything. All the wounded have a control shot in the temple or the back of the head.”

On the road back towards Donetsk, we stopped at a school that had been shelled in late February.

According to Victoria Terichenko, head of the Dokuchaevsk city administration’s Department of Education, the shelling was by Ukrainian forces.

“Of course, Ukraine. There were only Ukrainian troops there. We had no military here, we were only civilians here.”

Fortunately, children weren’t at school at the time of the shelling, but Terichenko said a nursery school in the area had been shelled, with children inside, but again, fortunately, not on the side of the building shelled.

Horrors of Ukraine’s War on the People of the Donbass Republics

Ukraine’s relentless bombing and sniping of the people of Donbass is bad enough, along with it being ignored by Western press and politicians.

But in its eight years of warring on a people who rejected the rule of ultra-nationalists and Nazis, who just wanted to live autonomously, speak their own language, remember their history (Ukraine has rewritten history to glorify Nazis and Nazi collaborators and to vilify those who defeated Nazism, namely the Soviets), Ukraine has committed war crimes as heinous as ISIS and their co-terrorists in Syria, with more and more testimonies coming out of mass graves, rapes, torture of civilians and Donbass soldiers, beheadings. None of this shocking given the crimes these extremists commit against even Ukrainian civilians and journalists.

Along a sidewalk flanking a central park, there is a row of photos containing incredibly disturbing images of murdered LPR civilians.

Elders slaughtered on benches and in wheelchairs, the corpse of an infant, mass graves, a room used to imprison and torture people, the insignia of the notorious rapists and murderers of the “Tornado” battalion.

One photo shows Nazi graffiti left on a wall.

These are similar to the graffiti I saw in January 2009 left by Israeli soldiers who occupied the home of a Palestinian family, half of which had been killed by Israeli-fired White Phosphorous. One of the slogans written in Hebrew was: “Next time it will hurt more.” This, to the family whose infant had burned alive due to the White Phosphorous bombing, and whose surviving family members were badly mutilated from the prohibited weapon. In another house in eastern Gaza, likewise occupied and desecrated by Israeli soldiers, more hate and death graffiti had been left for the traumatized inhabitants.

Different people and places–same violent hatred of the population being targeted.

In the same park area, there is a monument to two journalists killed in 2014 by Ukrainian forces. Had these journalists been killed by Russia or Syria, their names would have been on the front pages of news sites and TIME magazine covers. In Syria, dozens of journalists have been killed by terrorist forces, to the silence of not only Western media but also of the groups supposedly advocating for journalists’ rights and safety.

In Shchastia, north of Lugansk, more civilians received humanitarian aid in the liberated town.

Humanitarian aid being handed out in Shchastia, a town north of Lugansk, liberated in early March.

Western Delivered Weapons on Display

In the two republics, we saw some of the vehicles and weapons captured from Ukrainian forces. Telesur journalist Alejandro Kirk spoke to me about these captured weapons and vehicles, noting the many foreign made weapons sold to Ukraine. Western countries continue to sell weapons to Ukraine.

On March 20, journalist Alexander Rubinstein wrote of the West’s exorbitant shipping of billions of dollars in weapons to Ukraine over the years. He noted:

“At least 32 countries have announced their intention to ship billions of dollars in weapons into Ukraine for use against Russian forces in Ukraine. Photographic evidence shows that these weapons have already ended up in the hands of neo-Nazi paramilitaries – units which have already received training and arms the US and its NATO allies.

All of this builds on $3.8 billion in military aid from the United States to Ukraine, the training of 55,000 Ukrainian soldiers by Canada and the United Kingdom, and a longstanding CIA program aimed at cultivating an anti-Russian insurgency.

…weapons furnished by NATO allies have been placed in the hands of the Azov Battalion, a neo-Nazi former paramilitary organization incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard.

The governments of Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom have presided over a massive program to train and equip Ukrainian soldiers for a full-scale war with Russia. Trainees have included top commanders of the Azov Battalion.

In late February, the European Union opened the floodgates of weapon shipments to Ukraine, approving financing through the aptly-named “European Peace Facility” to reimburse countries sending weapons to the country to the tune of $500 million USD. Another $55 million USD is earmarked for non-lethal military aid.

This February, the State Department announced $350 million in additional military aid to Ukraine, bringing “the total security assistance the United States has committed to Ukraine over the past year to more than $1 billion.”

Another $200 million was sent in early March, and following Zelensky’s March 16 appeal to Congress for more weapons, Biden is reportedly set to dole out another $800 in military aid including 800 Stinger anti-aircraft systems, 9,000 anti-tank systems, 5,000 rifles, 1,000 pistols, 400 machine guns, 400 shotguns, 400 grenade launchers, 20 million rounds of ammunition, 100 tactical drones, 25,000 sets of body armor and 25,000 helmets. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

These figures add to the $2.5 billion in military aid the US delivered between 2014 and the summer of 2021, bringing the total to $3.8 billion.”

Missing Context: What the Donbass People Have Endured In 8 Years of Ukraine’s War

After my September 2019 visit to the DPR, I wrote about the mostly elderly civilians I met who were living in battered homes damaged by Ukrainian shelling and heavy machine gun fire just 500 meters and 600 meters from Ukrainian forces. They remained there, they told me, mostly because they had nowhere else to go. Some spoke to me on camera, others were afraid of Ukrainian retaliation were they to be interviewed.

But their stories were all pretty much the same: at night, when the observers of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) left, the Ukrainian terrorizing began, with shelling throughout the night.

I also met a couple who had been living for 6 years in the stinking, dank, basement of a battered school, after Ukrainian bombing destroyed their home.

The DPR press officer who accompanied me and provided translations, spoke of how Ukrainian forces used weapons prohibited under the Minsk Agreements.

Irina Dikun, head of the administration of Zaitsevo, another frontline village, spoke at length on the Ukrainian bombing that erupted nearly every night.

“They are destroying street by street in the town. They take one street and destroy it house by house. Then they turn to another street. There was a school, and a nursery school, before, but they were both destroyed by Ukrainian artillery.”

As in Syria, when schools and hospitals are actually destroyed (in Syria by terrorist factions), the same media that howls over militarized hospitals being targeted, the same media that also manufactures stories that never even occurred, is silent when the destroying is actually done, by Ukrainian forces.

In Zaitsevo, Irina explained fire trucks and medics couldn’t reach targeted homes, because the ambulances themselves became targets for Ukrainian forces (as happens in Gaza, where medics are targeted by Israeli forces, as I myself witnessed).

During that 2019 visit, I also interviewed some of the defenders of the DPR, painted by Western media as “separatists”, “pro-Russian forces” and other such descriptions meant to dehumanize. The same Western media so quick to humanize terrorists, including one who chewed the organ of a dead Syrian soldier.

One more relevant note from that visit: Dmitri asked what people in the West think about the fact there is a Nazi state in Europe. I replied that most people don’t know, because of the media whitewashing.

Which brings me to my recent return to the Donbass: I was curious to see whether the journalists on the same delegation as me would report truthfully, partial truths, or fabricated lies. As it turned out, my skepticism was warranted.

Distortions and Omissions of Some Western Media on the Ground in the Donbass

Telesur’s report gave the historical context needed to understand the present, including the coup in Ukraine, the active neo-Nazis in Ukraine (many of whom re entrenched in the Ukrainian army), the past eight years of Ukraine’s war on the Donbass, the 14,000 killed during these years, and the media blackout on the suffering of the Donbass people.

Sky News’ report was good, mentioning the civilians killed in Donbass by Ukraine’s war, including the March 14 attack and the school shelling, while also giving air time to the DPR’s Pushilin.

Neither of the two French channels’ (FranceInfo and TF1Info) reports on the delegation’s visit mentioned the March 14 Tochka-U attack, even though we visited the site & Pushilin spoke of it at length, much less the roughly 8,000 civilians killed in the two republics alone. I couldn’t find mention of the Azov or other Nazi battalions participating in the atrocities against the Donbass people, even though we heard about them and saw the graphic photo display in Lugansk. Their reports were framed as, “this is what Russia wants us to see,” regarding the humanitarian aid and reclaimed towns.

And of course, they focused greatly on the destruction, but not on the reasons for it, the implication being that the Russians and the “pro-Russian separatists” were responsible.

The chief physician of the hospital in Volnokava spoke at length and did specifically state the Ukrainian army had occupied the hospital, as did the nurse I cited, both of whom addressed the group of journalists.

FranceInfo’s mention of the hospital was framed as, “The Russians accuse the Ukrainians of having bombed it.” They included a few seconds of the chief physician saying he didn’t know who had done it, there were soldiers in the area, he didn’t know who.

But actually, the physician spoke to us for about several minutes, during which—as I wrote earlier—he did specifically talk about the presence of the Ukrainian army in the hospital.

One journalist asked: “Why did such destruction happen?” To which the chief physician replied, “I don’t know. They were military. And who they were: military, national battalions, army? I don’t know.”

That’s the bit France TV cherry picked, omitting his previous words about the Ukrainian army occupying the hospital, as well as omitting what he said afterwards: “There was Ukrainian territory on that side and the rockets were from that side. They mined the entrance to the intensive care unit. On the last day when they were leaving, they shot at the intensive care unit.”

Likewise, TF1Info included just a few seconds of the physician’s words on the Ukrainian cannons and machine guns at the hospital, but then followed up with the presenter’s caveat: it is one of the arguments often presented by the Kremlin—in spite of the fact that not only he, but the nurse and many people I encountered in the town specifically blamed the Ukrainian army for occupying the hospital and attacking it themselves when leaving.

If there were any further TF1Info reports from their journalist’s visit which might have included mention of Donbass’ dead, I couldn’t find them. Likewise, of FranceInfo.

This tactic of cherry picking quotes and omitting information is a standard corporate media war propaganda tactic and, unfortunately one seen over and over in Syria and elsewhere.

Journalist Vanessa Beeley wrote of one particularly horrific and sadistic terrorist massacre of 200 Syrian civilians, including 116 children, in April 2017, killed by an explosion as they were being evacuated from their terrorist besieged villages. She wrote of one traumatized woman who lost 20 family members (10 dead, 10 missing) having witnessed the attack.

“Then, after the filming session (by various agencies, including Dubai based Orient News & Qatari Al Jazeera) which lasted approximately ten minutes, she and the other parents were forced back onto the buses, at gunpoint, and locked inside. They had to watch, while the armed militia collected the dead, dying and mutilated bodies of their community’s children and flung them in the back of trucks and Turkish ambulances, before driving them away from their families in Rashideen.

Not one western media outlet questioned why these injured, dying and disoriented children were being piled on top of one another in the back of a truck that obviously belonged to Nusra Front.”

In fact, as they did routinely in their Syria coverage, media essentially relegated these dead civilians as unimportant, because their deaths didn’t fit the corporate narrative, even when civilians were repeatedly targeted by horrific terrorist bombings, mortars and missiles.

Global Media Abusing the Suffering of the Donbass to Further Anti-Russia War Propaganda, Just as They Did in Syria…

It is already bad enough that Western media generally don’t report on Ukraine’s relentless shelling of the Donbass, but all the more disgusting when it depicts a scene from the March 14 bombing of Donetsk as if it was a bombing of Lvov by Russia.

“The aftermath of the bombing of Donetsk by Ukrainian “Tochka-U” missile, used by Italian newspaper “La Stampa” as an image from Lvov
*Propaganda noted in this article: The Hard Facts about Ukraine and Donbass
At the site of the Tochka-U missile attack in Donetsk, photos of the moments after the bombing, including the scene depicted in Western media as in Lvov. Photo: Eva Bartlett, March 24, 2022.

This isn’t the only instance. More recently, various Western media have used footage showing a multi-story apartment building in Donetsk that was bombed by Ukraine on March 30 to infer that the scene depicted was actually of Ukrainian areas that had been bombed by Russia. If you followed the war propaganda around Syria, you would be aware that this practice is common, not accidental.

New York post using Donetsk bombing photo to infer the scene was Kiev or elsewhere, under Russian bombing. The article has since been updated, photo removed. They would say it was a mistake. With corporate media, it never is. Luckily, at the time, some observers caught the lie.

And as with war propaganda on Syria, some media will use footage not even from Ukraine:

I could add paragraphs of examples of how Western media did this in Syria, but for the sake of brevity will state simply that this is one of many deceitful and deliberate propaganda tactics used to both downplay the hell civilians are suffering under Ukraine’s bombing, and instead to pretend Ukraine is the victim. How the journalists that propagate such lies live with themselves, I’ll never understand.

Finally, a word to some in independent media who feel the need to denigrate Russia’s denazification operation in Ukraine by snidely putting “special operation” in quotation marks, or others who took to social media to tell the world they don’t like war, and denounced Russia for its military operation (to stop a war): The people of the Donbass don’t like war, they didn’t ask for Ukraine to unleash hell upon them. Such posturing disrespects the at least 14,000 killed by Ukraine’s war.

As journalist Roman Kosarev, who has covered the war eightyears, said: “Russia isn’t starting a war, Russia is ending one.

Gonzalo Lira: News & Views 2022.04.04

APRIL 04, 2022

Moscow: Kiev used Jewish synagogue as gathering point for nationalists

March 30 2022

Source: Agencies

By Al Mayadeen Net 

Russia says Ukraine is using worshipping places as gathering and transfer points for weapons and Nazis to participate in hostilities.

Ukrainian nationalists and neo-nazis used a Jewish synagogue as a gathering point

Russian Defense Ministry Spokesperson Major General Igor Konashenkov revealed Wednesday that Ukraine used a Jewish synagogue in the city of Uman as a gathering point for nationalist formations, TASS reported.

According to Konashenkov, Kiev is using worshipping places as gathering and transfer points for weapons and Nazis to participate in hostilities, violating international humanitarian law and morality norms.

“Today we present evidence received from a member of the Uman Jewish community of the use by the [Ukrainian President Volodymyr] Zelensky regime for these purposes of the building of the new city synagogue, located at 1 Shosseiny Lane,” Konashenkov highlighted.

The Russian spokesperson stressed that the defense ministry has “recorded the formation of two nationalist columns on the territory of the synagogue,” according to TASS.

Konashenkov explained that “the property, weapons, and ammunition stored in the synagogue were first loaded by the nationalists into dump trucks, and then disguised as bags with construction waste. At the same time, to transport nationalists and foreign mercenaries from Ukraine’s western regions, buses with school vehicle markings and appropriate Children signs are used, as can be clearly seen in the photographs.”

Ukraine used a Jewish synagogue in the city of Uman as a gathering point for nationalist formations

He considered that “the object of the Jewish cult in Uman is deliberately used by the Kiev nationalist regime for military purposes in order to provoke a conflict and political pressure of Jewish religious organizations on Russia in case of fire on it.”

The major general pointed out that “on March 20, President Zelensky, in a video address to the Israeli Knesset, accused Russia of allegedly striking the city of Uman in the Cherkasy region.”

He reiterated that during the ongoing war, the Russian Armed Forces do not strike civilian sites or places of worship.

Just a handful, not relevant, yet…

March 27, 2022

Source

By Nat South

There are some comments made on social media, to whitewash and downplay the serious issue regarding a far-right/ ultranationalist movement in Ukraine. Such simplistic takes are seen as a sound reason for denying a Russian military intervention* in Ukraine. This article provides some responses to these, by using a combination of corporate MSM and Ukrainian information to address the points made about a handful of far-right groups and individuals and their influence.

  1. How many deputies does Right Sector or other ultranationalists have in the Ukrainian Rada?

Remarkably, people use this stance over and over on social media and in the press to justify that there is no ultranationalism problem in Ukraine. To them, support & evidence and ultra-nationalism ought to translate into votes and winning seats in the Ukrainian parliament. If only it were as simple it is seems. It goes much much deeper, and the roots are deeply established.

The focus isn’t that there are just a few ultra-nationalists that were elected to politics recently, but how since 2014 ultra-nationalists were a vector for unsettling changes in socio-political structures and provided cover for wider acceptance of an overtly fascist ethno- nationalism within Ukrainian institutions, namely in education and in the military.

Roll back a few years, there were plenty that used their status as a volunteer fighter in Donbass (known as the Anti-Terrorism Operation — ATO) to get elected back in 2014. Practically all of them lost in the 2019 parliamentary elections. This is the crucial aspect to carefully note. The background to the 2019 parliamentary elections was when Zelensky had been elected as president on a platform to bring peace to the country.

Here are some examples of the Donbass ATO unit members who become deputies:

  • Ex-commander Azov battalion: Andriy Biletsky (ex Verkhovna Rada deputy 2014- 2019), founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Assembly;
  • Ex-commander Aidar battalion: Sergei Melnichuk (Ex-Rada deputy 2014-2019);
  • Ex- company commander, Aidar: Ihor Lapin (Ex- Rada deputy 2014-2019);
  • Ex- Dnipro Battalion commander: Yuriy Bereza
  • Ex-Aidar volunteer, helicopter pilot, Nadiya Savchenko — Ex-Rada deputy (2014-2018)
  • Ex-commander of Donbass battalion: Konstantin Grishin, former Rada deputy, (Self-Help party), alias – Semyon Semenchenko.

Only of one of the above was elected and represented a radical right party, the Radical Party of Oleh Lyashko, all of the others stood for mainstream political parties. Notably, the leader of the Radical Party (RP) Oleh Lyashko did admit that members of his party murdered anti-Maidan leaders during the ‘revolution of dignity’ and extrajudicial murders of non-combatants in Torez in 2014.

Yet, all of the above Rada Deputies served in far right / ultranationalist volunteer units. The very same nationalist units cited on multiple occasions in human right reports for “credible allegations of torture and other egregious abuses”  + incommunicado detention & violence against civilians . Additionally, there are many others who fought in Donbass and also became Rada deputies.

Moreover, many of the far-right fringe groups successfully stood for election in 2014, reflecting a change in perception. However, 5 years later, the reality of what the ultra-nationalists brought with them, (regular threats, conflict, language & cultural restrictions, corruption, crime) was no longer acceptable to the majority of ordinary voters.

The election result was the one-party majority, a novelty in Ukraine, for President Zelenskyy’s Servant of the People party with 254 seats.” Wikipedia. This is the crux of the matter, people wanted a change, people just did not want to vote for the ultranationalists parties and their policies. The likes of Svoboda, led by Oleh Tyahnybok did get 2.15% and just the one seat in the Verkhovna Rada. Even Oleh Lyashko lost his seat in 2019.

During the last 8 years, a number of prominent ultra-nationalist groups have made their mark on Ukrainian society. The notorious Azov’s political wing, the National Corps headed by none other than the ex-Azov commander, Andrei Biletskiy, as well as Right Sector, and its armed Volunteer Ukrainian Corps (DUK) and UVA, along with Svoboda linked groups, (key Maidan participants), have been consistently and fiercely opposed to any sort of a peace settlement in Donbass.

Similarly, the ex-Rada deputies, who participated in the Donbass ATO, other ultra-nationalists, have to date, largely enjoyed judicial impunity in the wake of committing crimes, given their official status and connections to military and nationalist units. Some examples of this are provided later in the article.

Electorally, the ultranationalist parties may not be popular and get parliamentary seats, due to a wish for a change in politics, namely a peace settlement in Donbass, but also due to the various fractions, frictions and bickering between ultranationalists groups. Obtaining a peace settlement was one of the main electoral promises made by Zelensky in 2019. Hence, the overwhelming election of Zelensky, across the board, with 73% of the votes, apparently due to widespread disenchantment with Petro Poroshenko’s policies.

Ever since the events in Maidan back in 2014, ultra-nationalists have latched themselves in various sectors, local politics, police, the security service (SBU) and military structures. There are numerous examples of this over this 8-year period, too many to cite here, but just a couple examples provided to underscore the extent of the power and influence of ultra-nationalists in Ukraine, as well as highlight the cooperation between official bodies and far-right groups and outline some of the ties that ultra-nationalists have.

A suspect in the 2015 murder of the journalist Oles’ Buzina, an ultranationalist, ex-ATO volunteer (Kyiv-2), Andrey Medvedko, (ex-Svoboda Party, ex C-14) was voted in 2019 to the public council of the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU). Medvedko was never put on trial.

Avowed neo-nazi, Azov deputy commander, Vadim Troyan, was appointed in 2014 by the Interior minister (MVD), Arsen Avakov, as police chief for Kyiv Oblast & later in 2016, promoted to 1st deputy chief of the new National Police.

It is the same MVD minister, Avakov, who helped to create the ATO volunteer battalions in 2014, but also backed Azov as well, and then integrated Azov into the National Guard structure. This is the same Interior minister who said in 2014, “to promise the Russians anything, and then hang them after the victory”.

In 2018, C-14 was used as a vigilante group, signed a partnership with a local Kyiv Council and also the police to carry out patrols. This is the same group that got sponsorship from the Ministry of Youth & Sports, “under less $17,000 for a children’s camp.” The same C-14 that carried out pogroms against Roma. The C-14 leader, Yevhen Yaras openly acknowledged working with the Ukrainian security service, (SBU).

Just when things couldn’t actually deteriorate regarding deeply unsavoury shenanigans at the highest levels, Zelensky appointed Oleksandr Poklad as the SBU’s counter-intelligence chief in 2021. Poklad known as the ‘The Strangler’ is a decidedly shady character, typical of the post-Maidan scene, with links to organised crimes and involvement in extrajudicial killings.

March 2022, some everyday examples of ultra-nationalists in power, as mayors of Ivano-FrankivskKonotop (article) or the city council of Ternopil with their huge banner of Bandera. In fact, they don’t hide the fact that they revere Bandera and his ideology, (more on this in the 2nd part of this article).

Over just half of all the funds allocated by the Ukrainian government for children’s and youth organisations in 2020 went to various ultra-nationalist projects. All done primarily to foster and increase an already existing popularity for Bandera.

Now replicate these examples a thousand times over, across Ukraine over eight years to get a sense of the tip of the ultra-nationalist iceberg. More examples are also provided later in the article.

Back in 2019, Zelensky tried to advocate for peace, but ended up appeasing the ultra-nationalists and of late, progressively established himself more and more with individuals and groups, from those very same radical ultra nationalist / extremists entities.

Ex-president Petro Poroshenko, likewise has used the nationalist leaders and groups during the 1st December 2021 demonstrations against Zelensky. Basically, a rent-a-mob those various political entities use to their advantage. This exchange of mindsets isn’t surprising, given that Andriy Parubiy, [1] , the co-founder of Social Nationalist Party of Ukraine, was the on the party list for Poroshenko’s “European Solidarity Party”. An example of an ultra-nationalist gaining some traction by extending into the ‘conventional’ political system.

Although the ultra-nationalists as political parties are on the margins, they still have significant socio-political influence wider in society. For instance, the parades and massive torchlight rallies in Ukraine by various ultra-nationalists, approved by local authorities and local enforcement, reminiscent of the 1930’s torchlight processions. Paradoxically, the Western press expressed anguish and anger when such a torchlight march took place in in Charlottesville, USA, the one. But in Ukraine, nothing of the sort is expressed by Western corporate MSM on the numerous marches in various Ukrainian cities.

Additionally, although Zelensky initially make some tentative steps to try and get a peace settlement back in autumn 2019, this was totally scuppered by the threats made by ultra-nationalists, who forcefully asserted their “No Capitulation” campaign. Other high-profile Ukrainian politicians “drew red lines that Zelensky should not cross during the Normandy Format meeting”.

Moreover, no concerted attempts were made by Brussels, Washington or the OSCE to effectively pressurise Zelensky to cut loose from using ultra-nationalist units in the military, (first and foremost: Azov), nor were any efforts made to assist Zelensky in removing the ultra-nationalists out of official or elected positions.

2. There are just a handful of neo-Nazis / ultra-nationalists / extremists. Or, they’re only 0,005% of the military.

By solely mentioning ‘Azov’ as being teeming with Neo-Nazis, alleging that there are only about 900 to 1500 members, thus stating that is it a relatively small proportion compared to the total Ukrainian armed forces. Thus, the Neo-Nazis and ultra-nationalists is correspondingly insignificant. As if that was okay to start with.

“Ah but there are neo-Nazis in most militaries…” This type of comment misses the point completely. Only Ukraine has tolerated whole units with Neo-Nazis or supporters of Bandera and allowed units to have fascist-inspired insignia and flags. Only in Ukraine, is overt Neo-Nazi ideology permitted in the ranks. For the sake of fighting the ‘Muscovites’.

Yet, just Azov accounts for more than 1500 volunteers, up to double or triple that numbers, given the other battalions, as well as 2 regiments and other units across Ukraine. Add in the Right Sector’s units, conservatively estimated at around 10,000 volunteers. Not included are also other ultra-nationalist military units, Aidar, Donbass, nor the special police battalions, including Kharkiv, Dnipro, Kyiv-1, Kyiv-2 and a dozen other units. Then there are others such as the Carpathian Sich, OUN volunteers and foreign volunteer units. Their odious ideology and zeal is matched with their outright hatred for Russians. Some ultra-nationalists love to wear the Totenkopf, a symbol by the SS stormtroopers, who considered themselves to be the elite. These ultra-nationalists are currently the spearhead in fighting Russian forces across Ukraine.

Recently, the French President, Emmanuel Macron claimed that Russia’s special operation to demilitarise and “de-Nazify” Ukraine is “not a fight against Nazism”. A prime example of the denial or attempt to ignore some deeply serious issues that are being constantly overlooked by Western politicians and MSM. Evidently, he never got to read The Atlantic Council’s 2018 article Ukraine’s far-right problems or browsed through this photo essay.

The concept of ‘de-nazifying’ is probably totally lost on most people in the West. What should have been added was a reference to reclaiming nazi-era ideology and glorifying nationally a nazi-inspired supremacist. Even Zelensky stated categorically that “this is a normal and cool thing.” Why would he need to say such things if it wasn’t to placate and please a certain part of Ukrainian society?

“There are indisputable heroes. Stepan Bandera is a hero for a certain part of Ukrainians, and this is a normal and cool thing. He was one of those who defended the freedom of Ukraine.” Zelensky

(2019)

Ethno-ultra-nationalism in Ukraine has different strands, but all converge on reclaiming the ideology espoused by Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) and Ukrainian Partisan Army (UPA) and their activities in the 1940’s. Right Sector, OUN, C-14, National Corps foster and practice a cult principally centred on Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych, (See the photo below — Bandera Readings 2022, for an example). The government is no exception either, along with the Rada as well in promoting, nurturing these WWII fascist leaders, in order to establish them as part of Ukrainian culture. Bandera has been officially recognised as a national hero since 2010. Maidan was the catalyst in accelerating this process, more violently, more brutally on one hand and more insidiously by officials in education, culture and the military. Violent far right units that got patronage from Washington and Brussels.

Bandera Readings 2022

As the C-14 leader, Yevhen Yaras stated back in February, it is not a question of numbers per se, but actual influence and capability to mobilise people and resources. This was the vividly the case in Maidan, (as reported in a BBC documentary), and as he clearly said in his talk, and it is still certainly the case nowadays.

A clear example of this influence happened in December 2021, when Zelensky appointed the Right Sector founder, Dmitro Yarosh, as advisor to the chief of the general staff of the Ukrainian armed forces. More recently, in March 2022, Zelensky appointed the ex-Aidar commander, Maksym Marchenko, as the new head of the Odessa Administration.

Ultra-nationalists have been unable to regain a political foothold via the political parties, yet this doesn’t stop them from asserting their presence in society in general:

  • marches & demonstrations; (15,000 Ukraine nationalists march for divisive Bandera — USA Today)
  • disrupting council meetings & court proceedings; (BBC documentary 2018)
  • pogroms against Roma (Kyiv, Lviv);
  • attacked other protests & events (LGBT, environmentalists, International women’ s day marchers) as reported by HRW;
  • intimidation, blackmail and murders of opponents.

Their deeply unsavoury activities did raise alarm by human right and civic groups back in 2018. The concerns were about how the far right “created an atmosphere of near total impunity that cannot but embolden these groups to commit more attacks“. This deplorable situation has never been dealt with by authorities. Fast-forward five years, the reluctance was still there to even start tackling part of the problem. Rather than being seen as a liability, their presence is seen in some quarters as a necessary obligation.

Thus, the ultra-nationalists gained a firmer foothold, by the fact that they were the ones who went to the ATO, the ones willing to continue fighting in Donbass. Add in a perpetual fear that these groups could turn against the government or officials, as recently evidenced by the 1st of December 2021 protests, no official is willing to confront them. This shows the extent of the influence and power that they can wield. For instance, Dmytro Yarosh, the founder of Right Sector publicly threatened Zelensky in an interview that he would hang from a tree.

Since 2018, a continuous effort has been made to legitimise Ukraine’s extremists, (i.e. 2018 — National Militia cooperation with the police, during the 2019 election). Even though, groups linked to Azov, and both military wings of Right Sector are in fact illegal military groups, not officially part of the military or National Guard structure, it is telling how they are seen and valued at the highest levels of government.

1st December 2021 saw Zelenskiy in the Verkhovna Rada, giving the country’s highest state award, “Hero of Ukraine”, to the Right Sector unit commander, Dmitro Kotsyubailo. The unit is part of the Right Sector’s Volunteer Ukrainian Corps (DUK), a stand-alone irregular military unit, part of Right Sector.

A reminder to the readers that Right Sector units are predominantly manned by ultra-nationalists and neo-nazis. An example is Dmitro Kotsyubailo himself as one of thousands of examples, (centre photo with statue of Bandera and Right Sector flags):

Insert picture description

Dmitro Kotsyubailo’s unit has been given anti-tank missile systems. Likewise, an Azov unit in Kharkiv got given the same systems, as this tweet shows:

Insert picture description

As I said earlier, here are the ultra-nationalist units that get fast tracked training & access to NATO weaponry, as part of a total of $2.5 billion given by the U.S. alone to Ukraine. This isn’t indicative of a tolerance by Kyiv, but tacit acceptance of these units as well as the ideological stance that they have. Not only Kyiv, but Washington, London, Paris, and Brussels. A modern-day revamping of Op Gladio style units to fight the Russian military now and Donbass units since 2014.

A broader perspective can be glimpse through these selected headlines:

  • For Ukraine’s Far Right, War With Russia Can Be an Opportunity (Haaretz 2022)
  • Preparing for War With Ukraine’s Fascist Defenders of Freedom (Foreign Policy 2014)
  • A Year After 1/6, Ukraine’s War Draws U.S. Far-Right to Fight Russia, Train for Violence at Home (Newsweek 2022)

Western politicians, corporate media, think tanks experts are blatantly ignoring these deeply unpleasant aspects in Ukraine. However, given the widely circulated MSM articles that flagged up the far-right in Ukraine, most media outlets and journalists are willingly glossing over these aspects as well as the accompanying violence and brutality against civilians for daring to oppose this Ukrainian ideology. All in the pursuit of fighting the Russian military.

It is fair to say that overtly fascist elements provide a stream of volunteers for Azov, Right Sector, C-14, OUN, National Corps, and others, whose members have been integrated into the military, National Guard, police, security services & also in mainstream political parties. Paradoxically, the Russian intervention has provided a catalyst for the growth in Ukrainian ultra-nationalist military units.

Conclusion

Blindsided by citing simplistic comments, those who do not wish to look any further, as such, for them, there are just a handful of weak ultranationalists. Case closed, conveniently so for them. Yet, the disturbing reality shows the opposite and this article only attempted to provide a brief insight. The Ukrainian ultra-nationalists certainly pack a punch above their weight.

Both the U.S and Europe only understand to some extent the considerable danger represented by violent extremism when is present in their countries. Yet, they shut their eyes to very same danger, amplified by a conflict, fostered with the connivance of authorities.

Footnotes

* to use a standard U.S. and NATO MSM/military terminology.

[1] which became the political party ‘Svoboda’. He was also the leading hand of Euromaidan “Self-Defense” fighters and activists.

ما الخطة العسكريّة الروسيّة التي اعتمدت في أوكرانيا… ونتائجها؟

 العميد د. أمين محمد حطيط _

خطّطت أميركا وخلفها الغرب الأوروبي لاستدراج روسيا الى أوكرانيا وإغراقها في مستنقع لا تستطيع الخروج منه أو لا تخرج منه إلا بعد إنهاكها والقضاء على اقتصادها لا بل والنيل من وحدتها وتفكيكها الى دول متناحرة تضيع بين حدودها المكانة النووية استراتيجياً وتفقد حق الفيتو في مجلس الأمن دولياً وهما الميزتان اللتان كانتا للاتحاد السوفياتي وورثتهما روسيا بعد تفككه، واليوم تريد أميركا شطبهما من الكينونة الروسية بشكل نهائي. كلّ ذلك تقدم عليه أميركا من أجل إسقاط المثلث الاستراتيجي المشرقيّ الذي يرفض ويعمل من أجل الإجهاز النهائي على فكرة الأحادية القطبية التي حلمت بها أميركا وخاضت من أجل إرسائها الحروب المتتالية والمتنوّعة، فكرة لا تزال تدغدغ أحلامها رغم ما واجهته من عوائق وما مُنيت صاحبتها من هزائم.

وحتى تنفذ خطتها لجأت أميركا الى تدابير استفزازية دفعت اليها أوكرانيا الدولة الجار لروسيا ذات الـ ٤٥ مليون نسمة (ما يعادل ربع سكان روسيا) وذات المساحة التي تتجاوز الـ 600 الف كلم2، ومنذ العام 2014 بدأت أميركا بخطتها الجهنمية ضدّ روسيا بالانقلاب الذي أطاح بحكومة أوكرانية وطنية تقيم علاقات حسن جوار طبيعية مع روسيا، انقلاب جاء الى الحكم بدمية بيد الغرب وفئة من القوميين والنازيين الجدد المعبّأين بعميق الكراهية ضدّ روسيا، ما فرض على روسيا اتخاذ الوضع الدفاعي عن مصالحها ومستقبلها والأهم حاضراً عن أمنها القومي وأمن الأشخاص الروس او الذين هم من أصل روسي ويقيمون في أوكرانيا بصفتهم مواطنين بعد ان ضمتّ القيادة السوفياتية السابقة ارضاً روسية الى أوكرانيا لتشكل منها دولة في الاتحاد السوفياتي احتفظت بالأرض الروسية بعد تفكك الاتحاد السوفياتي.

حاولت روسيا جاهدة التفلت مما ينصب لها في أوكرانيا من كمائن او فخاخ، وعرضت بأكثر من طريقة ووسيلة وأسلوب حلولاً لما تخشاه خاصة على صعيد الأمن القومي وامن الأشخاص الروس، وكان الرفض الأميركي بصلافة وتعنّت هو الردّ دائماً وكان هذا طبيعياً من أميركا التي تخطط بالشكل الجهنّمي ضدّ روسيا، ووصلت الأمور في نهاية المطاف الى وضع روسيا أمام خيارين: اما السكوت على الاستفزاز وتآكل الموقع والقدرات والوصول الى يوم لن يكون بعيداً تضطر فيه للدفاع عن الدولة على أبواب موسكو وتتذكر يومها الغزو الغربي لها أكثر من مرة وما خلفه من قتل ودمار، او المبادرة بعمل عسكري استباقي ووقائي يقيها من هذه الأخطار دون أن تدخل النار أرض الدولة الروسية. بين الأمرين اختارت الحلّ الثاني رغم ما فيه، من مخاطر وما ينطوي عليه من الوقوع في الفخ الأميركي، ويحقق رغبة أميركا في اقتياد روسيا الى حرب استنزاف قاتلة،

بيد انّ روسيا ومع اختيارها للعمل العسكري النوعي الاستباقي، الذي اضطرت عليه كخيار بين السيّئ والأسوأ. واختارت السيّئ، بادرت الى وضع خطط تنفيذية تجنبها قدر الإمكان او الى الحدّ الأقصى الانزلاق الى حرب استنزاف أو عمليات قتل المدنيين كما تشتهي أميركا ومن أجل ذلك اختارت للتنفيذ استراتيجية الضغط المتدرّج الذي أملت منها حمل القيادة الأوكرانية على التفاوض تحت وطأة الميدان والضغط العسكري فيه من أجل الاستجابة للمطالب الروسية ذات الصلة بالأمن القومي الروسي وأمن الأشخاص الروس.

وفي التنفيذ ترجمت هذه الاستراتيجية عسكرياً بما يؤدي الى تدمير القدرات العسكرية الأوكرانية وتجفيف مصادر القوة، ونزع الانياب والأظافر وحرمان أوكرانيا من الإمكانات العسكرية الذاتية او التي تمنح لها من الخارج لتتمكن من إدارة حرب استنزاف ناجحة وطويلة الأمد تحقق لأميركا اهدافها. ومن أجل ذلك التزمت ونفذت روسيا ميدانياً بما يلي:

ـ الاقتصاد بالقوى مع تخصيص جزء بسيط من قواتها المسلحة وقواتها العسكرية وإناطة مهمة العملية العسكرية النوعية به، ولذلك لم تزجّ في الميدان وتدفع عبر الحدود أكثر من ١/١٣ من قواتها المقاتلة وهي نسبة متدنية جداً كما يعلم العسكريون لا يكون من شأنها ان ترهق الجيش مهما طال أمد العمليات.

ـ التخطيط للحرب الطويلة غير المرهقة حتى لا يكون طول المدة أداة ضغط عكسية على روسيا.

ـ التوجه لتدمير القدرات العسكرية الأوكرانية شاملاً الأسلحة والذخائر في الميدان وفي المستودعات وفي مصانع الإنتاج بما يحرم الجيش الأوكراني من الوسائل العسكرية المحلية التي تلزمه للقتال والمواجهة والصمود.

ـ اعتماد استراتيجية الحصار  للإنهاك النفسي والميداني الذي يفرغ المدن من سكانها ما يقود الى إسقاطها في نهاية المطاف مع تجنب حرب الشوارع ومعارك الالتحام وخسائرها او قتل المدنيين في بيوتهم، وفي هذه النقطة قلبت روسيا الاتجاه حيث تجنّبت حرب الاستنزاف ودفعت الخصم اليها وهو برأينا إبداع روسي.

ـ الاندفاع البدئيّ السريع للعملية عبر الحدود مع تعدّد محاور العمل (٣ محاور رئيسية ومحورين ثانويين) بما يحقق الصدمة والرعب ويقود الى الانهيار الإدراكي والإخراج من الميدان دون قتال لأنّ هدف روسيا لم يكن القتل بل التحييد عن القتال،

ـ رسم الخطوط الحمراء الصارمة بوجه التدخل الغربي الأطلسي وتجلى ذلك بـ ٣ مواقف الأول التلويح بالسلاح النووي الرادع، والثاني اعتبار قوافل الإمداد العسكري أهدافاً  مشروعة أينما كانت، والثالث اعتبار فتح مراكز التدريب والتحشيد وتجنيد الأجانب عملاً يستوجب التدخل لتدميرها.

ـ الارتقاء التصاعدي في استعمال الاسلحة بشكل يحقق مصالح روسية مركبة من عملانية ولوجستية واستراتيجية مع التقيّد بقاعدة “التناسب والضرورة” حسب المستطاع والحاجة والإمكان، ومن هنا نفهم كيف لجأت روسيا الى استعمال صاروخ “كنجال” ذي الرأس عالي الدقة والخارق للتحصينات من أجل تدمير مستودعات الأسلحة والذخائر، او إطلاق صاروخ باستون من قطعة بحرية في البحر الأسود ليدمّر أهدافاً في البر الأوكراني رغم أنه في الاصل معدّ للاستعمال ضدّ السفن، ففي هذه النقطة يبدو انّ روسيا تتجه الى عرض واستعراض القوة والقدرات العسكرية العالية المستوى وتأكيد قرارها الاستراتيجي بالمضيّ حتى النهاية لتحقيق أهدافها مهما استلزم ذلك من بذل.

ـ الإمساك بورقة المصانع البيولوجية والجرثومية التي أقامتها أميركا في أوكرانيا والتلويح بفضح الخطط الأميركية بصددها.

وبالنتيجة وفي اقلّ من شهر تمكنت روسيا من تحييد اكثر من ٧٥٪ من الجيش الأوكراني وفرض الحصار على ٣ مدن رئيسية منها العاصمة كييف كما وإحكام حصار بحري كامل على أوكرانيا فحرمتها من التجارة عبر البحرين الأسود وآزوف، كما أنها دمّرت المصانع العسكرية في معظم أوكرانيا ووضعت اليد على قاعدتين نوويتين أساسيتين في تشيرنوبيل وزاباروجيا متجنبة الى الحدّ الأقصى المواجهات الميدانية المباشرة ومعتمدة بشكل رئيسي على القدرات النارية براً وجواً وبحراً وعلى قدرات الصدم المناسبة.

وعلى هذا الأساس نستطيع القول من الوجهة العسكرية إنّ روسيا التي تعمل مع هوامش أمان كثيرة بعيداً عن ضغط الوقت، تجنّبت حرب الاستنزاف لا بل دفعت الخصم اليها وصاغت أسس معركتها بشكل يمكنها من تحقيق أهدافها بشكل مؤكد ما يعني أنّ أوكرانيا ستكون ميدان فشل إضافي للسياسة الأميركية التي حصدت فشلاً مركباً والأخطر فيه هو الفشل الاستراتيجي المتمثل بسقوط نهائي للأحادية القطبية.

أستاذ جامعي ـ باحث استراتيجي

فيديوات متعلقة

مقالات متعلقة

Gonzalo Lira – live stream from Kharkov (recording)

March 21, 2022

The many “great coming outs” triggered by the war in the Ukraine

March 20, 2022

Source

Dear friends,

For four weeks now we have been discussing the Russian special military operation in the Ukraine and most of what we looked at was happening either in the Ukraine proper or near it.  I did mention plenty of time that “this is not about the Ukraine, this is about the future collective security arrangement of Europe“, which is true.  But even that does not show the full picture.  So today I propose to widen the scope further and look at some absolutely crucial developments inside Russia.  Beginning with the most amazing result, at least in my opinion:

The total failure of US PSYOPs inside Russia

I wrote many times already that the Russians got their collective asses handed to them by the massive propaganda machine of the Empire of Lies.  But when I wrote that, I should have been more accurate and write that this is true OUTSIDE Russia.  Inside, almost the polar opposite happened.

First, let’s remember the various existing movements inside Russia:

  • Putinists.  My preferred term for them is Eurasian Sovereignists.  These are the folks in/near power who see the future of Russia as a truly sovereign country fully integrated into the Eurasian landmass. They see the future of Russia in the South, East and North, and want nothing to do with the West anymore.  They are opposed by those whom I call the
  • Atlantic Integrationists.  These are the folks in/near power who want Russia to be accepted as an equal partner into the world order favored by the ruling elites of the United States.  According to some, this faction does not exist.  Yet we can very clearly see their immense influence, especially on the Russian economic financial sector.
  • The official, “systemic”, opposition.  These are the parties which made it into the Duma and while they talk and protest a lot, they are a loyal opposition which supports the Kremlin every time that support is needed.  I would call them all “uninspiringly acceptable”.
  • The 5th columnists.  These are the self-declared “creative class” and gender-fluid “liberals” who dream of the day Russia becomes the next Poland (they think that Guadio or Tikhanovskaia are heroes).  These folks are totally sold out to the Empire of Lies and are the voice of that Empire in Russia.  Their incomes almost always depend on maintaining the political system created during the Eltsin years and which now the Kremlin has (FINALLY!) began to shut down.
  • The 6th columnists.  Ruslan Ostashko calls them the “emo-Marxists”, which is a good expression which I shall adopt.  These are also called “hurray patriots” or “turbo patriots”.  They blame Putin for being weak, sold out to the West, corrupt and dishonest.  They also oppose Putin’s ideology (patriotism instead of nationalism, and economic liberalism) and for decades now they are the ones who say 1) Putin has sold out or 2) Putin is about to sell out 3) all is lost.  For them a “Putin victory” in the Ukraine would be way WORSE than the total defeat of Russia by the West.  Thus they wrap themselves in the flag of patriotism, but in reality they are what Russians call “defeatists” (пораженцы).

Here is how the leaders of the Empire of Lies most likely relate to these groups:

GroupRelationship of the Empire to these groups
Eurasian Sovereignists (aka Putinists)Putin is basically the devil incarnate and removing him is the single most important goal upon which the West has already spent many BILLIONS of dollars on.  Yes, this is a Crusade, an anti-Putin Crusade by the self-same folks who waged all the crusades…
Atlantic IntegrationistsThey were extremely useful for decades (since the early 80s at least), but their shrinking influence makes them much less useful than in the past.  Putin is responsible for that degradation of their influence.  But they still have enough power to maintain agents of influence in the Russian ruling elites.
The official, systemic, oppositionUseful poodles, they give Russia all the “democratic trappings” needed, but they don’t threaten the Kremlin in any real way.  Besides, they often hate the West even more than the official party of the government (United Russia).
5th columnistsThey have become useless.  They have zero traction and, at most, they can get less than 1000 people in the streets in multi-million cities.  Also, their legal and IT “wings” have been clipped by various new laws.  At best, they can now emigrate to the Zone A and pretend to be political refugees or “dissidents”.  I recommend the UK or Israel.
6th columnistsThey were the last and biggest hope of the western PSYOPs.  Their mission: break the morale of the Russian society and, if at all possible, try to either overthrow Putin or force him to deal with mass protests.  As we shall see below, they failed as miserably as the 5th columnists.

So what happened?  Here is a quick list of factors which contributed to this outcome:

  • New laws were passed forcing foreign agents to publicly declare when they are getting money from abroad (irrespective from whom, CIA, MI6, NED, Soros, etc.).
  • Many western-run social media outlets, who were banning any non-russophobic voices, have now been banned in Russia, again, FINALLY!  Telegram is booming, let’s hope the Empire does not bring Telegram to heel next.
  • Russian foreign policy successes forced the Atlantic Integrationists to keep a low profile because it is hard to criticize a regime which, for example, so successfully dealt with the pre-2022 sanctions while saving a country like Syria.  Furthermore, the steady increase in hostility between the West and Russia made it hard for them to sing the virtues of that same West which now openly backs Nazis in the Ukraine with every resource the Empire of Lies has.  This is why even Dmitri Medvedev has now quickly rebranded himself as a patriot!
  • The 6th columnists and their mantra “Putin is about to sellout the Donbass” now look totally stupid since far from selling out the Donbass, Putin has used the Donbass as a cover and pretext to change the entire collective security architecture of Europe and, really, the entire planet.  Also, the 6th columnist made a HUGE mistake about the war in the Ukraine: their theses became increasingly indistinguishable from those of the 5th columnists.  Keep in mind that in the Russian culture to wish or advocate for a defeat when Russia is at war is basically an act of treason (lots of new laws passed recently by the Duma, the 5th and 6th columnists better be careful with what they say and do next!).
  • The first week of the special military operation was by far the most difficult one not only for the Russian military, but especially for the Russian society which not only got truly HAMMERED by the most intense PSYOP in history coming from the West, via not only propaganda outlets like BBC or Deutsche Welle, but also western IT giants (Google, Meta, etc.) censuring and banning not only post perceived as “prop-Russian” but even entire domain names like .su and .ru.  The HUGE mistake both the 5th and the 6th columnists did was to jump unto that “PSYOP horse” thereby revealing their true agenda.
  • In direct retaliation for the banning of all things Russian by the western-controlled social media, Russia finally began to slap on fines and, better, totally shut down all these vomit spewing sewers, at least in Russia.

The first week of the war went extremely well from a purely military point of view, but from a socio-political point of view, I know that a lot of Russian vacillated and really freaked out.

But then, the western PSYOPs made a huge mistake: they gave free reign to truly rabid and racist russophobia while, at the same time, openly proclaiming the Nazi regime in Kiev as “heroic” defenders of the West.  It is one thing to hear that your dictator Putin and his Mordor will be sanctioned to smithereens and quite another to feel the overt, direct and targeted hatred against you and your people, that is something you perceive less with your mind and more, I would say, with you “skin” or “guts”.  Once it became obvious that the West’s hate for Russia is absolute and total and that the “best” Russians can hope from our “western friends” is to be treated like Native Americans or the Boers by the Anglos, which is not different at all from how the Nazis treated Russians, most Russian figured out what this was really all about since Day 1 and even much before (I would argue since about 1000 years).

That was pretty much all it took to “switch over” the mode of many Russians from “of my God, what will happen next?” to “we shall never surrender” or, on the words of Molotov, “Ours is a righteous cause. The enemy shall be defeated. Victory will be ours” (June 22, 1941).

To give you an idea of the magnitute of the defeat for the 5th and 6th columnist, I could mention that both Putin’s personal popularity and the popular support for the denazification and disarmament of the Nazi regime in the Ukraine is over 70%.  Instead, I just want to share this short video with you:

(official translation, source here)

“We, the multi-ethnic nation of the Russian Federation, united by common fate on our land…” These are the first words of our fundamental law, the Russian Constitution. Each word has deep meaning and enormous significance.

On our land, united by common fate. This is what the people of Crimea and Sevastopol must have been thinking as they went to the referendum on March 18, 2014. They lived and continue to live on their land, and they wanted to have a common fate with their historical motherland, Russia. They had every right to it and they achieved their goal. Let’s congratulate them first because it is their holiday. Happy anniversary!

Over these years, Russia has done a great deal to help Crimea and Sevastopol grow. There were things that needed to be done that were not immediately obvious to the unaided eye. These were essential things such as gas and power supply, utility infrastructure, restoring the road network, and construction of new roads, motorways and bridges.

We needed to drag Crimea out of that humiliating position and state that Crimea and Sevastopol had been pushed into when they were part of another state that had only provided leftover financing to these territories.

There is more to it. The fact is we know what needs to be done next, how it needs to be done, and at what cost – and we will fulfil all these plans, absolutely.

These decisions are not even as important as the fact that the residents of Crimea and Sevastopol made the right choice when they put up a firm barrier against neo-Nazis and ultra-nationalists. What was and is still happening on other territories is the best indication that they did the right thing.

People who lived and live in Donbass did not agree with this coup d’état, either. Several punitive military operations were instantly staged against them; they were besieged and subjected to systemic shelling with artillery and bombing by aircraft – and this is actually what is called “genocide.”

The main goal and motive of the military operation that we launched in Donbass and Ukraine is to relieve these people of suffering, of this genocide. At this point, I recall the words from the Holy Scripture: “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.” And we are seeing how heroically our military are fighting during this operation.

These words come from the Holy Scripture of Christianity, from what is cherished by those who profess this religion. But the bottom line is that this is a universal value for all nations and those of all religions in Russia, and primarily for our people. The best evidence of this is how our fellows are fighting and acting in this operation: shoulder to shoulder, helping and supporting each other. If they have to, they will cover each other with their bodies to protect their comrade from a bullet in the battlefield, as they would to save their brother. It has been a long time since we had such unity.

It so happened that, by sheer coincidence, the start of the operation was same day as the birthday of one of our outstanding military leaders who was canonised – Fedor Ushakov. He did not lose a single battle throughout his brilliant career. He once said that these thunderstorms would glorify Russia. This is how it was in his time; this is how it is today and will always be!

Thank you!

Of course, the 5th columnists and the 6th columnists dismiss any election in Russia (they are all faked!), any opinion poll (they are all faked too!) and even any such mass events (the people are bused in for money!).

Which is EXACTLY what the western PYSOPs say too (in those rare cases when the report about that at all).  In French there is an expression “those who look alike gather together” (qui se ressemble s’assemble) and now that “stain” of “being with” the CIA/MI6/etc. and against your own President while your country is at war for its survival is a mark which neither the 5th nor the 6th columnists will ever be able to wash off, at least not in Russia.

I want to repeat here something which is crucial: truth is the first casualty of war, that is true, and lying on behalf of your side (whichever side you are on) is only morally wrong, but also effective only short term, in the mid to long term the truth begins to seep in through the cracks in the wall of lies.

Furthermore, criticism of a government, even during a war, is also fair and, in fact, needed.  But when a full scale war is going on and people are dying (including your own people, whichever side you are on), you have to ask yourself that simple question: cui bono from what I just wrote?

Many “patriots” and “friends of Russia” clearly won’t.  Okay.

I think that when your own arguments become indistinguishable from the talking points of the western letter soup’s PSYOPS and when the 5th and the 6th columns basically unite to try to overthrow the commander in chief, then we are not talking about honest criticism, but either treason (if you are Russian) or ignorance (if you are not).

Whatever may be the case, I would argue that the West’s PSYOPs triumph over Russia outside Russia has been more than compensated for by the Kremlin’s triumph over the West’s PSYOPs inside Russia.  And since the serfs living in Zone A decide nothing, all they can do is talk, talk and talk even more, that western triumph over Russia in the societies which are under the dominion of Uncle Shmuel, I think that while in the short term the Kremlin rather lame efforts (RT & Co.) did get a bloody nose, that initial period of shock is over and far from demoralizing Russians, the western PSYOPS are now uniting them in the determination to prevail and survive, at any cost, bar absolutely none.

Russia is now in full WWII mode.

I know expect the 5th columnists to emigrate en masse and the 6th columnists to steadily melt into utter irrelevance.

What about the Atlantic Integrationists?

Alas, they are very much still there 😦

They keep a low profile and say the right words when needed.  Yet the latest SNAFU with the Russian foreign currency and gold reserves places a direct spotlight on them.  There are two crucial problems with these folks:

  1. Putin is a liberal, at least in economic terms.  Hate it or love it, but that is a fact.  Or was until now.  This gang was never popular in Russia, and that latest controversy has resulted in A LOT of angry accusations.  Mind you, Putin has just re-nominated Elvira Nabiulina to head the Russian Central Bank and it shall be very interesting to see how the Duma will vote on this.  I would just say that if I was a Duma member I would not vote for confirmation not only because I don’t like the Kremlin’s economic policies, but also because that might be a very politically costly move.  So let’s wait and see.  By the way, Putin has also appointed Sergei Glazyev to the position of Minister for Integration and Macroeconomics of the Eurasian Economic Union.  Interesting times…
  2. The Atlantic Integrationists still wield a lot of power because they are not some secret society which meets in secret locations and exchanges some secret handshakes, but they are a socio-political class, I mean that in a fully Marxist sense, including the notion that these people have class interests and a class consciousness.  Furthermore, a lot of regular Russians fully depend on the institutions created by the Atlantic Integrationists since the early 1990s.  So to “simply eliminate” them sounds like a great idea until you realize that you are talking about an entire class of people.

[Sidebar: especially for those red-blooded US Americans who, if they were in charge of the Kremlin and Russia, would have easily solved that and all other Russian problems, by whatever means, they ought to remember that in the land of the free home of the brave you are ALSO all serfs of a political class – I call it the US Nomenklatura – which they have totally FAILED to remove and which crushed Trump in less than 30 days!  So, how about “doctor, heal thyself” and “motes in other eyes?”  First liberate YOUR OWN country – then give lessons to Russians!  Ditto for the stupid claims that the Russian military is moving too slow.  It took the US military SIX MONTHS to prepare for invasion during “Desert Shield” – in spite of huge prepositioned stores and a totally supportive KSA – and another MONTH to invade Bagdad which was basically undefended.  In fact, the US has not won a single war since WWII and never waged an existential war in its entire history.  Do you REALLY think that you are competent to teach Russians how to fight?  At least, next time you prepare to give Russians lessons, try to remember this factoid: during WWII the Soviet Army liberated one thousand two hundered (1’200!!!) cities from Nazi occupation forces.  As for civilians casualties, Tokyo, Hiroshima, Nagasaki, Dresden and “500’000 dead Iraqi children as “worth it” – that all you.  As is the vicious and genocidal bombing of the DPRK and Vietnam.  So, remind me, who are you again to give us lessons???]

But yes, the Atlantic Integrationists are still there.  If Putin decided to ignore Russian law and act like Stalin, he could fire all those Atlantic Integrationists we all know and love to hate (I do!), but that would NOT remove their power base.  So, instead, what he needs to do is gradually (and legally!!!) weaken their power base, which is *exactly* what he has been doing since at least 2014 (and, in reality, even before; he is a slow, deliberately acting person, and he does wait as long as needed before striking).

Which brings me to my last topic: the super-pooper “sanctions from hell”

Okay, there is very little doubt that just as the post MH-17 sanctions, the current sanctions will hurt Russia and, more specifically, some sectors of the Russian economy.  However, just like the post MH-17 sanctions forced Russia to FINALLY diversify and invest in such crucial sectors like agriculture, the current sanctions will simply FORCE Russia to completely remove herself from most of Zone A, especially in her political and economic activities.  In other words

By committing economic suicide (which is what these sanctions will be for the West!) the leaders of the AngloZionist Empire FORCED the Russians to cut a lot of, shall we say, “umbilical cords” which still tied them to western controlled interests.  I would even go as far as to say that ignorant imbeciles like “Trump” and “Biden” did more to destroy the 5th and 6th columns and to immensely weaken the Atlantic Integrationists than all the efforts of the FSB or the (very lame and weak) Russian counter-propaganda efforts.

The toxic 5th and 6th column abscesses have finally been punctured.  Yeah, it stinks and yeah, a lot of “disinfection” will be needed, not “only” in the Ukraine, but also in Russia.

Oh, I know, the leaders of the West did not do all that out of some kind of love for Russia, they did that because their own class interest depends on doubling down over and over and over again.  Add to this the entire “best military in the history of the galaxy” narrative, and lots of “WE will teach the Russian a lesson they will never forget!” (yeah, both of these idiots, and Obama too, see themselves as much scarier and tougher than the united Europe under Napoleon or the united Europe under Hitler, funny, no?).

As Andrei Martyanov very accurately described in his latest videothe West’s insane push to “Cancel Russia” has been received loud and clear by the Russian people, and now they are in the “existential war for survival” mode (well, at least most of them, no less than 70+ percent).

The result?

Russian caption: we will finish this war together spelled with a Latin “Z” rather than a Russian “З”.

I think that these two images illustrate the current dynamic very well: Woke-drones can think that when they display the unanimity of a lynch-mob they are scaring Russians.

To some degree, the Russians themselves are too blame, we accepted way too many plastic beads in exchange empty promises.

But not because we treasured these beads, but because until 2021 we simply did not have what we needed to stop accepting these beads.

Putin’s 2021 ultimatum to the entire united West was, in fact, the last concession Russia was willing to make.

As I wrote many many times, the difference between Russians and the West is that the West does not fear war but is not ready to fight one, whereas the Russians very much DO fear war, but they are also totally ready to fight.  We have lived in this reality for 1000 years, and we know that war is always the ultimate evil.  So now, far from being ashamed or unhappy about how the Kremlin did everything it could to avoid that war (which I was absolutely opposed to, if possible and if given an alternative choice, of course), but the West gave Russia no choice.

And, in doing so, it flipped the mental “we will unite to win this war” switch in the minds of most Russians.

You could say that the West has finally truly “canceled itself” in the mind of a vast majority of Russians.

I think that the Kremlin STILL would prefer a negotiated solution, not just to the war in the Ukraine, but even in the semi-covert (or even not so covert) war going on with NATO.  But the recent strikes at ammo dumps and foreign mercenaries in the western Ukraine are a clear sign that 1) Russia will not accept any outside intervention and 2) that Russia will, if needed, strike Poland, Romania or whatever other self-prostituting state, and their membership in NATO will make no difference whatsoever.

Guys, one of the main reasons why Russia chose a low-manpower strategy is precisely because the bulk of the Russian military is ready for any type of war against NATO and the US, even a nuclear one if needed.

Yeah yeah, in the West they announce with a strait face that Russia is running out of bullets for her AKs.  If that kind of nonsense makes some woke freak feel good – by all means, enjoy!

In Russia, it only strengthens the determination to cut all ties with the West whose true face all Russians have FINALLY seen again, for first time since WWII.

Conclusion – the “Great Coming Out”

This war, which I abhor and ENTIRELY blame on the Empire of Lies had at least one consequence which I welcome with all my heart: this war has triggered a massive “Great Coming Out” in which not only politicians, countries, societies or celebrities have shown their true face, this also applies to those I thought were my trusted and respected friends, family member and even clergy!

Sometimes these *true* faces turned out to be ugly and hypocritical, in other times they radiated kindness, compassion and love for all our fellow human beings.  Yes, some of it was painful, even heartbreaking.  But some of it was unexpected and deeply deeply touching.

I personally welcome this clarity with all my heart!

Now I know the answer(s) to this crucial question: with whom are you, whose side are you really on?

I hasten to add that I am not Dubya, I don’t need to tell the world “you are either with us or with the terrorists”.  In reality, I very much welcome any neutral or indifferent position.  After all, why should a Chilean fisherman or a coffee-shop owner in the Azores care about any of that?

My disgust is not with those who don’t care or don’t know – it is with those who either ought know better or, if not, ought to to shut-up and mind their business (especially if they are totally clueless about the nature of this conflict).

[Sidebar for doubleplusgoodthinking Orthodox Christians: Orthodox Christians, especially those who struggle to truly uphold the fullness faith “which the Lord gave, was preached by the Apostles, and was preserved by the Fathers” ought to realize two simple things: Orthodox Christians are the sole heirs of the East Roman Empire and it behooves us more than anybody else to recognize the modern day Franks and Crusaders for whom/what they are.  To neutral or “opposed to aggression” is not only moral cowardice, it is a negation of our ethos and our collective memory.  Christ told us “my Kingdom is not of this world“, and your manic determination to remain in harmony with the secular mainstream of our fallen world is really pathetic.  If that is not yet another form of Neo-Sergianism then I don’t know what it is!]

Yet again, as during most of in my life I now again see what I have always seen: my own, personal, “good Samaritans” very rarely were Russian or Orthodox, and even less so Russian Orthodox.  All my life I have see FAR more brotherly love, compassion and kindness from atheists, secular Jews and (non-Takfiri!) Muslims than from my putative “brothers”.

Yes, this hurts me deeply and shames me too.  But that is a truth I am not willing to forget or remain silent about.

Finally, I owe it to my TRUE “good Samaritan” brothers/sisters to repeat this truth either until my last breath or until my fellow Orthodox Christians at least begin to show the moral probity so often shown to me by my heterodox brothers and sisters.

The same will prove true of Russia as a country: this war, bad as it is, will show all Russians who our real brothers, friends and allies are, and who are but the garden variety servants of the Empire.

This could be a fantastic opportunity for Russia, but that is a topic I will address in a future post.

Kind regards

Andrei

PS: please expect regular stuff, yes, with maps, either tomorrow or Tuesday.

Scott Ritter: Military Intelligence Expert on Ukraine Conflict

March 20, 2022

Russians are grinding up the Ukrainians.

Briefing by Russian Defence Ministry (Kalibr sea-based cruise missiles flying)

March 20, 2022

https://t.me/mod_russia_en/288

The grouping of troops of the Donetsk People’s Republic, developing an offensive, took full control of Stepnoye and is pursuing the retreating units of the 53rd separate mechanized brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Up to 25 personnel, 2 tanks, 2 infantry fighting vehicles and 5 all-terrain vehicles were destroyed.

In Novoselovka Vtoraya direction, the units of the Donetsk Republic have advanced to a depth of 3 kilometers, crossed the Kamenka – Verkhnetoretskoye road, and are fighting with the 1st airborne battalion of the 25th separate airborne brigade of the Ukrainian Armed Forces.

During the night, most of Verkhnetoretskoye settlement was taken under control, where battles are being fought with the 2nd battalion of the same brigade. In total, up to 40 personnel, 5 armored personnel carriers and 4 all-terrain vehicles were destroyed there. Offensive actions continue.

In the evening of March 19 and in the morning of March 20, high-precision long-range weapons attacked Ukraine’s military infrastructure.

From the waters of the Black Sea, Kalibr sea-based cruise missiles destroyed workshops for repairing Ukrainian armored vehicles damaged in combat at the Nezhinsky repair plant.

A large fuel storage base of the Ukrainian Armed Forces near Konstantinovka in Nikolaev region was destroyed by Kalibr sea-based cruise missiles from the waters of the Caspian Sea, as well as by Kinzhal aviation missile systems with hypersonic aeroballistic missiles from the airspace over Crimea territory. This is the main base for supply Ukrainian armored vehicles with fuel in combat areas in the south of Ukraine.

High-precision air-launched missiles struck the training centre of the Ukrainian special operations forces near Ovruch settlement of Zhytomir region, where foreign mercenaries who arrived in Ukraine were based. More than 100 special operations forces servicemen and mercenaries were killed.

During the night, operational-tactical and army aviation hit 62 military assets of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Among them: 3 command posts, 1 multiple launch rocket system, 2 missile and artillery weapons depots and 1 fuel depot, as well as 52 areas of military equipment concentration.

Russian air defence means shot down in the air: 1 Mi-8 helicopter of the Ukrainian Air Force near Kohannoye, 6 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, including 1 Bayraktar TB-2 near Shibennoye, as well as 1 Ukrainian Tochka-U tactical ballistic missile near Chistovodovka north of Izyum.

Russian artillery destroyed 6 Ukrainian Bukovel mobile electronic warfare systems.

In total, 207 unmanned aerial vehicles, 1,467 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 148 multiple launch rocket systems, 573 field artillery and mortar guns, as well as 1,262 units of special military vehicles have been destroyed since the beginning of the special military operation.

Briefing by Russian Defence Ministry + Statement

March 18, 2022

Briefing by Russian Defence Ministry

 The Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue the special military operation.

 The grouping of troops of the Lugansk People’s Republic with the fire support of the Russian Armed Forces liberated more than 90 percent of the territory of the republic.

 Currently, the units of the Lugansk People’s Republic are eliminating scattered groups of nationalists on the southern outskirts of Rubezhnoye liberated settlement.

 In the Donetsk People’s Republic, the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation continue their successful offensive in the northern direction.
During the day, they took control of Zolotaya Niva, Novodonetsky, Novomayorskoye and Prechistovka. The advance was 16 kilometers.

 In Mariupol, units of the Donetsk People’s Republic, with the support of the Russian Armed Forces, narrow the encirclement and fighting against nationalists in the city center.

 During the night, aviation and air defence means of the Russian Aerospace Forces shot down 6 more Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, including 1 Bayraktar TB-2.

Operational-tactical and army aviation hit 81 military assets of the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Among them: 4 multiple launch rocket system, 3 command posts, 8 ammunition depots and 28 areas of military equipment concentration.

In total, 183 unmanned aerial vehicles, 1,406 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 138 multiple launch rocket systems, 535 field artillery and mortars, as well as 1,197 units of special military vehicles of the Armed Forces of Ukraine were destroyed during the operation.

Continued

Statement by Russian Defence Ministry

On the night of March, 18, the residential areas of Melitopol were attacked by Tochka-U cluster-warhead missiles from a territory controlled by the Kiev nationalist regime.

The Russian air defence systems have repelled the missile launched against the civilian population of the city.

The attack had been launched from the northern direction, south-eastern outskirts of Zaporozhie that is fully controlled by the Ukrainian nationalist units.

The Russian Federation Armed Forces have detected the coordinates of the Ukrainian ballistic missiles.

In order to prevent missile attacks and to protect the Ukrainian citizens against new attacks of the Kiev nationalist regime, the rocket launchers of the Ukrainian nationalists have been destroyed by two Iskander missiles.

It should be emphasised that Melitopol is in ordinary conditions. Shops and public transport are in operation. Every day the Russian servicemen deliver humanitarian aid that has repeatedly been told and shown by mass media representatives.

The subsequent application of ballistic missiles against civilian residents by the Kiev regime whose representatives knew about the absence of Russian Armed Forces firing positions in residential areas of Melitopol proves the criminal nature of the nationalist leadership of Ukraine.

War in the Ukraine, Tragedy and Hope (Part III)

March 18, 2022

Source: Al Mayadeen Net

Niloufer Bhagwat 

Ukraine, as it once was, is an industrialized and technologically advanced republic of the former USSR.

War in the Ukraine, Tragedy and Hope (Part III)

Ukraine was once one of the most advanced and industrialized republics of the former USSR, well integrated into the former multinational state of the USSR, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. It is also true that for the first time after the Russian Revolution of 1917, the first Socialist Revolution, that the Ukrainian Republic was constituted as one of the republics of the former USSR, before that it was an integral part of the territories of Tsarist Russia. It is necessary to recall that the peoples of all the republics of the Soviet Union lived in harmony, in a closely-knit society sharing culture, inter-marrying. It was not uncommon for one spouse to be Russian and the other Ukrainian. There was even more exotic pairing, such as Tartar and Cossack, Daghestani and Ukrainian, and so on. The Ukrainian Republic of the USSR had regions that were culturally Russian-speaking regions, integrated for administrative and other reasons into the Ukrainian Republic. Ukrainian and Russian languages are similar as is the culture of both people, there was never any problem of co-existence. It was much more than co-existence; it was a mutual culture and life shared over a thousand years. The Russian-speaking nationality and, to a lesser extent, other nationalities settled in different parts of what was earlier an integral part of the Tsarist Russian Empire. This continued in the USSR.

For those of us living for almost a year on the Black Sea in 1982-1983, awaiting the commissioning of the destroyer built by the once-famous Nikolayev Shipyard to be handed over to the Indian Navy by the Soviet Navy after completion of trials in the Black Sea and military exercises off the Crimea, the cities of Sevastopol, Mariupol, and Odessa were all Russian. The Indian contingent/ Team or ‘Ekipazh’, was not the only contingent there. There were seven other contingents from different countries, including Libyan and Cuban, awaiting the delivery of ships and boats of all sizes. None of us used the politically correct term ‘Soviet’, for us everything was Russian. Citizens from our host country from different republics of the USSR did not dissent or frown on or attempt to correct our expression or to explain or distinguish what was Ukrainian from what was Russian, or what was Crimean from what was Russian, and no one from the host country complained about ‘Great Russian National Chauvinism’.

To me, a ‘ Soviet watcher’, a legacy from my father, an Indian Muslim by birth, religion, and culture, who believed that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was one of the most important events of the 20th Century, influencing National Liberation Struggles around the world, including those that led India’s freedom struggle, with some Indian revolutionaries in exile crossing over from Afghanistan into Uzbekistan after the 1917 Revolution, as recorded by Soviet scholars… to me, what seemed remarkable was that for decades the USSR from 1922-1953 was led by Josef Stalin, a Georgian and Asian by nationality. Josef Stalin, a former student of a religious seminary training to be a priest, before he became a revolutionary, as a Commissar after the revolution, was directed to implement the Bolshevik policy of autonomy for ‘nationalities’ to be reorganized into Republics of the USSR, by the famous Russian revolutionary, visionary, and first head of state of the revolutionary government, Vladimir Ilyich Ulyanov or Lenin, as he is widely known; still loved across Asia, Africa, and Latin America; even today considered a leading authority against ‘Imperialism’. Ukraine was a beneficiary of this policy as President Putin correctly asserted.

Lenin was determined to abolish the oppression of all subject nationalities by empires and colonialists. On the other hand, Josef Stalin’s reservations on aspects of this policy were known, though he implemented the policy deferring to his leader. Josef Stalin personally witnessed the misuse of Russia’s ‘nationalities’ in the famous Oil city of Baku, a beautiful city now in independent Azerbaijan on the Caspian, then a part of the Tsarist Russian Empire in the pre-revolutionary period. In Baku, murderous attacks took place to divide workers’ movements; one nationality was used against another. It was because of this direct field experience that Stalin understood, as did Rosa Luxemburg, the famous German Revolutionary, of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, later of the ‘Spartacus’ group of the SPD, that Imperialism would ‘pervert this policy for autonomy for  Nationalities’ to divide people in every country targeted for plunder of resources and the working class.

This is predictably what occurred in Western Ukraine during the Second World War, in those regions of Ukraine earlier occupied by the Polish – Lithuanian Kingdom and later the Second Polish Republic – and in Hungary and Romanian territories of the Austrian-Hapsburg Empire. The Nazis at the very outset of their infamous military invasion, ‘Operation Barbarossa’, used Stepan Bandera, the Ukrainian fascist, and other extreme right-wing Ukrainian nationalists for the killings and genocide of Slavs, Poles, and Jews, manipulating the theory of a Ukrainian ‘Superior Race’. This was a barbaric attempt by the German Nazi Army to divide people in Ukraine to weaken the national defense of the Soviet Union. This cynical and cold-blooded Nazi policy, though it inflicted death and destruction on people of different nationalities in Ukraine in millions, in what was clearly genocide, could not defeat the USSR, as the majority of the Ukrainians defended the Soviet Union, serving selflessly and courageously in the Red Army. Every republic of the USSR, including Ukraine, made a heroic contribution to the victory of the former USSR in what is known as the ‘Great Patriotic War’, during which the Soviet army faced not only the might of the German Army, but also the combined military and technological might of the advanced countries of Europe, closely allied with Hitler and the Nazi party. It was a ‘Fascist Europe’ with its contingents led by Nazi Germany which was defeated by the Soviet Union’s Red Army liberating one country of Europe after another; one of the remarkable achievements in military history. The United States was to enter the war in its last stage with the Normandy landings, to participate in the spoils of a tragic war that destroyed Europe.

Aspects of this more than 75-year-old history of the use of fascism in Ukraine have been repeated by the descendants of those who created Hitler and the Nazi party. How many know that it was the United States of America’s Rockefeller’s New Jersey Standard Oil Company which supplied fuel to the Nazi Army, without which the fascist subjugation of Europe and the invasion of the USSR by Nazi hordes was not possible? IBM among other US companies equally collaborated in maintaining an efficiently compiled data of Slavs, Jews, Romas, and other minorities in Nazi Germany to be targeted. Some US companies used slave labor in Nazi Germany like the best and brightest German Corporations, which even stole whole factories from occupied territories; similar to what happened recently when Syria was occupied by Turkish troops and ISIS legions of NATO and its alliance partners who stole whole factories from Syria, from Aleppo and other occupied regions. The United States and Turkey have been regularly looting Syrian oil after unleashing ISIS hordes on Syria for invasion and occupation, stationing their troops in Syria.

 After the Second World War, even as the ink on the Judgments of the Nuremberg trials was hardly dry, ‘Operation Paper Clip‘ began by the United States, to rehabilitate Nazi war criminals, intelligence agents, scientists, doctors, and others in the United States for use in the so-called “Cold War”, a continuance of the war on the Soviet Union by other means, and to use the scientific and medical expertise of German and Japanese scientists and intelligence agents, who were war criminals. Many former Nazis were successfully rehabilitated along with East European fascists, who subsequently, along with their descendants, held high-ranking posts in National Security Councils and the State Department of the United States. Significantly, a leading member of President Trudeau’s cabinet in Canada, prominent during the crackdown on the democratic struggle of the ‘Truckers’ Resistance’ to indiscriminate vaccine mandates, is the progeny of one such Nazi collaborator. Is it surprising that those who made small donations to the ‘Truckers Movements’ had their bank accounts blocked by a government decree?

The opinions mentioned in this article do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Al mayadeen, but rather express the opinion of its writer exclusively.

Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov’s interview with RBC TV channel, Moscow, March 16, 2022

March 17, 2022

https://www.mid.ru/en/press_service/minister_speeches/1804655/

Question: Initially, the in-person talks were held in Belarus followed by online talks. You met with Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba in Antalya, Turkey, on March 10. What’s your take on the negotiating process?

Sergey Lavrov: I did not fly to Turkey in order to forestall the Belarusian negotiating track agreed upon by Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky which is now being implemented via video conference. President Zelensky asked President Recep Tayyip Erdogan to speak with President Putin in order to set up a meeting between Dmitry Kuleba and me in Antalya, since we both planned to take part in the Antalya Diplomacy Forum.

Based on this request, President Vladimir Putin instructed me to hold a meeting and find out what Dmitry Kuleba has to offer (which is what I asked him to do). He stated that he did not arrive there to reiterate public statements. This statement got my attention. Dmitry Kuleba failed to vocalise any new ideas during the 90-minute conversation in the presence of Foreign Minister of Turkey Mevlut Cavusoglu, despite multiple reminders to the effect that I wanted to hear things that had not been said publicly. I did my part and made myself available to listen to what he had to say. Anyway, we had a conversation, which is not a bad thing. We are ready for such contacts going forward. It would be good to know the added value derived from such contacts and how the proposals to create new channels of interaction correlate with the functioning of an existing and steady negotiating process (the Belarusian channel).

I’m not going to comment on the details, which are a delicate matter. According to head of the Russian delegation Vladimir Medinsky, the talks focus on humanitarian issues, the situation on the ground in terms of hostilities, and on matters of political settlement. Overall, the agenda is known (it was repeatedly and publicly announced by President Vladimir Putin in his elaborate remarks) and includes matters of security and saving lives of the people in Donbass; preventing Ukraine from becoming a permanent threat to the security of the Russian Federation; and preventing the revival in Ukraine of neo-Nazi ideology, which is illegal around the world, including civilised Europe.

I base my opinion on the assessments provided by our negotiators. They state that the talks are not going smoothly (for obvious reasons). However, there is hope for a compromise. The same assessment is given by a number of Ukrainian officials, including members of President Zelensky’s staff and President Zelensky himself.

Question: President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky said that the positions of Russia and Ukraine during the talks have become more “realistic.”

Sergey Lavrov: This is about a more realistic assessment of the ongoing events coming from Vladimir Zelensky. His previous statements were confrontational. We can see that this role and function has been reassigned to Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, who started saying that Russia’s demands are “unacceptable.” If they wish to create additional tension (as if the current tension were not enough) in the media space, what can we do?

We saw a similar tendency with respect to the Minsk agreements. Dmitry Kuleba was riding ahead on a dashing horse, along with those who were hacking the Minsk agreements into pieces. He publicly stated that the agreements would not be fulfilled. I would give negotiators an opportunity to work in a calmer environment, without stirring up more hysteria.

Question: President of Ukraine Vladimir Zelensky said that they are “reasonable people” and they realise that they are no longer welcome in NATO. What made him change his rhetoric? NATO aspirations are stated in one of the articles of the Ukrainian Constitution. They have been saying it all along that Kiev actually wants to be part of the alliance.

Sergey Lavrov: The rhetoric has changed because more reasonable thinking is paving its way to the minds of the Ukrainian leaders. The issue of dissolving the Soviet Union was resolved in a very odd manner: very few parties were asked; the decision was split “between three,” so to speak, and it was done. Later, certain common ground was achieved in the form of the Commonwealth of Independent States. It is good that the other former Soviet republics were shown some respect, at least post factum.

In the Declaration of State Sovereignty of the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, adopted before the Belovezh Accords, it was stated in black and white that Ukraine would be a non-aligned and militarily neutral state. In all the subsequent documents characterising the formation of Ukrainian statehood, the declaration was always listed among fundamental documents. After the anti-constitutional coup in February 2014, the Ukrainian Constitution was amended to include statements on continuous movement towards NATO (in addition to the European Union). That undermined the integrity of the previous process and the fundamental documents that the Ukrainian state is based on – because the Declaration of Sovereignty and the Act of Ukraine’s Independence are still listed among the founding documents of the Ukrainian state.

This is not the only inconsistency. The provision of the Ukrainian Constitution on ensuring the rights of the Russian and other ethnic minorities remains intact. However, a huge number of laws have been adopted that run counter to this constitutional provision and flagrantly discriminate against the Russian language, in particular, against all European norms.

We remember that President Zelensky recently said that NATO must close the sky over Ukraine and start fighting for Ukraine, recruiting mercenaries and sending them to the frontline. That statement was made very aggressively. The reaction of the North Atlantic Alliance, where some clear-headed people still remain, had a cooling effect. This reasonable approach in the current situation deserves to be welcomed.

Before the final decision was made to begin the special military operation, President Vladimir Putin spoke about our initiatives concerning the security guarantees in Europe at a news conference in the Kremlin, explaining that it is unacceptable that Ukraine’s security be ensured through its NATO membership. He clearly said that we are ready to look for any ways to ensure the security of Ukraine, the European countries and Russia except for NATO’s expansion to the east. The alliance has been assuring us that we should not be worried as it serves a defensive purpose and nothing threatens us and our security. The alliance was declared as defensive in its early days. During the Cold War, it was clear who was defending whom, where and against which party. There was the Berlin Wall, both concrete and geopolitical. Everybody accepted that contact line under the Warsaw Pact and NATO. It was clear which line NATO would protect.

When the Warsaw Pact and later the Soviet Union were dissolved, NATO started, at its own discretion and without any consultations with those who used to be part of the balance of power on the European continent, working its way to the east, moving the contact line further to the right each time. When the contact line came too close to us (and nobody took our reasoning seriously in the past 20 years), we proposed the European security initiatives which, to my great regret, were also ignored by our arrogant partners.

Question: Many people in Russia and Ukraine are asking themselves whether the situation could not have been resolved peacefully. Why didn’t this work out? Why did it become necessary to conduct a special operation?

Sergey Lavrov: Because the West did not want to resolve this situation peacefully. Although I have already discussed this aspect, I would like to highlight it once again. This has absolutely nothing to do with Ukraine. This concerns the international order, rather than Ukraine alone.

The United States has pinned down the whole of Europe. Today, some Europeans are telling us that Russia started behaving differently, that Europe had its own special interests differing from those of the United States, and that we have compelled Europe to share the United States’ fervour for the cause. I believe that what has happened is entirely different. Under President Joe Biden, the United States set the goal of subordinating Europe, and it has succeeded in forcing Europe to implicitly follow US policies. This is a crucial moment, a landmark in contemporary history because, in the broad sense of the word, it reflects the battle for a future international order.

The West stopped using the term “international law,” embodied in the UN Charter, many years ago, and it invented the term “rules-based order.” These rules were written by members of an inner circle. The West incentivised those who accepted these rules. At the same time, narrow non-universal organisations dealing with the same matters as the universal organisations were established. Apart from UNESCO, there is a certain international partnership in support of information and democracy. We have international humanitarian law and the UN Refugee Agency dealing with related issues. The European Union is setting up a special partnership for dealing with the same matter. However, decisions will be based on EU interests, and they will disregard universal processes.

France and Germany are establishing an alliance for multilateralism. When asked about the reason for setting it up at a time when the UN – the most legitimate and universal organisation – embodies multilateralism, they gave an interesting reply that the UN employed many retrogrades, and that the new alliance prioritised avantgardism. They also stated their intention to promote multilateralism in such a way that no one would hamper their efforts. When asked what the ideals of this multilateralism were, they said that they were EU values. This arrogance and misinterpreted feeling of one’s own superiority also rule supreme in a situation that we are now reviewing, namely, the creation of a world where the West would a priori manage everything with impunity. Many people now claim that Russia has come under attack because it remains virtually the only obstacle that needs to be removed before the West can start dealing with China. This straightforward statement is quite truthful.

You asked why it was impossible to peacefully resolve the situation. For many years, we suggested resolving the matter peacefully. Many reasonable politicians from the US and Europe responded in earnest to Vladimir Putin’s proposal at the 2007 Munich Security Conference. Unfortunately, decision-makers in Western countries ignored it. Numerous assessments by world-famous political analysts, published in many leading US magazines, such as Foreign Policy and Foreign Affairs, and European magazines, were also ignored. A coup took place in 2014. The West unconditionally backed Ukraine and the coup’s perpetrators who had gained power in Kiev. The West emphatically refuses to set any framework in relations between NATO and the territory of Russian interests. These warnings were also voiced but were disregarded, to put it mildly.

You should read the works of Zbigniew Brzezinski, who said back in the 1990s that Ukraine would become a key issue. He said openly that a friendly Ukraine would make Russia a great power, and that a hostile Ukraine would turn it into a regional player. These statements concealed geopolitical implications. Ukraine merely acted as a tool for preventing Russia from upholding its legitimate and equal rights on the international scene.

Question: Not long ago, I heard the current adviser to the President of Ukraine, Alexey Arestovich, speak. A couple of years ago, he said that neutral status was too expensive for Ukraine. “We can’t afford it,” he said. What do you think about this statement? Is that true? Following up on what worries ordinary Ukrainians – security guarantees – what is Russia ready to do? What kind of guarantees can it provide?

Sergey Lavrov: Neutral status is being seriously discussed in a package with security guarantees. This is exactly what President Vladimir Putin said at one of his news conferences: there are multiple options out there, including any generally acceptable security guarantees for Ukraine and all other countries, including Russia, with the exception of NATO expansion. This is what is being discussed at the talks. There is specific language which is, I believe, close to being agreed upon.

Question: Can you share it with us yet or not?

Sergey Lavrov: I’d rather not, because it is a negotiating process. Unlike some of our partners, we try to adhere to the culture of diplomatic negotiations, even though we were forced to make documents public that are normally off-limits. We did so in the situations where our communication with the German and French participants of the Normandy format was misrepresented to the point where it was the opposite of what really happened. Then, in order to expose the culprits before the international community, we were forced to make things public. No attempts at provocation are being made now as we discuss the guarantees of Ukraine’s neutrality. Hopefully, the first attempts at a businesslike approach that we are seeing now will prevail and we will be able to reach specific agreements on this matter even though simply declaring neutrality and announcing guarantees will be a significant step forward. The problem is much broader. We talked about it, including from the point of view of values such as the Russian language, culture and freedom of speech, since Russian media are outright banned, and the ones that broadcast in Ukraine in Russian were shut down.

Question: But they can always tell us that they are an independent country and it’s up to them to decide which language to speak. Why are you – Russia and Moscow – forcing us to speak Russian?

Sergey Lavrov: Because Ukraine has European obligations. There is the European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages. There are multiple other commitments, including in the Council of Europe, which we are leaving (this has been announced officially). However, we will never renounce our obligations regarding the rights of ethnic minorities, be they linguistic, cultural, or any other. We will never “withdraw from the documents” that guarantee freedom of access to information.

In the 1990s, everyone was rubbing their hands together in anticipation of the Soviet Union becoming an absolutely obedient and obsequious partner of the West. Back then, we did our best to show that perestroika and new thinking were opening up a groundbreaking chapter in the history of our state. We signed everything that the West wanted us to sign at the OSCE, including the declaration proposed by the West and supported by us which contained obligations to ensure freedom of access to information in each country and to transboundary information sources. Now, we are unable to get through to the West so that it itself starts fulfilling this obligation, which they themselves initiated.

This Russian language-related requirement is enshrined in the obligations. Ukraine did not turn them down. Can you imagine the consequences of Finland banning the Swedish language? There are 6 percent of Swedes in Finland, and Swedish is the second official language. Or, Ireland banning English, or Belgium banning French? The list goes on and on. All these minority languages ​​are respected, regardless of the fact that they have a parent state, whereas our case represents an exception. This is a case of outright discrimination, and what is known as enlightened Europe is just keeping quiet about it.

Question: We have decided to withdraw from the Council of Europe before being expelled. Why?

Sergey Lavrov: By and large, this decision was formulated long ago. Not because of a series of suspension and reinstatement of our rights, but because that organisation has fully degenerated. It was established as a pan-European organisation of all countries, with the exception of Belarus which was given observer status. We did our best to help Belarus participate in several conventions, which is possible in the Council of Europe. In general, Belarus was considering the possibility of joining it.

However, over the years the Council of Europe has turned into a kind of OSCE, (excuse my language), where the initial idea of interaction and consensus as the main instruments of attaining the goal of common European cooperation and security was superceded by polemics and rhetoric, which was becoming increasingly Russophobic and was determined by the unilateral interests of the West, in particular, NATO countries and the EU. They used their technical majority in the OSCE and the Council of Europe to undermine the culture of consensus and compromise and to force their views on everyone, showing that they have no regard whatsoever, do not care one iota for our interests and only want to lecture and moralise, which is what they have actually been doing.

Our intention to withdraw matured long ago, but our decision to withdraw has been accelerated by the recent events and the decision enforced through voting. The Parliamentary Assembly issued recommendations for the Committee of Ministers, which has voted to suspend our rights. They told us not to worry, that we would only be unable to attend the sessions but can still make our payments to the budget.  This is what they have openly said.

The Foreign Ministry pointed out in a statement that our withdrawal from this organisation will not affect the rights and freedoms of Russian citizens under the European Convention on Human Rights, from which we are withdrawing as part of our withdrawal from the Council of Europe. First of all, there are constitutional guarantees and guarantees under the international conventions to which Russia is a party. These universal conventions are the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights; the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (which the United States has not signed); the Convention on the Rights of the Child (the US is not among its signatories) and many other conventions and covenants most of which have been incorporated into the national legislation. Our lawyers are working with the Constitutional Court and the Justice Ministry on additional amendments to Russian laws to prevent any infringement on the rights of our citizens as the result of our withdrawal from the Council of Europe.

Question: Several counties have been trying to develop dialogue between Moscow and Kiev. France was the first to do this, followed by Israel, and Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu will come to Moscow today. Turkey has stepped up its activity. Why are these three countries so active on this issue?

Sergey Lavrov: They are not the only ones to offer their services. The President of Russia had a telephone conversation with President of the European Council Charles Michel yesterday. He has had contacts with German Chancellor Olaf Scholz, President of France Emmanuel Macron and Prime Minister of Israel Naftali Bennett. My foreign colleagues have contacted me as well. For example, Switzerland, which has traditionally posed as a country where compromises are reached, is ready to mediate.

In this context, it is strange that mediation services are being offered by the countries which have joined the unprecedented sanctions against Russia and have proclaimed the goal (they make no bones about stating this openly) of setting the Russian people against the Russian authorities. We take a positive view on the mediation offers coming from the countries which have refused to play this Russophobic game, which are aware of the root causes of the current crisis, that is, the fundamental and legitimate national interests of Russia, and which have not joined this war of sanctions. We are ready to analyse their proposals. Israel and Turkey are among these states.

Question: Do they come with proposals, asking if they could help establish dialogue?  Or how is this taking place in reality?

Sergey Lavrov: This happens in different ways. Right now, I cannot go into detail, but both want to help achieve accord at the talks conducted via the “Belarusian channel.”  They know the state of the talks, what proposals are on the table, and where there is a bilateral rapprochement.   They are sincerely trying to speed up the rapprochement. We welcome this, but I would like to stress once again that the matter of key importance is having a direct dialogue between the Russian and Ukrainian delegations and  solving what we consider fundamental issues related to the effort not only to ensure the physical security of people in eastern Ukraine and for that matter in other parts of Ukraine, but also to enable them to live normal, civilised lives in the country that has a duty to ensure the rights of  those who are known as ethnic minorities, rights that have been trampled underfoot in every sense.

Let us not forget about the tasks of demilitarisation. Ukraine cannot have weapons that create a threat to the Russian Federation. We are ready to negotiate on the types of armaments that do not present a threat to us. This problem will have to be solved even regardless of the situation’s NATO aspect. Even without NATO membership, the United States or anyone else can supply offensive weapons to Ukraine on a bilateral basis, just as they did with the anti-missile bases in Poland and Romania. No one asked NATO. Let us not forget that [Ukraine] is perhaps the only OSCE and European country that has legislatively legalised the neo-Nazis’ right to promote their views and practices.

These are matters of principle. I hope that the realisation of their legitimacy, justifiability and key importance for our interests and therefore the interests of European security will enable those, who are graciously offering their good offices, to promote relevant compromises in contacts with Ukraine, among others.

Question: We have named certain countries that are helping to settle this crisis. Has the United States offered any services in this connection, like “let us help to establish contacts?” After all, it is no secret to anyone that Russia-US relations were at a very low level. Now they have hit rock bottom, haven’t they?

Sergey Lavrov: Yes, there is such a figurative expression. Of course, the situation is unprecedented. I can’t recall anything like the frenzied policy that Washington is conducting right now. To a considerable extent, this policy is generated by Congress whose members have lost all sense of reality and are throwing all conventions to the winds. I am not even mentioning the diplomatic proprieties that have long since been abandoned.

The United States certainly has played the decisive role in shaping the position of the Kiev authorities. The Americans have maintained a huge “presence” in Kiev’s “corridors of power” for many years, including the uniformed agencies, the security service, and the top brass. Everyone knows this. The CIA and other US secret services have their missions there.

Like other NATO members (the Canadians, the British), they have sent hundreds of their instructors to train combat units not only within the Armed Forces of Ukraine but also in the so-called volunteer battalions, including Azov and Aydar. However, some seven or eight years ago, in 2014, immediately after the coup d’etat, the Azov battalion was officially struck off the list of recipients of US aid.  This was done precisely because it was regarded as an extremist, if not terrorist, organisation. Today, all pretences have been removed.

Now any person or group in Ukraine that declares Russia its enemy is immediately taken under the wing of overseas and Western patrons.

They are talking about the supremacy of law and about democracy. What supremacy of law, if the EU, in violation of its own law on the inadmissibility of arms supplies to conflict zones, takes the decision to do the opposite and send offensive arms to Ukraine?

We do not see any sign that the United States is interested in settling the conflict as soon as possible. If they were interested, they would have every opportunity, first, to explain to the Ukrainian negotiators and President Zelensky that they should seek compromises. Second, they need to make it clear that they are aware of the legitimacy of our demands and positions, but do not want to accept them, not because they are illegitimate but because they would like to dominate the world and are unwilling to restrain themselves with any commitments to take into consideration the interests of others. They have already brought Europe to heel, as I have said.

The US has been telling Europe for years that Nord Stream 2 could undermine their energy security. Europe responded that they should find out that on their own. They took the decision and their companies invested billions of euros. The Americans were claiming that this was contrary to the EU’s interests. They offered to sell them their liquefied gas. If there are no gas terminals, they should be built.  The Germans told me this a few years ago. It was during President Trump’s administration. Europe was complaining that this would considerably increase gas prices for their consumers. Donald Trump replied that they were rich guys and will compensate the difference from the German budget. That’s their approach.

Today, Europe was shown its place. Germany eventually said that its regulator was taking a break, and this precisely defines the FRG’s place in the arrangements that the Americans are making on the world scene.

Question: Has Germany become a less independent state under the new chancellor? Would it have acted the same under Angela Merkel?

Sergey Lavrov: The Nord Stream 2 was commissioned, albeit temporarily suspended afterwards, under the new chancellor. I hope that experience will bring an understanding of the need to uphold national interests, rather than to fully rely on the overseas partner who will make all the decisions for you and then do everything for you as well. Clearly, the enormous number of US troops on German soil is also a factor that interferes with independent decision-making.

Articles are being published to the effect that the “politics of memory” is vanishing. It has always been considered a sacred thing in Germany and meant that the German people would never forget the suffering they brought during World War II, primarily to the peoples of the Soviet Union. After I read this, I realised that many people are aware of it. These are open publications. German political scientists are talking about this and, of course, ours do so as well. Several years ago, I spotted something that was probably the early phase of this emerging trend. We were holding ministerial and other consultations with the Germans (I’m talking about foreign policy talks) at the level of department directors and deputy ministers. I never saw this at the ministerial level. The thought that was conveyed to us during the talks was that “we, the Germans, have paid our dues to everyone and owe nothing to anyone, so stop bringing this up.”

Speaking of the Germans, there is a thing that is worth mentioning. We are now talking a lot about attributes of genocide or racial discrimination. Take, for instance, the siege of Leningrad. For many years and with all my colleagues, starting with Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Guido Westerwelle, Heiko Maas, and most recently Annalena Baerbock, I very persistently, with each of them, raised the topic of paying compensations to the Leningrad siege survivors. The German government has made two one-time payments but only to Jewish survivors. We asked why only Jews, because many ethnic groups, including Russians and Tatars, lived in Leningrad and continue to live there. Many of them are still alive. How are they supposed to understand the fact that only the Jews have received some kind of help from the German government when at the time they were boiling shoes, burying children and transporting corpses on sleds together? The payments in question are not big. But, first, for many of them they matter, and second, they serve as the recognition of the fact that everyone has been impacted by the siege. Their answer was interesting. The Jews, they said, are victims of the Holocaust. These payments cannot be made to other survivors, because they are not Holocaust victims. Our attempts to reach out to the German legislators and politicians and tell them that the siege of Leningrad was an unparalleled event in the history of WWII, where there was no distinction between Jews, Russians or other ethnic groups, failed. We reached out to Jewish organisations. It is a matter of honour for them as well. We will continue this work going forward. January marked yet another anniversary of the lifting of the siege of Leningrad. The President of Russia signed an executive order on one-time payments to all siege survivors, including the Jews. We have not seen any sign of conscience awakening in Germany so far.

To be continued…

International Criminal Lawyer on “The Legality of War”

March 17, 2022

Very apt & timely article by international criminal lawyer, Christopher Black.

Excerpts:

“In my opinion Russia acted in accordance with international law under Article 51 of the UN Charter for the following reasons;

First, the Kiev regime was mounting a major offensive with NATO’s help against the Donbass Republics with the intent of destroying them. Intensive shelling had already begun days before Russia acted, the shelling of civilian buildings and infrastructure, which resulted in scores of thousands of civilians fleeing into Russia. During that period the Kiev regime also attempted to assassinate a leader of the Republics with a car bomb. Russia had no choice but to protect the Donbass peoples and since the Security Council could do nothing, and the EU and NATO were supporting the Kiev offensive against the Donbass, Russia was the only nation that could act.

The request for military assistance from the Donbass Republics also compelled Russia to send in its forces to help push back the Kiev forces from the territories of the Republics.

Second, Russia itself had been attacked multiple times by Kiev regime forces. Saboteurs were sent into Crimea time and again to carry out raids, assassinate officials, to destroy infrastructure. They even cut Crimea’s water supply, a crime against humanity. Just a few days before Russia acted a Kiev reconnaissance unit invaded Russia but was detected and destroyed. Russia had every right under The Caroline Doctrine to go after the attackers and to prevent further attacks.

…In this case the threat was more than imminent. It was on-going and increasing. The only effective and proportional defensive response was to destroy the offensive forces being deployed. These forces include not only Kiev regime government forces but also the nationalist, Nazi brigades supporting and spearheading the Kiev offensive and all the NATO equipment being supplied to them to conduct the Kiev offensive.

Thirdly, the deeper issue was the imminent threat to Russia from NATO posed by its continuous expansion to the east, its continuous build up of forces and offensive structure pointed at Russia and the completion this September of the American missile systems in Poland, Romania and Ukraine which could then be used to launch a nuclear attack against Russia.

We remember that in the past few months the NATO nations have conducted military exercises that included practicing launching nuclear attacks on Russia. We also remember that the USA has a first strike nuclear war policy, claiming the right to use nuclear weapons wherever and whenever they deem fit. It was evident that they were practising attacks because that was and is their intention.

Russia demanded the Americans withdraw those systems, and to withdraw NATO from Eastern Europe. They flatly refused. Ukraine talked of acquiring nuclear weapons and threatening Russia with them. It would take time for them to manufacture but there was nothing to stop the Americans from giving them nuclear weapons, under their control, as the Americans have done with Germany, for instance.

Russia could do nothing, keep the peace, and watch, as the weapons for its destruction were installed and made ready to fire; to commit suicide in other words, or it could defend itself. It warned the US that it would do so, and had the right to do so, the same right the Americans always claim to have, but again Russia was ignored. It had to act or face destruction and subjugation.

We remember that during the Cuban Missile Crisis, in 1962, the Americans threatened to invade Cuba and to attack the USSR because nuclear missiles had been placed in Cuba to protect it against American aggression. President Kennedy established the precedent principle that when a nation feels its existence is at stake from nuclear weapons it has the right to use force to protect itself pre-emptively. Russia is acting on the same principle.

Lastly, the NATO powers have lately relied on their bogus legal doctrine of “responsibility to protect” that they invented after the fact to try to justify their aggression against Yugoslavia. No such doctrine exists in international law but they claim the right to use it nevertheless. It applies, according to them, when a military action is justified, though illegal, “for legitimate humanitarian reasons.’ They were warned that this false doctrine could be turned against them. Russia has not referred to it at all, but if NATO can rely on it for their wars of aggression, then surely Russia can rely on it to justify their military action to defend the Donbass, and themselves.

When one takes account of all the factors that governed the Russian decision to send its forces into Ukraine it is clear that in law they had the legal right to do so whereas the United States continues its illegal invasion and occupation of Iraq and Syria to this day and the NATO media powers and governments say nothing, because they are all complicit in those invasions.
If the United States and the NATO alliance had complied with international law in the first place as set out in the UN Charter, the world would not be in this mess. They caused this, not Russia. The responsibility is entirely theirs and they will be judged for it.”
https://christopher-black.com/the-legality-of-war/

Related video

Related Article

خارطة للعملية الروسية في يومها الـ20.. وموسكو تعرض أدلّة لخطة أوكرانية

الثلاثاء 15 آذار  2022


المصدر: وكالات

وزارة الدفاع الروسية تعلن ضبطَ عددٍ كبيرٍ من الأسلحة الأجنبية في ضواحي كييف، وسكرتير مجلس الأمن الروسي يؤكّد أن أوكرانيا كانت تمتلك كل ما يلزم لصناعة سلاحٍ نوويٍّ.

الخريطة الميدانية لليوم الـ20 من العملية العسكرية الروسية الخاصة في أوكرانيا

أعلنت وزارة الدفاع الروسية، اليوم الثلاثاء، أنَّ “القوات الخاصّة الروسية المحمولة جوّاً، قامت بضبطِ عددٍ كبيرٍ من الأسلحة الأجنبية في ضواحي كييف، وذلك بعد معارك مع القوميين الأوكرانيين المتطرفين”.

وأظهر مقطعٌ مصوَّرٌ نشرته وزارة الدفاع الروسية المنظومة الأميركية المضادة للدبابات “جافلين”، ومنظومة “بانتسيرفاوست” الألمانية، وعدداً من منظومات الصواريخ المحمولة. كما أظهر المقطع تحميل الجنود الروس لهذه الغنائم في مركباتهم العسكرية.

وأشار أحد جنود القوات الجوية إلى أنّه “سيتمّ تسليم جميع الأسلحة إلى ممثلي جمهوريتي لوغانسك ودونيتسك الشعبيتين”.

وفي وقتٍ سابقٍ، سيطرت وحداتٌ من القوات الخاصة الروسية المحمولة جوّاً على مركز إسناد للقوميين المتطرفين الأوكرانيين والمرتزقة الأجانب، في بلدة “غوتا ميجوغورسكايا” في مقاطعة كييف.

وأمس، أعلنت وزارة الدفاع الروسية أنَّ مدينتي ميليتوبول وخيرسون خضعتا لسيطرة القوات الروسية بالكامل.

باتروشيف: كييف كانت تمتلك كل ما يلزم لصنع سلاح نووي

أعلن سكرتير مجلس الأمن الروسي، نيكولاي باتروشيف، اليوم الثلاثاء، أنَّ “قيام أوكرانيا بصنعِ سلاحٍ نوويٍّ كان من شأنه تهديد الأمن العالمي”، مشيراً إلى أنَّ “روسيا لم تكن لتسمح بظهور هذا السلاح لدى القوميين المتطرفيين، الذين لا يمكن السيطرة عليهم”.

وقال باتروشيف، خلال جلسةٍ حول الأمن في شمال القوقاز، إنّه “أصبح من الواضح أن المستشارين الأميركيين هم الذين يشجّعون ويساعدون نظام كييف في صنع أسلحة بيولوجية ونووية”. وأضاف أنَّ “لدى أوكرانيا كل ما يلزم لهذا الغرض، الكفاءات والتقنيات والمواد الخام ووسائل التسليم”.

وأكّد باتروشيف أنَّ “تصريحات القيادة الأوكرانية حول إمكانية تغيير الوضع النووي للبلاد لم تكن كلمات جوفاء”.

وتابع باتروشيف أنّه “يمكن تحويل هذه النوايا إلى واقع، وهذا مثّل بالفعل تهديداً واضحاً ليس لأمن روسيا فقط، ولكن للعالم بأسره، ما قد يؤدي إلى اندلاع حربٍ نوويةٍ”.

وشدَّد باتروشيف على أنّه “لا يمكننا أن نسمح للقوميين المتعصبين، وغير القابلين للسيطرة، بامتلاك أسلحة نووية”. وأشار سكرتير مجلس الأمن الروسي إلى أنَّ “الأسلحة النووية التكتيكية الأميركية قد تم نشرها بالفعل في أوروبا”.

وسأل باتروشيف “من أجل إمكانية استخدام البنية التحتية للدفاع الصاروخي التي تم إنشاؤها في المنطقة المجاورة مباشرة لحدودنا، أين ضمان أن السلاح المُجهّز لن يتمَّ إطلاقه مرةً أخرى؟”.

وأوضح باتروشيف أنَّ “الولايات المتحدة استخدمت بالفعل أسلحةً نوويةً ضد المدنيين، فقد ألقيت قنابل ذرية على مدن في اليابان، واستخدمت ذخيرة اليورانيوم المنضب في العراق ويوغوسلافيا”.

وفي هذا الصدد، قال إنَّ “عواقب استخدام هذه الذخيرة لا تزال تؤثر على البيئة وصحة الإنسان، ما يزيد بشكلٍ كبيرٍ من الوفيات الناجمة عن مرض السرطان”.

مجلس الأمن القومي الروسي: حصلنا على أدلة موثقة عن خطة كييف لغزو دونباس والقرم الشهر الجاري

وأعلن باتروشيف، اليوم الثلاثاء، أنّه “تم الحصول على أدلةٍ موثّقةٍ تُثبت أن سلطات كييف كانت تستعد لغزو أراضي جمهوريتي دونيتسك ولوغانسك الشعبيتين، وكذلك شبه جزيرة القرم، في آذار/مارس الجاري”، وأوضح باتروشيف أن الحصول على هذه الأدلة خلال العملية الروسية الخاصة الجارية في أوكرانيا.

وفي وقتٍ سابقٍ، أكدت قناة “روسيا – 24” أن الاستخبارات الروسية تلقت معلومات تفيد بأن أوكرانيا كانت تخطط لاجتياح إقليم دونباس في شباط/فبراير الماضي.

وقالت القناة في برنامج “بيسوغون” إن خطة كييف كانت تنص على دعوة قوات من حلف شمال الأطلسي إلى أوكرانيا لمنع التدخل الروسي. 

ووفق معد ومقدم البرنامج، عضو المجلس الاستشاري لدى الرئيس الروسي، نيكيتا ميخالكوف، فإن إرسال السلاح إلى أوكرانيا على مدى أشهر كان يهدف إلى تكديسه ليتم فيما بعد تسليح قوات الناتو به.

روسيا تُجلي حوالى 260 ألف شخص من دونيتسك ولوغانسك وأوكرانيا

وصرّح أيضاً رئيس المركز الوطني الروسي لإدارة الدفاع، ميخائيل ميزينتسيف، اليوم الثلاثاء، بأنَّ “روسيا قامت، دون مشاركة السلطات الأوكرانية، بإجلاء حوالي 260 ألف شخصٍ من المناطق الخطرة في أوكرانيا، من بينهم 56 ألفَ طفلٍ، وكذلك من جمهوريتي دونيتسك ولوغانسك الشعبيتين”.

وقال ميزينتسيف في إفادةٍ صحفيةٍ إنّه “على الرغم من كل العراقيل التي وضعتها الكتائب القومية وسلطات كييف أمام خروج المواطنين، فقد تمَّ خلال الساعات الـ24 الماضية إجلاء 11372 شخصاً من المناطق الخطرة في مختلف مناطق أوكرانيا، كما تمَّ إجلاء 11372 شخصاً، من بينهم 1873 طفلاً، من جمهوريتي لوغانسك ودونيتسك”.

وأوضح رئيس المركز الوطني الروسي لإدارة الدفاع أنّه “منذ بداية العملية العسكرية الخاصة تم إجلاء 258791 شخصاً، من بينهم 56180 طفلاً”. وأضاف بأنَّ “1368 سيارةً خاصَّةً عبرت الحدود الروسية في يومٍ واحدٍ، وأكثر من 29 ألفاً خلال كامل فترة العملية الخاصة”.

وأشار إلى أنّه “خلال الساعات الـ 24 الماضية، وبفضل الإجراءات الأمنية غير المسبوقة التي اتخذتها القوات المسلحة الروسية، تمَّ توفير ممرات إنسانية، وإجلاء 36721 مواطناً في اتجاهات جيتومير ولوغانسك ودونيتسك وماريوبول، تتبعهم حافلاتٌ وسياراتٌ خاصَّةٌ من مختلف المناطق السكنية إلى المناطق الغربية من أوكرانيا”.

“الدفاع الروسية”: المتطرفون الأوكرانيون يحتجزون 7070 مواطناً من 22 دولة

وقال رئيس المركز الوطني لقيادة الدفاع في روسيا، ميخائيل ميزينتسيف، اليوم الثلاثاء، إنَّ “القوميين المتطرفيين الأوكرانيين يواصلون احتجاز 7070 مواطناً من 22 دولةً أجنبيةً، فضلاً عن أطقم 70 سفينةً أجنبيةً”.

وأضاف ميزينتسيف أن هؤلاء الأشخاص “محتجزون كرهائن من قبل مسلحي كتائب الدفاع الإقليمية”.

وتابع أنّه “تمَّ تنظيم العمل على مدار الساعة مع ممثلي الدوائر الدبلوماسية ذات الصلة، بشأن مصير جميع المواطنين الأجانب المحتجزين بشكلٍ غيرِ قانونيٍّ”، مشيراً إلى أنّه “في الوقت نفسه، ما زالت السلطات الأوكرانية لا تستجيب لنداءات الدول الأجنبية التي تحاول إنقاذ أرواح مواطنيها وتخليصهم من هذا المأزق”.

وقبل نحو 10 أيام، قالت وزارة الدفاع الروسية إنَّ “أكثر من 7,5 ألف أجنبي محتجزون كرهائن في مدن أوكرانية، مشيرةً إلى أن نظام كييف فقد بالكامل تقريباً القدرة على إدارة المناطق والمقاطعات في البلاد”.

وقالت الدفاع الروسية في بيان لها أنه “في مدينة سومي قام النازيون الجدد بقصف مسكن يعيش فيه طلاب هنود، وأصيب 5 أشخاص، فيما لا يزال مصير 11 غير معروف”.

وأمس، أعلن المتحدث باسم وزارة الدفاع الروسية، إيغور كوناشينكوف، مقتل 20 مدنياً وإصابة 28 آخرين، جراء قصف القوات الأوكرانية مركز مدينة دونيتسك بصاروخٍ من طراز “توتشكا أو”، الذي “يحتوي على ذخيرة عنقودية”، واصفاً هذا القصف بأنّه “جريمة حرب”.

وقال كوناشينكوف إنَّ “هناك أطفالاً بين المصابين إصاباتٍ بالغة”، وأكّد أنّه “تم نقل المصابين إلى المراكز الطبية”.

يُذكر أنَّ القوميين الأوكرانيين المتطرفين لا يطلقون سراح المواطنين والأجانب، بل يتّخذونهم كدروعٍ بشرية، مما يعيق عمليات الإجلاء بعد تأمين ممرات إنسانية لعبور اللاجئين باتجاه الأماكن الآمنة، بحسب ما تعلن وزارة الدفاع الروسية.

Israel’s Links to Ukraine’s Thriving Neo-Nazi Movement

March 15th, 2022

Although there is no concrete evidence of a direct Israeli government link with the Azov Battalion or other neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine, there are clearly Israeli citizens who are directly aiding them.

By Robert Inlakesh

Source

KIEV, UKRAINE – Western media have attempted to all but deny the existence of neo-Nazis in Ukraine, alleging that Russia’s goal to de-Nazify Kiev is not possible because Ukraine’s president is Jewish. But what is to be made of an Israeli Jew openly calling himself the co-founder of the neo-Nazi Azov Battalion?

Kiev’s infamous Azov Battalion, officially part of the National Guard of Ukraine, has been widely acknowledged as a neo-Nazi volunteer paramilitary force. It has also been connected with foreign white supremacist organizations. In addition to this, the far-right, neo-Nazi and white-nationalist members in its ranks have even been criticized by the likes of Human Rights Watch and the United Nations for human rights abuses.

Despite the well-documented history of racially motivated crimes and attacks on Ukraine’s LGBTQ+ community, the battalion has been indirectly and continually armed by Western powers. In June 2015 the United States and Canada banned the support and/or training of Azov by their forces, specifically citing its neo-Nazi connections. However, the following year the U.S. lifted its ban owing to pressure from the Pentagon. In 2019, The Nation magazine published an article in which it was stated that “[p]ost-Maidan Ukraine is the world’s only nation to have a neo-Nazi formation in its armed forces.” All of which is to say that Azov can conclusively be labeled neo-Nazi. This may be why reports are now emerging of White Supremacists and far-Right militia members flocking to Ukraine, to fight alongside extremist forces in the country.

Israeli support of and involvement in the Azov Battalion

Prior to Azov becoming an integrated part of the Ukrainian military, the group was funded primarily by Ukrainian oligarchs, the most well known of whom was Igor Kolomoisky. Kolomoisky is of Jewish heritage and is an Israeli citizen and well-known billionaire businessman. Despite his being a Jewish Israeli, he had no problem pouring money into neo-Nazi volunteer militias such as the Azov and Aidar, among other far-right groups that feature elements hostile to Jewish people.

Although the Jewish president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyy, is often held up by mainstream Western media as proof that there is no problem with neo-Nazis in Ukraine, he himself received financial backing from the same oligarch – Igor Kolomoisky – who was financing neo-Nazis. Zelenskyy’s presidential bid in 2019, which saw him win 73% of the vote, was successful on the basis that he was running in order to combat corruption and create peace in the country but, as the leaked documents known as the Pandora Papers revealed, he himself was storing funds in offshore bank accounts. Zelenskyy’s campaign was at the time boosted and bankrolled by the Israeli-Ukrainian-Cypriot billionaire Kolomoisky – who was himself accused of stealing $5.5 billion from his own bank.

It may come as a shock, but there are actually many Israeli Jews who fight with ultra-nationalist Ukrainian groups and who coordinate closely with, or even belong to, neo-Nazi groups such as Azov. Konstantyn Batozsky, for example, who stated that he worked as a political consultant in Donetsk for the Azov Battalion between 2014-15, even defended Azov members who had tattoos of Nazi symbols.

“They were soccer hooligans and wanted attention, so yeah, I was shocked when I saw guys with swastika tattoos,” Batozsky said of Azov Battalion members he personally got to know. He then followed that statement by saying. “But I talked with them all the time about being Jewish and they had nothing negative to say. They had no anti-Jewish ideology.” Another Jewish Israeli, Daniel Kovzhun, claims that “there were Orthodox Jews in Azov,” which he claims came down to all members being Ukrainian nationalists and therefore Jewishness was not an issue.

Muslims however, seem to be a major issue for the Azov Battalion. The Islamophobia present not only in Azov, but also in the National Guard of Ukraine, came through strongly on social media as the official National Guard site glorified the Azov Battalion as they dipped their bullets in pig fat. The video was directed at Muslim soldiers from Chechnya who are fighting on the side of Russia and were described as “orcs” by the National Guard on Twitter. In the video, one of the Azov fighters can be heard saying: “Dear Muslim brothers, in our country, you will not go to heaven.” It is a belief shared by some white supremacists that if they kill a Muslim with a bullet coated in pig fat, the Muslim will not enter heaven.

Although little is published about this fact in English, according to the BBC, an Israeli-Ukrainian named Natan Khazin claims to have co-founded the Azov Battalion. In an interview conducted by BBC Ukraine in 2018, which attempted to downplay the claims of rising antisemitism in Ukraine, Khazin is quoted as saying: “I can say that, despite the difficult situation in Ukraine and the war, the level of antisemitism is not growing. Someone in the West simply does not understand the real state of things in Ukraine in this area.”

In The Forward, a Jewish news outlet, Khazin is described as a “yarmulke-wearing … veteran of the Israel Defense Forces and an ordained rabbi.” The description continues:

[He is] representative of many young Ukrainian Jews who are Zionist, religiously observant and at the same time strong Ukrainian patriots. Some of them refer to themselves humorously as Zhido-Banderists — a fusion of the pejorative term for “Jew” with the name Stepan Bandera, leader of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists, which fought for Ukrainian independence during World War II. The organization’s forces also participated in the massacre of Jews, so the term Zhido-Banderist is self-consciously ironic.”

During an interview, published in a condensed form by The Forward, Khazin is asked, “If it isn’t confidential, where did you serve [while  in the Israeli military]?” He answers:  “In the Gaza Strip. I know what it’s like to move down a street with people shooting, throwing stones or burning objects.”

All the above examples of Israelis actively collaborating with known neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine are of private Israeli citizens and there is no direct connection to the Israeli government. However, the Israeli government itself seems to have participated, much like the United States and other NATO nations, in supplying weapons to the Ukrainian military, which is considered by some as a form of indirectly arming the Azov Battalion and other ultra-right elements. In 2018, more than 40 human rights activists filed a petition with the Israeli High Court, in which they argued that the Israeli weapons were being sent to serve those who espouse neo-Nazi beliefs. They cited “evidence that the right-wing Azov militia, whose members are part of Ukraine’s armed forces, and are supported by the country’s ministry of internal affairs,” were using the weapons, according to a report published in Haaretz.

Although there is no concrete evidence of a direct Israeli government link with the Azov Battalion or other neo-Nazi groups in Ukraine, there are clearly Israeli citizens who are directly aiding them. There are, however, reports that claim that Israeli forces have directly trained the Azov Battalion and Azov has been shown to possess Israeli-made weapons. When such a connection between neo-Nazi groups and Israeli Jews in Ukraine clearly exists, this in of itself should call into question the sincerity of Western media’s attempt to use President Zelenskyy’s Jewish identity in order to push to the side claims that there are hardline neo-Nazi elements inside Ukraine. Furthermore, these groups are clearly able to coexist beside Israeli citizens, so long as those Jewish Israelis are themselves Ukrainian nationalists. This is not to say that anti-Semitism does not exist in these groups, however.

Israeli far-right alignment in Europe

The propensity for right-wing Israelis to align themselves with right-wing Europeans has long been clear, and this propensity has even meant allying themselves with groups accused of antisemitism. The Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) – a right wing German party condemned by World Jewish Congress President Ronald Lauder as being “a disgrace for Germany,” and frequently accused of antisemitism – has strong links to Israel. Interestly, figures regarded as being from the far-right – such as Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, France’s Marine Le Pen, Britain’s Nigel Farage, and Hungary’s Viktor Orbán – are all on record as being pro-Israeli and have made efforts to align themselves with the Jewish State. Former Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also made it clear that he would meet and align himself with figures accused of antisemitism, such as Orbán.

Netanyahu tried hard to cement Israel’s alliance with the Visegrad bloc — Poland, Hungary, Slovakia, and the Czech Republic — which Foreign Policy magazine described as forming “a common entity imbued with hostility to the values of the Enlightenment, to human rights, to the concept of a nation as a community of citizens, to the principle of equality, and, generally speaking, to foreigners.” Of course, when it comes to Israeli government endeavors, there is a pragmatic incentive for Israel, and such alliances with the far-right should not be taken as a purely love-bond relationship. But the fact that these relationships have existed, and continue to exist, should indicate that right-wing Israelis can readily coexist with the European far-right.

As for white supremacists in the United States, there are many who openly align themselves with Israel. One such example is White Nationalist leader Richard Spencer, who is an open supporter of Israel and came out in 2018 to back Israel’s Nation State Bill, which affirmed that  “the realization of the right to national self-determination in Israel is unique to the Jewish people.” The bill was widely pegged as racist and Spencer said of it that he has “great admiration for Israel’s Nation-State Law. Jews are, once again, at the vanguard, rethinking politics and sovereignty for the future, showing a path forward for Europeans.” Israel’s system of racial supremacy is viewed with great admiration by many white supremacists, who seek to model their own system along similar lines, according to people like Richard Spencer.

This sort of mentality, which aligns Israel and the Western far-right, cannot simply be ignored and demonstrates why it is not necessarily a valid point to say that the presence of Jewish individuals in Ukraine’s fight against Russia debunks the claims of neo-Nazi elements existing. As is demonstrated above, these groups not only exist in spite of Jewish individuals being present, but in some cases even feature Israeli Jews in their ranks.

Info Sheet

March 15, 2022

Germany announces changes to arms supplies for Ukraine

14 Mar, 2022

A government spokesman says Berlin will keep shipments secret due to “security risks”

Germany will no longer divulge details of its weapons shipments to Ukraine, government spokesman Wolfgang Buechner told reporters on Monday, according to the Associated Press. The policy of secrecy will extend to switching off livestreams from the country’s highways, and comes after Russia said it will treat Western arms shipments into Ukraine as “legitimate targets.”

Buechner said that under the new policy, Germany will not say which weapons are being delivered to Ukraine or how “to avoid security risks.” Speaking at the same press conference on Monday, Defense Ministry spokesman Arne Collatz added that “it is the goal of the Russian aggressors to cut Ukraine’s supply routes and make defense harder, and we don’t want to facilitate this.”

The country’s transport ministry has also switched off live feeds from cameras on German highways for security reasons, presumably to prevent Russia from reconnoitering weapons convoys before they leave Germany.

Initially reluctant to supply weapons to Ukraine, Germany reversed its ban on arms sales to Kiev in late February and sent thousands of anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles to the Ukrainian military. Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s government also authorized the Netherlands and Estonia to send their stocks of German-made weapons to Kiev.

Germany is one of many NATO countries funneling arms to Ukraine, while the EU has also made the unprecedented move of procuring weapons for the pro-Western government in Kiev. 

Amid the influx of foreign weapons, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov stated on Saturday that he had “warned the US that pumping weapons from a number of countries it orchestrates isn’t just a dangerous move, it’s an action that makes those convoys legitimate targets.”

While Russia has not yet struck any of these arms convoys, Germany’s more secretive approach going forward suggests that the possibility is being taken seriously in Berlin. 

Western arms and foreign volunteers for Ukraine’s military typically cross the country’s 535-kilometer (332-mile) border with Poland, as Hungary has forbidden the transit of weapons to Ukraine. While western Ukraine is firmly under Ukrainian control and is seen as a bastion of pro-Western sentiment, Russia has demonstrated the ability to strike deep into this region, launching missile strikes on a NATO-partnered training center around a dozen miles from the Polish border on Sunday.  

You can share this story on social media:

Related Articles

Briefings by the Russian Defense Ministry

March 14, 2022

Early Morning Briefing

Units of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation, continuing the offensive, reached the border of Vodyanoe, Sladkoe, Stepnoe, Taramchuk and Slavnoye. The advance per day was 11 kilometers.

The grouping of troops of the Lugansk People’s Republic, having previously blocked Severodonetsk from the eastern and southern directions, is fighting against nationalists on the northeastern outskirts of the city.

During the night of March 14, 4 Ukrainian unmanned aerial vehicles, including иBayraktar TB-2, were shot down by aviation and air defence of the Russian Aerospace Forces.

Operational-tactical, army and unmanned aviation hit 46 military infrastructure assets of Ukraine, including: 2 command posts, 1 Buk-M1 anti-aircraft missile system, 1 guidance and target designation radar station, 2 MLRS, 2 electronic warfare stations, 2 ammunition and fuel depots, 31 areas of military equipment concentration.

In total, during the operation, 3,920 objects of the military infrastructure of Ukraine were disabled.

Destroyed: 143 unmanned aerial vehicles, 1,267 tanks and other armored combat vehicles, 124 multiple launch rocket systems, 457 field artillery and mortars, as well as 1,028 units of special military vehicles.


Statement by Russian Defence Ministry

 On March 14, at about 11.30 a.m. Moscow time, Tochka-U tactical missile was fired at a residential block of Donetsk city from the territory controlled by the Kiev nationalist regime.

 The shelling of the city was carried out from the north-western direction, from the area of Krasnoarmeysk settlement, which is controlled by Ukrainian nationalist units.

 As a result of the explosion of a cluster warhead in the center of Donetsk, 20 civilians were killed. Another 28 people, including children, were seriously injured and taken to medical institutions.

 The use of such weapons on a town with no armed forces firing positions, i.e. deliberately targeting civilians, is a war crime.

 The armament of Tochka-U missile’ warhead with cluster ammunition proves that the purpose of the nationalists’ strike on the city was to kill as many civilians as possible.

I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the decision to use this type of missile weapons is made, at least, by the command of the Ukrainian grouping of troops, after approval by the leadership of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in Kiev.

 All this once again confirms the Nazi and anti-human nature of the ruling regime in Ukraine today.

Western Silence on NATO-Backed Provocations Leading to War in Ukraine

March 11, 2022

Source

The silence of Western media on the causes of confrontation and the criminal involvement of their own governments is complicity in creating conditions for war.

Russia provided more evidence this week that NATO and the Kiev regime were planning a deadly offensive on Donbass, which Russia pre-empted with its military intervention beginning on February 24. Russia has called its intervention a special military operation, while Western states have condemned it as “an unprovoked invasion” of Ukraine.

One senses that it is absolutely imperative for Western media to deny all Russian claims for why it took military action. To do so might lead to some acknowledgement that Russia has just cause, as well as attribute onerous responsibility to Western governments.

It should also be noted, although this is denied too in Western media, that Moscow assiduously tried to address its security concerns through dialogue with the United States and its NATO partners. But those efforts were continually rebuffed. Moscow was treated like it was a non-entity whose long-held security concerns were non-existent or a figment of its imagination.

Russia’s latest information this week substantiating its claims involves a grave multidimensional national security threat. The gravity of the threats makes them impossible to ignore, which makes Western media silence all the more damnable. Moscow says its security analysts are still processing the full extent of information and it will provide more details at a future date. Suffice to say that so far, Russia has identified three major areas where its national security was being threatened by the U.S. and NATO-backed regime in Ukraine. Those threats were greater and more pressing than previously understood, which then presaged the military conflict that is underway in Ukraine.

First, there has emerged more information that the Kiev regime was planning to launch a major offensive on the self-declared people’s republic of Donetsk and Lugansk. The military formations assigned for the attack were the National Guard whose ranks are packed with Neo-Nazi brigades such as the notorious Azov Battalion. Those brigades have been trained and weaponized by the United States, Britain, Canada, Poland, and other NATO members. The Kiev regime has been waging a low-intensity war on the Russian-speaking populations of the Donetsk and Lugansk republics for the past eight years since the CIA-backed coup in 2014. Some 14,000 people have been killed and up to one million displaced from their homes. The new intensified offensive was to be launched this month. Thus when Moscow recognized the independence of the Donbass Republics on February 21 and went to their defense three days later on February 24, it effectively preempted a military attack that in all probability would have been coordinated by NATO powers. Russia has said that its objectives in Ukraine are to denazify and demilitarize the Kiev regime. That necessarily means taking the military operation to the Ukrainian capital and terminating it as a hostile power center.

Second, the threat to turn Ukraine into a nuclear weapon state was a real covert project, not some idle threat, according to Russian foreign intelligence. It claims to have evidence that the U.S. and other NATO powers were well aware of plans for Ukraine to acquire nuclear weapons. When Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky mentioned at the Munich Security Conference on February 19 that his country might abrogate the 1994 Budapest Memorandum banning such weapons in the former Soviet Republic it was not merely an idle whim or braggadocio.

Third, it has now transpired that the United States was funding biowarfare laboratories at dozens of sites across Ukraine. This has long been a Russian concern over many years since Ukraine’s independence in 1991. But this week, the Russian authorities were able to cite documents recovered from laboratories that showed that these facilities were indeed engaged in producing deadly pathogens or bacterial warfare agents. The facilities were apparently ordered to hastily destroy samples on February 24. Such activity is a violation of international bacterial warfare treaties and posed an unacceptable national security threat to Russia. The Pentagon is on record for publicly funding the laboratories. The State Department official with responsibility for Ukraine, Victoria Nuland, this week confirmed in congressional hearings that the laboratories were involved in producing hazardous materials because she expressed fears that Russian forces might obtain them. If they weren’t hazardous or illicit then why was Nuland so alarmed?

All in all, these three subject areas provide prima facia evidence for why Russia needed to launch its military operation into Ukraine nearly three weeks ago. Ever since the CIA-orchestrated coup d’état in 2014 against an elected Ukrainian president, Viktor Yanukovych, the country has been riven by civil war and used as a cat’s paw to destabilize eastern neighbor Russia. This of course conforms neatly with the deep imperial planning by the United States as articulated by people like Zbigniew Brzezinski for pursuing its hostility towards Russia and for continued Cold War division of geopolitical relations.

What is instructive, however, is the near-total silence among Western media outlets on all of the above. To his credit, Tucker Carlson at Fox News has been almost alone among the corporate media outlets in highlighting the warmongering duplicity of the Biden administration and its NATO acolytes.

By and large, though, the vital circumstances explaining the present conflict in Ukraine have been ignored or omitted by Western media. Any brief mention of Russia’s concerns that may be aired is quickly dismissed and ridiculed as “Kremlin propaganda”. It certainly does not help the public interest that Western states have recently taken draconian steps to ban Russian news media from broadcasting. The hypocrisy of Western claims about free speech is astounding.

But what is even more deplorable is the attempt by Western governments and their dutiful media to demonize and criminalize Russia. The climate of Russophobia is giving license to violent attacks on Russian citizens abroad. One reprehensible incident was a truck-ramming attack at the Russian embassy in Ireland.

The ignorance and bigotry being fostered by supposedly free media is lending policies of hostility and aggression by NATO powers. Weapons and war finance are being funneled to Ukraine from U.S. and European taxpayers under the guise of “defending democracy from Russian aggression”. There are real reasons for why the conflict in Ukraine has erupted and there is grievous responsibility by NATO governments. The silence of Western media on the causes of confrontation and the criminal involvement of their own governments is complicity in creating conditions for war.

This week the Russian government expressed again a readiness for diplomatic engagement to end the war in Ukraine. It wants a commitment to end the systemic threat of NATO, the end of aggression by the NATO-backed Kiev regime, and recognition of its historic territorial claim to Crimea. Rational dialogue can solve conflict and ensure peace. But how is dialogue feasible when Western governments and media do not even begin to accept an alternative perspective, let alone one that might even be valid?

Who’s Really Plotting A Chemical Weapons False Flag In Ukraine: Moscow Or Kiev?

12 MARCH 2022

By Andrew Korybko

Source

There’s no credible reason why Russia would employ chemical weapons when it already has uncontested military superiority in all warfighting domains, not to mention when it’s already coming under unprecedented full-spectrum pressure and being recklessly accused of staging precisely such a false flag. On the other hand, Kiev’s fascists literally have nothing to lose since their defeat is inevitable, hence why they’re inclined to use such weapons of mass destruction out of desperation in a last-ditch attempt to blame the potential incident on Russia in order to get the US-led West to militarily intervene in their support.

The US-led West is wildly speculating without any proof whatsoever that the Russian Armed Forces (RAF) are plotting a chemical weapons false flag in Ukraine, claims that Moscow officially rejected on Friday. The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs pushed back by sharing evidence with the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) and the UNSC showing that it’s actually Kiev’s fascist-nationalist forces that are gearing up to do this instead. According to their statement, “Radical Ukrainian groups under the control of the representatives of American special services have prepared several potential scenarios of the use of toxic chemicals in order to carry out various types of provocations. The objective of such actions is to accuse Russia of the use of chemical weapons against the civil population and violating its obligations, including those under the Chemical Weapons Convention.”

The global public is understandably confused since each side is accusing the other of this scenario, which ominously suggests that something of the sort might horribly transpire sometime soon. It’s therefore important to analyze the military-strategic dynamics at play in order to more confidently predict who’d be responsible if this actually comes to pass. The American accusations that have been echoed by their fascist proxies in Kiev aren’t credible when one takes the time to actually think about them. Russia’s military superiority over its neighbor is undeniable and nobody questions the fact that the RAF are much larger than the Ukrainian ones (UAF), their fascist-nationalist militias, and the thousands of mercenaries that they’re urgently pleading with to join the fray. Furthermore, Kiev is utterly disappointed that US President Biden reportedly killed Poland’s plan to send fighter jets to them via Rammstein Air Base.

There’s also no chance of NATO daring to impose a so-called “no-fly zone” over Ukraine that would necessitate first destroying the RAF’s air capabilities, including possibly within Russia itself. President Putin very clearly warned during his 24 February address to the Russian people announcing his country’s special military operation in Ukraine that the RAF will regard any third party that directly interferes in its activities there as a hostile force that will be decisively responded to in self-defense. These developments doom the UAF to defeat since they simply cannot hope to beat back the RAF without such significant foreign military assistance, and even then, it would be nigh impossible since the introduction of such forces into the conflict zone could very likely trigger the Third World War that President Putin just narrowly averted through the decisive timing of his country’s special operation there.

Faced with such a predicament yet still politically unwilling to comply with Russia’s reasonable national security red line requests, it’s all the more likely that Kiev’s increasingly desperate forces might be inclined to stage a chemical weapons false flag as a last-ditch attempt to blame the RAF for it in order to compel the US-led West into decisively intervening in their support despite that risking World War III. There’s already an established pattern of false flags committed by Kiev in this conflict, from the Snake Island psy-op to the Mariupol maternity & children’s hospital bombing, the latter of which was exposed by Russian diplomats at the UN the other day. If the US-led Western “logic” is that Russia warning about a chemical weapons false flag supposedly suggests that it’s about to commit precisely that, then Pentagons spokesman Kirby’s earlier warning about Russian false flags suggests the same vis-à-vis Kiev.

There’s no credible reason why Russia would employ chemical weapons when it already has uncontested military superiority in all warfighting domains, not to mention when it’s already coming under unprecedented full-spectrum pressure and being recklessly accused of staging precisely such a false flag. On the other hand, Kiev’s fascists literally have nothing to lose since their defeat is inevitable, hence why they’re inclined to use such weapons of mass destruction out of desperation in a last-ditch attempt to blame the potential incident on Russia in order to get the US-led West to militarily intervene in their support. This insight suggests that the international community must be on alert for Kiev’s US-backed fascist proxies attempting a chemical weapons false flag in the very near future. Hopefully that scenario won’t come to pass, but if it does, then everyone should immediately suspect the US and Kiev.