#2
Valdai Club
http://valdaiclub.com
July 28, 2015
The Kremlin Secret
By Alexei Mukhin
Alexei Mukhin is President of the Center for Political Information.

President Vladimir Putin's high approval rating infuses quite a strong irritation among his opponents and understanding among the majority of the Russian population.

Despite the serious economic problems associated not only with the so-called "anti-Russian" sanctions and plummeting prices for energy resources, but also with the inevitable repercussions and echoes of the financial crisis of 2008-2009, the president's influence remains equally firm in many spheres of Russians' lives.

Indeed, Russia has lost some of the platforms used to spread influence on the international situation (G8, PACE) and found itself a whole pool of overt and die-hard opponents comprised of US satellites (Canada, Australia, Poland) and Ukraine, whose politicians have literally declared war on Moscow.

Indeed, despite the fact that the situation has been turned "topsy-turvy" and the real aggressor, who threatened to destroy the Russian population on his territory, accused Russia of being the source of aggression, was backed by so-called advanced states. And the "advanced states" have found themselves in an awkward situation, forced to be under the thumb of US whims, although it is contrary to their own economic interests.

The population of countries whose governments criticize Russia, even under the pressure of anti-Russian propaganda, show a rather pragmatic approach to problems related to information confrontation with the Russian leader. No wonder Putin is regularly topping the mass media rankings based on independent surveys. Nonetheless, the population of the US and Europe, when comparing its own politicians with the Russian president, sends a message to them that they need to "reach" his level.

Of course, such complimentary positioning of Putin made Western politicians grow envious, naturally instigating their anti-Russian attitude and rendering rapprochement between Russia, the European Union and the US impossible at the moment.

Plans to exploit social problems in Russia in order to turn the population away from the supreme authority failed and did not play the role Washington had plotted. Surprisingly for the Western establishment, even groups originally indifferent to Putin have now mobilized around the president.

In particular, the US made several mistakes that raised Putin's approval ratings: it declared a Cold War on Russia and reanimated the long-rusty mechanisms of the Soviet immunity to aggression of the United States; it tried to employ the "sanctions effect" and, as a result, encouraged diversification of Russian trade turnover, it tried to isolate Russia politically, expelling it from the G8 format and conduced realization of a whole set of integration projects within the framework of BRICS, SCO, EurAsEC.

In general, Western authorities lack experts possessing real knowledge and understanding of Russia. The opinions of those who had been consulting American presidents and heads of European states prior to the collapse of the USSR have been ignored. They, by the way, are the ones pointing out the unwise conduct of the current heads of Western states.

It is undeniable, the more intensively the US and the EU try to "press" on the Russian president, the more solid ranks of supporters he will get.

[return to Contents] 

#3
Things you need to know about Putin's popularity in Russia

BEIJING, July 28 (Xinhua) -- Since the Ukraine crisis erupted, there has been a sharp contrast between how Russian President Vladimir Putin is perceived in the West and at home.

While policymakers and media commentators in the West have been very vocal in denouncing Putin's action in Ukraine, he has actually enjoyed an unprecedented popularity among Russians.

The latest figures on Putin's popularity came from the Levada Center, an independent and respected polling agency whose leadership has a contentious history with the government and thus has no incentive to fabricate Putin's approval ratings to bolster the public image of the Kremlin.

Russia's annexation of Crimea last year contributed to the skyrocketing of Putin's approval rating to 89 percent, up 24 percent from the 65 percent approval rating before the crisis and even higher than the 88 percent in 2008, shortly after victory in the Russo-Georgian War.

While most Russians express solid support for Putin, there has been an absence of trust for the Russian political system outside of Putin, with 69 percent of them trying to have minimal interaction with the government and 47 percent claiming not to feel protected by the law.

Russians do not hold Putin accountable for the negative effects Western sanctions inflict on them. Nearly half of Russians say the sanctions are intended not only to cripple elite circles, but also to punish ordinary Russians. Many thus regard the sanctions as assaults on them and their families, in addition to being an attack on their country.

With 66 percent of Russians believing that Western sanctions are meant to "weaken and humiliate" Russia, many have rallied around the flag and embraced Putin as a "father protector" defending the country against foreign onslaughts. Instead of blaming Putin for their economic woes, many Russians blame the West.

On the Ukraine issue, even some opposition members support Putin. Several prominent opposition leaders have spoken up in favor of the current policy towards Ukraine, and in certain cases urged Russia to go beyond.

Sergei Udaltsov, a key firebrand during the 2011 mass anti-Putin protests who was sentenced to 4.5 years in prison for his role in those protests, celebrated the result of the Crimean referendum, proclaiming, "I am a Soviet patriot, and consider the destruction of the USSR a great mistake and crime, so I regard the return of Crimea as a small but important step towards the rebirth of an updated Union."

Likewise, Eduard Limonov, a longtime Putin foe who has spent time in jail for his political activities, called not only for military intervention in eastern Ukraine, but also for the Black Sea Fleet to be sent to Odessa, the third largest city in Ukraine.

Within such a context, "even if the West succeeds in further weakening Putin economically, it may end up strengthening his position domestically," Dimitri Simes Jr., staff member of the Center for the National Interest of the United States, said in an article.
 

 [return to Contents] 

 
#4
Interfax
July 29, 2015
Kremlin: Prohibition of NGOs' operations in Russia does not mean restriction of access to democratic values

The inclusion of one or several non-governmental organizations (NGO) in a list of those whose operations on Russian territory are undesirable does not restrict access of Russian citizens to democratic values, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

"It would be absolutely wrong to say that, with the prohibition of this or that organization, Russian citizens would be deprived of something. A huge number of non-governmental and other organizations are operating on Russian territory, including human rights ones and those operating in the social sector," Peskov told journalists in commenting on a remark that the designation of NGOs as undesirable restricts the development of civil society in Russia.

"Therefore, the prohibition of operations of one or several organizations will definitely not mean any restriction of access of Russian citizens to democratic values," he added.

"The law has been enforced, and, in keeping with this law's provisions, some organizations have been included in this list," Peskov said. "All this complies with our legislation," he said.

The Russian Prosecutor General's Office qualified the operations of the U.S. nonprofit organization National Endowment for Democracy (NED) as undesirable in Russia on July 29.

 [return to Contents]

 #5
Interfax
July 28, 2015
U.S. embassy in Moscow concerned about NED's designation as 'undesirable organization' in Russia

The U.S. Embassy in Moscow is concerned about the Russian Prosecutor General's Office's decision to designate the U.S. nonprofit organization National Endowment for Democracy (NED) an undesirable foreign organization in Russian territory.

"We are deeply concerned about the effect of the so-called law on undesirable organizations," U.S. embassy spokesperson Will Stevens told Interfax when asked to comment on the Prosecutor General's Office's decision on July 28.

In this context, the U.S. "calls on the Russian authorities to comply with their international obligations and understandings regarding freedom of expression, of peaceful assembly and of association, and also the rule of law principle," Stevens said.

The U.S. is also concerned that this law would put more obstacles in the way of civil society's functioning in Russia and is yet another example of the Russian government's consistent steps toward harassing independent voices and isolating Russians from the rest of the world, he said.

"We are still concerned about growing restrictions being imposed on the work of independent media, on the functioning of civil society, and on members of minorities and opposition forces," he said.

The Russian Prosecutor General's Office designated the National Endowment for Democracy an undesirable foreign organization in Russian territory earlier on Tuesday. The office recognized the NED's operations as threatening "the Russian Federation's constitutional system, defense capability, and security."

 #6
www.rt.com
July 28, 2015
US National Endowment for Democracy labeled 'undesirable' group under new law

Prosecutors have recognized NED's activities in Russia as undesirable and undermining national security after the US NGO spent millions on attempts to question the legitimacy of Russian elections and tarnish the prestige of military service.

According to the release published on the Prosecutor General Office's website deputy head of the agency Vladimir Malinovsky on Tuesday signed the decision to recognize as undesirable on the territory of the Russian Federation all activities of the foreign non-government organization the National Endowment for Democracy. On the same day this decision was forwarded to the Justice Ministry that must now include NED in the list of undesirable foreign organizations.

Prosecutors added in their report that the decision was based on the analysis of the endowment's recent work. This analysis showed that it controlled some Russian commercial and non-commercial organizations and used them in campaigns aimed at recognizing the results of Russian polls illegitimate, influencing the authorities' decisions through political actions and discrediting of the Russian military forces.

Foreign Ministry praises law banning undesirable foreign groups in Russia

The release reads that in 2013 and 2014 the National Endowment for Democracy rendered $5.2 million in financial aid to its Russian partners. According to RBC the endowment itself has earlier reported that in 2014 alone it satisfied 95 Russian applications for aid amounting to $8.4 million.

The National Endowment for Democracy, founded in 1983 on Ronald Reagan's initiative, is sponsored by the US Congress and sees its main task as helping the democratic institutions all over the world. The Russian Justice Ministry has earlier recognized this organization as the most active provider of various grants in politics and politics-related spheres, such as sociology or political research.

The NED was also included in the very first draft of the 'patriotic stop-list' - the document approved by the Russian upper house that names the groups that the senators see as potential threat to security and want to be probed and, if these suspicions are confirmed, officially declared undesirable.

The bill on undesirable foreign organizations was signed into law by President Vladimir Putin in late May. The new law allows the Prosecutor General's Office and the Foreign Ministry to create a proscribed list of 'undesirable foreign organizations', making the activities of such groups in Russia illegal. The main criterion for putting a foreign or international NGO on the list is a "threat to the constitutional order and defense capability, or to the security of the Russian state."

Non-compliance with the ban can be punished by administrative penalties, and for repeated and aggravated offenses can carry prison sentences of up to six years. Russian citizens and organizations that continue to work with banned groups would face administrative fines only.

As the sponsors of the bill faced criticism from the domestic and international rights community, they replied that it was more of a preventive measure and it was not targeting any particular organizations.

In early July the Federation Council released a list of foreign organizations it plans to declare 'undesirable'. The 12 entries in the document include the National Endowment for Democracy, the Soros Foundation, Freedom House and other major US-sponsored groups as well as two Ukrainian organizations.

 [return to Contents]

#7
Washington Post
July 29, 2015
Editorial
Vladimir Putin is suffocating his own nation

IN THE tumult and uncertainty that marked Russia after the Soviet Union imploded, when the state was weak and many institutions tottering, a vital lifeline was extended from the West. The U.S. government, as well as foundations and philanthropies, responded generously. The financier George Soros, through his Open Society Foundations, provided small grants that sustained many impoverished scientists. The MacArthur Foundation and the National Endowment for Democracy (NED) were vital sources of support to civil society, education and human rights.

Now, President Vladimir Putin is forcing these organizations out of Russia, using law enforcement and a parliament that he controls. Mr. Putin's larger target is to destroy civil society, that vital two-way link in any democracy between the rulers and the ruled. The latest move, announced Tuesday, is to declare the NED an "undesirable" organization under the terms of a law that Mr. Putin signed in May. The law bans groups from abroad who are deemed a "threat to the foundations of the constitutional system of the Russian Federation, its defense capabilities and its national security."

The charge against the NED is patently ridiculous. The NED's grantees in Russia last year ran the gamut of civil society. They advocated transparency in public affairs, fought corruption and promoted human rights, freedom of information and freedom of association, among other things. All these activities make for a healthy democracy but are seen as threatening from the Kremlin's ramparts.

The new law on "undesirables" comes in addition to one signed in 2012 that gave authorities the power to declare organizations "foreign agents" if they engaged in any kind of politics and receive money from abroad. The designation, from the Stalin era, implies espionage. While the NED is the first organization to be labeled "undesirable," on July 5, the Dynasty Foundation, which had provided millions of dollars for science and education in Russia, reported that it was closing after being labeled a "foreign agent."

Others are feeling the chill. On July 24, the Charles Stewart Mott Foundation of Flint, Mich., an independent, private philanthropy that had supported community education in Russia and contributed more than $25 million since the early 1990s, announced that it would no longer support organizations in Russia. The Federation Council, Russia's upper house of parliament, had put the foundation on a list of potentially undesirable organizations that was submitted to authorities. On July 21, the MacArthur Foundation, which had provided more than $173 million in grants in Russia since 1992 to further higher education, advance human rights and combat nuclear proliferation, said that it was closing its office in Moscow. MacArthur had also been put on parliament's hit list.

Mr. Putin fears competition, opposition and any cry of dissent. In pursuit of absolute power, he is suffocating his own society.

 [return to Contents]

 #8
Washington Post
July 29, 2015
Russia's crackdown on civil society shows the regime's weakness
By Carl Gershman
Carl Gershman is president of the National Endowment for Democracy.

Russia's newest anti-NGO law, under which the National Endowment for Democracy on Tuesday was declared an "undesirable organization" prohibited from operating in Russia, is the latest evidence that the regime of President Vladimir Putin faces a worsening crisis of political legitimacy. Putin may claim that the National Endowment for Democracy and other nongovernmental organizations are "a threat to Russia's basic constitutional order," and his labeling them as dangerous enemies, along with the Russian democrats he calls "national traitors," is his typical way of rallying political support by appealing to nationalist fears and hostilities. But it is the regime itself that has been undermining Russia's constitutional order through repression, corruption and international aggression; and the pressures are now building toward what many in Russia believe is a major political turning point.

Putin rose to power in 1999 on a wave of anti-Chechen hysteria, but it was steady economic growth over the next decade fueled by rising oil prices that accounted for his popularity. Now that growth has come to a screeching halt, and the gross domestic product could decline by as much as 8 percent this year, according to economist Anders Aslund.

The economic crisis is beginning to be felt at the local level. Real wages fell by 9 percent in the first quarter of 2015, and social spending on health and pensions has been cut sharply, even as military spending has continued to increase. With Russia's foreign debt of $570 billion exceeding its $157 billion in liquid reserves by more than three times, Russia faces the danger of bankruptcy, especially with Western financial sanctions cutting off Russia's access to international funding.

The crisis's political repercussions could grow because of rampant elite corruption, which is essential to the functioning of Russia's system of power. An example was the corruption surrounding the Sochi Olympics that was the subject of an extensive report by Boris Nemtsov, the opposition leader who was murdered in February just steps from the Kremlin. According to Nemtsov, the majority of construction contracts were awarded to companies with ties to Putin, and all were dramatically inflated to several times the international average for similar projects. Karen Dawisha, a leading expert on elite corruption in Russia, estimates Putin's worth, conservatively, at $40 billion.

In addition to economic crisis and elite corruption, Russia's war in Ukraine is a third factor undermining the regime's political legitimacy. Even without meaningful assistance from the United States and Europe, the Ukrainians have fought the Russians to a standstill in eastern Ukraine, and this is a far cry from the decisive victory that Putin predicted when he annexed Crimea last year. Putin has tried to hide the casualties Russia has suffered in the conflict, knowing that the war does not enjoy widespread popular support. He also knows from Russia's experience in Afghanistan and other conflicts in Russian history that failure in war could threaten the regime's survival.

The regime's fear over its own lack of political legitimacy is apparent in the lengths to which it is going to prevent any electoral competition. Not only has Russia moved up the date of 2016 national parliamentary elections , making it more difficult for the opposition to challenge incumbent officeholders, but also it is cracking down on three regional parliamentary campaigns in which a coalition of democratic opposition parties are trying to win seats in elections to be held in September. In Novosibirsk, three opposition activists are on a hunger strike protesting authorities' decision to exclude them from the ballot. In Kostroma, the opposition campaign manager is in jail and faces politically-motivated criminal charges. These efforts to deny the opposition a chance to win a handful of seats in Russia's equivalent of a state legislature demonstrate that the regime sees any alternative to its own politics as a serious threat that must be eliminated.

This is the context in which Russia has passed the law prohibiting Russian democrats from getting any international assistance to promote freedom of expression, the rule of law and a democratic political system. Significantly, democrats have not backed down. They have not been deterred by the criminal penalties contained in the "foreign agents" law and other repressive laws. They know that these laws contradict international law, which allows for such aid, and that the laws are meant to block a better future for Russia. They are not even frightened by the threat of being killed, which has already been the fate of Nemtsov and other Russian democrats.

The least the United States and other Western democracies can do is to continue to provide moral and political solidarity to such brave people. It serves not just their interests but our own as well.

[return to Contents] 

 #9
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
July 28, 2015
Press Digest: Navalny-led coalition barred from running in Novosibirsk poll
RBTH presents a selection of views from leading Russian media on international events, featuring reports on local authorities' refusal to register the RPR-Parnas opposition coalition in regional elections in Novosibirsk, and the deployment of nuclear bombers in Crimea, as well as an interview with former deputy Pentagon chief Paul Wolfowitz.
Yekaterina Sinelschikova, RBTH

Local authorities bar Democratic Coalition from Novosibirsk elections

The Novosibirsk election commission has refused to register the party list of the Democratic Coalition (based on the RPR-Parnas alliance) for regional elections, writes the centrist daily Nezavisimaya Gazeta.

The electoral commission dismissed the collected signatures as "fabricated," even though - as the head of the Democratic Coalition's campaign in Novosibirsk, Leonid Volkov, pointed out - handwriting experts failed to find even a single fabricated signature.

The coalition, an alliance of opposition parties RPR and Parnas, is led by opposition figurehead, politician and lawyer Alexei Navalny and former prime minister Mikhail Kasyanov.

The liberals see what happened as a purely political decision. For example, signatures were rejected as defective if the passport of the signatory was not listed in the database of the Federal Migration Service.

But Volkov claims that the signatures were checked against one-year-old databases - so that the system did not see any documents issued less than a year ago. The opposition would-be candidates have already announced that, in any case, they will appeal the decision of the electoral commission to higher authorities and courts.

Experts, however, believe that a chance still remains for the democrats to participate in the federal election, since previously Moscow strongly recommended the regional authorities not to hinder RPR-Parnas from being registered.

According to the head of the Political Expert Group, Konstantin Kalachev, Novosibirsk did not heed these recommendations.

Alexei Makarkin, first vice-president of the Center for Political Technologies, believes that the watchdog logic of regional authorities has triumphed there, and if the Kremlin chooses not to allow the opposition to the State Duma elections, "it can come up with any reasons, for example, to revoke the party registration."
 
Former deputy Pentagon chief Paul Wolfowitz gives exclusive interview

The news website Gazeta.ru has published an interview with former head of the World Bank and ex-Pentagon deputy chief Paul Wolfowitz.

"I believed that Russia was becoming part of the West, since Russia is largely a European country <...>. However, what is happening today is a kind of revival of the 'Cold War,'" said Wolfowitz.

According to him, avoiding a new "Cold War" is only possible if Russia returns to the path on which it was in the 1990s - to the path of democratic reforms, integration into European institutions and compliance with the security treaties that it concluded.

However, Wolfowitz believes the goal of Russian policy is now to destabilize Ukraine as a warning to those who think about removing corrupt dictators from power, as Ukrainians did a year ago.

Answering a question from the website about what he thinks of the idea of supplying lethal weapons to Ukraine, the Pentagon's former deputy chief said: "I think this is an important principle that people are willing to fight for their freedom and independence. And they must have the means for doing this."

Wolfowitz pointed out that the ceasefire currently in force in eastern Ukraine is not a genuine truce, and if the strengthening of Ukrainian military power will provide a real truce, it is good for Ukraine to have such a lever [lethal weapons].

As for the partnership between Russia and the United States in the fight against the Islamic State (ISIS) radical militant group, Wolfowitz noted that it needs a fundamental change in Russia's approach to Syria.
 
Russia will not deploy nuclear bombers in Crimea

The Russian Defense Ministry has officially abandoned plans to deploy a squadron of Tu-22M3 long-range bombers in Crimea, the daily tabloid Moskovsky Komsomolets reports, even though the idea of relocating bombers to Crimea has repeatedly been voiced by sources in the Defense Ministry and even the Foreign Ministry, the newspaper reminds its readers.

According to some experts, from Crimea the Tu-22M3 could reach NATO bases in Eastern and Southern Europe, and virtually anywhere in Western Europe. Therefore,   the deployment of strategic bombers in Crimea could serve as a real deterrent for adversaries of Russia, writes Moskovsky Komsomolets.

At the same time, Viktor Murakhovsky, a military expert and the editor-in-chief of the Arsenal Otechestva military magazine, told the newspaper that there is really no need to place the Tu-22M3 in Crimea.

"This is an operational-strategic-level aircraft, it can operate from its bases in central Russia," he said. But the main threat is that if the strategic bombers are placed in Crimea, they will immediately fall under the tactical resources of NATO (for example, the naval forces in the Black Sea region).

 [return to Contents] 

 #10
Vedomosti
July 13, 2015
Russian opposition politician calls on people to prepare for "life after Putin"
Leonid Gozman: "Take next logical step. Politician Leonid Gozman on how Vladimir Putin's departure should be open demand for all who disagree with his course"

The Russian intelligentsia feels comfortable in a detached, expert position - observation is rarely followed by action or even what would appear to be the inevitable conclusions.

For the minority of the population who are not duped by official propaganda, the assertion that the country is advancing by seven-league steps towards a full-scale disaster has long been a truism. There are arguments about the time scale - in the coming months or somewhere around the year 2024. There are arguments about the scenario - a palace coup with diehard fascists coming to power, or economic mutinies in the regions, with people initially appealing to Putin as a protector but later demanding reprisals against him, or, finally, many years of stagnation commentating in total collapse. And so on.

Authoritarian systems, as history shows, can be replaced bloodlessly. But here a necessary condition is the readiness of the top people in the regime to join in this process and cooperate with the forces that will take their place. Only then is it possible to have either a bloodless reform or the transfer of power to a person who will conduct that reform.

Readiness is not necessarily synonymous with desire. Jaruzelski or Pinochet can hardly have been so very eager to renounce power. Readiness is determined by an understanding that it is impossible and ruinous to the country and/or oneself personally to continue the former course. [Czar] Alexander II, when asked at his father's funeral whether he really intends to abolish serfdom, replied that it must be abolished from above before it abolishes itself from below. He understood that he was not choosing between a more or less effective or morally justified system but between reform and a new Pugachev [rebellion]. (Incidentally, in 2011, the year of the 150th anniversary of the emancipation of the peasants, the Right Cause party, of which the author was co-chairman at the time, was unable to hang banners in Moscow quoting that remark of the emperor's - all the advertising agencies refused point-blank: they told us that everyone would understand what we were trying to say).

It is not clear whether the present Russian leadership understands the need for change. There is more evidence that they think it is only necessary to wait for their enemies' bodies to float down the river. But even if, far away from the television cameras, they realize what they have come to, that is not enough.

Of course, with these ratings and with this kind of television Putin can do anything. He could come out tomorrow and declare America a friend and China or Honduras an enemy. Kiselev could turn not the United States, but ISIL or Zimbabwe into radioactive ash [alluding to remark made by influential journalist Dmitriy Kiselev in March 2014 that Russia could turn the United States into radioactive ash].

But there are also internal limitations. Apparently Putin believes his own statements, which means that it would be extremely difficult for him to change course. Look how sincere he is when he talks about American foundations that help our students to grants. These are not the routine mantras about our love of peace, which apparently he himself is bored of uttering.

Furthermore he has no way out of the impasse into which he has driven himself and all of us. The Ukrainian adventure must end in a visible victory analogous to the banner over the Reichstag, otherwise he will be removed - the regime could not withstand disappointment in its personification. The palaces and much else would come to light and it would no longer be a question of remaining in power but of his freedom or even his life.

It would have been possible to declare a complete and final victory after Crimea - to receive a parade there, show mercy towards the vanquished (do you remember his instruction to [Defence Minister Sergey] Shoygu to treat with the utmost respect the Ukrainian military symbols that fell into the hands of the polite people [catchphrase for anonymous alleged Russians who turned up in Crimea early in the conflict]?). But the president believed his experts, whose quality is systematically and constantly deteriorating, when they told him that Ukraine did not have armed forces and, most important, would not have them in the foreseeable future, people in Donbass [Donets Basin] would greet us as liberators, Ukraine would collapse, and the West, as is traditional, would get used to the idea. It all turned out the other way round. And now [Ukrainian President Petro] Poroshenko's standard cannot be seen at the foot of the Mausoleum [in Red Square]. Compliance with the Minsk accords obviously does not constitute a visible victory. What is left? Either the fall of the Kiev regime - a new Maydan and the removal of Poroshenko and Yatsenyuk from power, no matter who takes their place, or else an actual military victory. But apparently things in Kiev may be difficult but they are stable, and even a series of "shameful defeats" is not going to provoke a new revolution. Only a land corridor to Crimea would be an obvious military victory. But that means the tightening of sanctions if not actually war with the West. Maybe Putin himself regrets that he did not stop immediately after Crimea. But it is too late.

The world will never trust him again. Of course, if he changes his rhetoric, or better still his policy, much will outwardly settle down, but they still will not trust him. And that means that the new arms race that has already begun will continue. And the problem here is not only that for Russia, as at one time for the Soviet Union, this is an unbearable burden. The arms race combined with an archaic and aggressive picture of the world increases the risk of war. It is no accident that our aircraft are increasingly frequently flying in dangerous proximity to NATO's borders. Sooner or later a duty officer in NATO's air defence forces will press the button. In short, the threat of war, the one they used to threaten the children with, but they were not afraid, is becoming very real.

If the above is even half true, we are obligated to note that Putin is leading the country along a disastrous course, that he is unwilling and unable to turn aside from it, and that the most influential forces on the planet do not regard him as a partner. And that means that his departure is perhaps not a sufficient but a necessary condition for preventing national or even global disaster.

An understanding of this should not lead to the renunciation of civil, political and still less professional activity, just as an awareness of the inevitability of death does not remove the need to clean one's teeth. It is necessary to teach, to treat the sick and build under any regime, and also to look for lost children, put on shows and write books. Political activity is not pointless either - of course the regime cannot be changed through elections, but the actual process of elections promotes the growth of activity among citizens and - in the broadest sense of the word - enlightenment.

Many people repeat like an incantation: "This cannot go on long." Why not? First, what is "not long" for history may well exceed the length of a human life. Second, neither the soft nor the hard ending of a regime's existence is determined directly either by oil prices, or by the degree of the country's isolation, or even by the depletion of financial resources. What matters here is the gap between expectations and reality. For instance, after the collapse of the rouble, prices increased not by a factor of two, but by much less, and there were not even any waiting lines in shops. That is what people were expecting, and when it did not happen, people felt relieved. Consequently no grievances arose against the bosses. And also, a large proportion of our fellow citizens see no alternative - the propagandists are not given awards for nothing. Furthermore, anyone who finds it intolerable can leave - in the medium term that also helps to strengthen the regime.

Incidentally, many people believe, not without grounds, that in the event of Putin's departure things will get even worse - the chances of broad public support, which a hypothetical usurper needs no less than a legitimately elected candidate, are higher today not for a democrat but for a national socialist. But since the present regime is systematically destroying all the institutions that still survive, the longer the regime goes on existing, the longer and more terrible will be this probable period of the fascist successor.

An understanding of the need for Putin's speedy departure certainly does not mean refusing to recognize his merits. It is a question of the future, which, with him, appears extremely dangerous.

The question is, what is to be done. He will not lose the elections. We already had a revolution - for 100 years we have been unable to get over it!

Nonetheless, certain steps seem obvious.

First, his departure should become a solid, open demand among all those who do not like the current direction. One must take the next logical step. If things are hopeless with him, we must try it without him. The need to replace the top man must be explained to people, and not in our own forums, where everything is already clear to the listeners and readers, but in other, hostile ones. An authoritarian ruler whose departure is demanded by a significant proportion of the population will not stay long. And the level of his support should not be overestimated - even for the rallies, despite the notorious 89 per cent [popularity rating], the authorities are obligated to recruit public sector workers, and the 89 per cent understand perfectly well about corruption and about the authorities' fatherly concern. And I, for instance, have never once met hostility in the streets because I was critical of the national leader on the federal TV channels.

Second, it is necessary to try to convince the public of the need for security guarantees for the president himself and his closest staffers and family. Irrespective of whether or not he is guilty of the infringements attributed to him, a peaceful handover is in the common interest. And the only chance of that is if the number one is not driven into a corner. Unfortunately the examples of Pinochet and Jaruzelski are not inspiring - they were also promised security. So the task is even more difficult: guarantees - international, clearly - must be formulated that can be trusted despite negative experience.

Third, and this is a job directly for the intelligentsia, we must prepare for life after Putin. I am talking about the formulation of programmes for reform of the economy, the social sphere, and the political system analogous in the level of detail to those that the Gaydar team had in the early 1990s, and most important, preparing people. A bit more television madness, along with governmental efforts in the sphere of education and culture, and our fellow citizens will think the Earth is supported by three whales [as in Russian mythology] (many people already think so). And with that picture of the world, the country will not be able to return to a normal path. Furthermore people are needed who will be able to take responsibility for the country - thousands and thousands of brave, intelligent, educated people are needed. They must be prepared. And if official higher educational establishments are doing this less and less, then it must be done by other means. University lecture rooms do not have the monopoly on enlightenment or education.

Fourth, it is necessary to develop and support everything that creates the demand for democracy. Civil institutions within which different, non-authoritarian patterns of relationships between people are shaped. Political structures that promote the formation among citizens of a sense of involvement in their country's future. High-tech whose manufacturers and developers, because of their objective involvement in worldwide trends, do not want to march in formation and who demand not a glass of vodka after their shift, but respect for their professionalism and human dignity.

Fifth and last, moral resistance is required to lies and hypocrisy, which have apparently already surpassed the Soviet level. After all, the nightmare of the story about the king with no clothes is not that people saw everything and were afraid to say - that is only half the problem - but that they really did see their ruler's new clothes. And somebody must tell the truth, then it will become obvious to others. At one time, Soviet dissidents did this. Today it is by no means as dangerous as back then, it certainly does not require heroism. But for millions of people who understand everything but who are in information isolation it is extremely important to know that not everyone has surrendered yet, not everyone is intimidated, not everyone has left, and therefore there is a chance of living to see new times.

 [return to Contents] 

 
#11
Russia steps up struggle against right-wing radicals
By Lyudmila Alexandrova

MOSCOW, July 28. /TASS/. When he heard the judge declare he had been sentenced to life in prison, Ilya Goryachev, the leader of the legal organization Russian Image and illegal militant group of Russian nationalists BORN lost consciousness. In the meantime, he can hardly be called a nervous person: BORN is notorious for multiple killings of migrants and anti-fascists. Goryachev himself was accused of five murders.

The BORN case has proved a very high profile affair. According to the investigators, in 2008 Goryachev and Nikita Tikhonov, who is already serving a life sentence, founded an extremist armed group called BORN. It has been found responsible for ideologically and ethnically motivated hate murders and encroachments on the lives of law enforcers in retaliation for their professional activities, the prosecution said. It is noteworthy that during the investigation the group's members testified against each other, trying to put most of the blame on their former associates.

The law enforcers have noticeably stepped up struggle against right-wing radicals, the centre of information and analysis Sova said in its report entitled Xenophobia and Radical Nationalism and Resistance to them in Russia in the First Half of 2015.

"According to our sources the ultra-rights' criminal activity in 2015 was considerably lower than a year earlier," the report says. "In the first half of 2015 no less than 37 people suffered from xenophobic and neo-Nazi violence. Four of them died. Two received serious murder threats. In the first half of 2014 23 people were killed and 86 others injured and one was threatened with murder."

Criminal prosecution of the most active leaders of oppositional nationalist organizations was one of the major factors that influenced the ultra-rights' public policies in the first half of 2015. The law enforcers' pressure on nationalists considerably eased their public activity. Traditional street processions and rallies failed to gather even half of the usual number of demonstrators. Not a single ethnic conflict flared up and pressures by the authorities were the most widely discussed theme.

Whereas before the nationalists acted on their words and mounted attacks on migrants and other minorities, these days they prefer to focus on combat training. There has been noticeable growth in the number of nationalists-affiliated permanent clubs offering combat instruction to any outsider. Experts say that on the websites of ultra-right movements invitations to join knife and hand-to-hand fight clubs and groups receiving instruction in urban and forest battle tactics and the handling of firearms are ever more frequent. It is beyond doubt that this type of training is meant for future internal political use.

"It is a rather alarming sign the nationalists are no longer in the mood of attending rallies. They prefer to play war running about with firearms in hand," the RBC Daily quotes the director of the Sova centre, member of the presidential council for human rights Aleksandr Verkhovsky as saying.

Obviously the authorities regard this movement as a threat, the first vice-president of the Political Technologies Centre, Aleksey Makarkin, told TASS. "Attitudes to them varied at different moments in time. There was a period when one had the impression there are good right-wing radicals and bad right-wing radicals. The bad radicals are to be fought against and good radicals, to be made friends with. But then the tragic affair involving the Russian Image organization showed that the people who are considered as good right-wing radicals may prove murderers and there is nothing moderate about them at all."

Makarkin believes that these illusions are now all gone.

"The harsh sentences pronounced in the BORN case are a clear sign the authorities are determined to offer firm resistance to such organizations and personalities," he said.
He remarks, though, the question is to what degree the official policies in this respect are a matter of consensus.

"There is the official government policy, there have been harsh court sentences passed on those who commit political murders, including murders of judges. On the other hand, individual personalities within the law enforcement adhere to different views. Some argue that if the ultra-rights go to war with the left-wing radicals, the ultra-rights are more preferable. They are just to be put on the right track and reformatted, but not persecuted."

The opposition's attitude to the nationalists is dual, too, Makarkin added.

 [return to Contents] 

 #12
Wall Street Journal
July 29, 2015
Ruble's Slide Is Mixed News For Russia
Ruble's decline is a boon to Russia's budget, but weighs on consumer demand
By ANDREY OSTROUKH

MOSCOW-The ruble fell to its weakest levels in more than four months Tuesday, as the price of Russia's key export, oil, continued to slide.

The dollar rose to 60.47 rubles, a level last seen on March 20, gaining nearly 7% in just one week on expectations that the U.S. Federal Reserve will increase rates later this year. Late in New York, it traded at 59.92 rubles.

The ruble's decline is a boon to Russia's budget, as it helps shore up the value of ruble revenues derived from oil exports.

But it also weighs on consumer demand, a key driver of the economy.

In a research note, analysts at Raiffeisen Bank, citing a weak ruble and declining real disposable income, said the recession that hit Russia in the first half of the year is likely to continue in the third quarter.

The fall in the currency also carries with it inflationary risks that have limited the scale of monetary easing by the Bank of Russia so far this year. The central bank is set to meet on interest rates again on Friday.

 [return to Contents] 

 #13
Deutsche Welle
July 28, 2015
Investors lose interest in Russia

Global investment funds are turning increasingly skeptical about Russia's economic prospects, as investors show less interest in Russian equities. The "BRIC" investment idea is also no longer attractive.

The news came from the United States and hit big waves in Russia, but grabbed little attention in Germany: The Templeton Russia and East European Fund, a US investment fund founded 20 years ago by legendary portfolio manager and emerging markets expert Mark Mobius, had announced its liquidation.

The announcement marks the dissolution of a fund which identified the potential of the Russian stock market long before the hype around Russia and other BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) took hold among small investors worldwide.

Risks outweigh

But the hype has now evaporated. It is felt not only by the US fund Franklin Templeton Investments, which is shuttering its Russia fund due to a lack of investor interest. In Germany, too, the industry is turning away from the former stock market favorites. "The euphoria surrounding BRIC is over," Feri EuroRating Services, a European rating agency, stated in a press release as early as a year ago.

Christian Michel, a capital markets expert at Feri EuroRating, told DW that "at present, emerging market funds are seeing more outflows than inflows." As far as Russian equities are concerned, Michel noted, many investors got out of them in mid-2014.

"At the moment, the Russian market is unappealing for an overwhelming majority of investors, as the risks outweigh the benefits," the expert said, referring both to the political risks such as the Ukraine conflict and Western sanctions, as well as the economic risks related to the deep recession the Russian economy currently finds itself in.

China and India remain attractive

The attractiveness of investment funds focused on Russia and BRIC has declined significantly in recent years, said Peter Schille, founder and head of the German financial news portal "finanzen.net." Schiller told DW that the number of people seeking information about BRIC-focused funds has dipped by about a fifth since 2011, while the corresponding figure for Russia-focused funds has more than halved.

At the same time, there has been a growing interest in investment funds in general, Schiller pointed out, adding that there has also been a surge in the attractiveness of China and India. "While the idea of investing in the entire BRIC grouping lost favor, that's not the case about investing in China and India individually, and information about both of them is increasingly sought after," the analyst said.

Savers exit, speculators enter

In Russia, however, the information that is frequently sought after by the users of the "finanzen.net" website involves the indices of the Moscow stock market, the ruble's exchange rate and individual stock movements, noted Schille. "The number of visits to our site seeking information on the RTS index has nearly tripled since 2011."

These trends suggest that the Russian market is mainly drawing traders and speculators, who aim to benefit from the short-term fluctuations of individual securities and currencies, instead of long-term investors, the expert underlined.

Nevertheless, German retail investors looking for a Russia-focused investment fund still have a wide range of options. The Internet bank comdirekt, for instance, offers its customers around 11,500 different equity funds, out of which 68 deal exclusively with Russia equities. And one of them is DWS Russia.

Losses for long-term investors

DWS is Deutsche Bank's asset management arm, and DWS Russia has assets worth 132 million euros under its management, according to information on the fund's website. That figure is far greater than the $58 million, which the Templeton Russia and East European Fund was forced to liquidate due to its small volume.

By comparison, DWS India manages 177 million euros, while DWS Invest Chinese Equities has assets worth 216 million euros under its management and DWS Germany some 5.5 billion euros.

DWS Russia was launched in April 2002. Those who invested in the fund back then have seen the value of their stake jump by 55 percent. However, investors who joined later had to suffer losses. People who invested in the fund three years ago have seen the value of their investment fall by about 21 percent, and after 10 years of holding time the loss is expected to be more than 22 percent.

In March 2005, DWS also set up a BRIC fund named DWS Invest BRIC Plus. In May 2013, it was renamed DWS Invest Global Emerging Markets Equities. At the same time, it also changed its investment policy and now invests in emerging markets across the world.

DWS published an article titled "The end of BRIC myth?" on its website in May 2015. A few years ago, BRIC countries were regarded as icons of economic growth, but enthusiasm has sharply slid in recent times, the article noted.

However, for those actively seeking potential investment opportunities in these markets, they still can find many attractive opportunities, the fund underlines, adding: "Russia is probably not the place where these opportunities are currently present."

 [return to Contents] 

 #14
Business New Europe
www.bne.eu
July 28, 2015
Chart - Just 1 in 10 Russians favour cooperation with Nato
Francesca Moll in London
[Chart here http://www.bne.eu/content/story/bnechart-just-1-10-russians-favour-cooperation-nato]

Just one in ten Russians believe their country should cooperate with Nato, according to a recent survey by the Russian Public Opinion Research Centre (WCIOM).

A preference for Eastern-led organisations emerged from the study, in which a majority of Russians (54%) believe that cooperation with the BRICS nations (which also include Brazil, India, China and South Africa) is the most beneficial for Russia. The Eurasian Economic Union (EEU) was the next most popular option, at 36%. By contrast, only 11% believe that Russia should work more closely with Nato, and 19% would like to see closer ties with the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE).

This is reflected in how these organisations are perceived by respondents. 53% view the BRICS positively, while PACE trails behind in Russian sympathies at 17%, while 46% explicitly disapprove.

In the wake of the latest BRICS summit in the Russian city of Ufa, this survey suggests that alternative political and economic groupings are gaining legitimacy disproportionate to the Western media attention that they receive. But Western-led economic groupings such as the G7 and G8 continue to dominate the international political scene in the minds of many.

29% reacted favourably to the G20, but this is only 2pp more than those who expressed the opposite opinion. Negative views outweighed the positive when it came to the G7 and G8, at 37% and 27%, respectively.

Very different answers emerge when asked about current political realities, though. The G7/G8 and the World Trade Organization (WTO) are seen as the most powerful international players, with 46% and 44% of those surveyed thinking they had a strong influence on world affairs.

The BRICS group and the G20 are seen as less influential, with only 38% and 37% thinking they had a significant impact. This is still greater than the number that view these organisations as weak - 29% for BRICS and 25% for the G20.

 [return to Contents] 

 #15
www.rt.com
July 29, 2015
Russians' attitude to US improved slightly, latest poll shows

Russian citizens claim that their attitude to the United States, the EU and Ukraine has become slightly better, but remains very low as anti-Russian sanctions remain in place.

According to the research held by the Levada Center in mid-July 70 percent of Russians currently have negative sentiments about the United States, which is 11 percent points less than in January this year when anti-Americanism in the Russian society hit its maximum. Only 19 percent of responders confessed positive attitude towards the US in July.

The Russians' view of other nations that they saw as hostile in the beginning of the year has also improved. Sixty percent of responders claimed to dislike Ukraine (against 64 percent in January) and 62 percent said they disliked the European Union (71 percent in January). The share of those who had positive feelings about the European countries rose from 20 percent in January to 26 percent in mid-July.

China and Belarus topped the list of Russians' favorably-viewed countries with 75 and 84 percent of positive answers respectively. Other nations in the list included Iran with 43 percent and Georgia with 45 percent (also up from 25 and 35 percent respectively in the beginning of the year).

In mid-May another Russian polling center, the VTSIOM released the results of its research according to which the USA and President Barack Obama are seen by Russians as main enemies of their country. Other entries in the list were the EU, the Kiev government and Islamic terrorists.

 [return to Contents] 

 #16
Moscow Times
July 29, 2015
Russian Defense Industry Revenues Soar Despite Western Sanctions
By Matthew Bodner

The Russian government bought defense equipment worth almost 2 trillion rubles ($33.2 billion) in 2014, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said in April.
Russia's major defense industry enterprises shrugged off Western sanctions and a Russian economic slowdown to grow their revenues rapidly in 2014, according to a new global ranking.

The Defense News Top 100 ranking is published annually and ranks the world's top arms makers by revenue. Russian firms bucked a global downward trend in defense revenues thanks to an expansion of military spending by the Russian government and increasing defense exports, which reached new highs in 2014.

The top 10 defense companies in the world were all major Western firms such as aerospace firm Lockheed Martin, maker of the new U.S. F-35 multi-role strike fighter, which reported defense revenues of over $40 billion, and Boeing - another U.S. aerospace company - with defense revenues of almost $30 billion.

But most of the Western companies saw declining revenues, as the U.S. and its NATO allies trim defense procurements. Russian firms meanwhile saw mostly double-digit revenue growth as President Vladimir Putin's 20 trillion ruble ($330 billion) military modernization drive filled order books and Russian exports reached a record-setting $13.2 billion of hardware in 2014, according to arms export agency Rosoboronexport.

The Russian government bought defense equipment worth almost 2 trillion rubles ($33.2 billion) in 2014, Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev said in April.

Procurement spending is expected to increase annually until the rearmament program is completed in 2020 - meaning that Russian defense firms should expect to continue increasing their revenues for the remainder of the decade.

How much they will rise is hard to predict. Although government expenditures are expanding, arms exports are expected to plateau as soon as next year, analysts told The Moscow Times earlier this year.
Western sanctions imposed on Russian defense firms in the wake of the downing of passenger airliner MH17 over Ukraine last summer do not appear to have had a negative impact on defense industry revenues.

The harshest measure, an EU embargo on Russia's defense sector, did not have a significant impact on export revenues, since the majority of Russian arms exports go to non-Western nations such as China, India, Algeria and Venezuela.

Financial sanctions curbed the access of Russian defense industry firms to Western capital markets, while other measures ended their ability to import advanced components and electronics from Europe. But the Russian government is pushing the defense industry to establish production of domestic alternatives, which may serve to further boost revenues for component manufacturers such as RTI and United Engine-Building Corporation, among others.

Rankings Breakdown

The 2015 Defense News Top 100 list featured seven Russian firms, all of which saw revenues rise in 2014.

Russia's highest ranked defense firm was Almaz-Antey, maker of air defense systems such as the now-infamous Buk missile systems that were allegedly used to shoot down Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 last year.

Almaz-Antey ranked 11th in this year's ranking, rising one position from a year earlier. The firm reported a 10.6 percent rise in revenue over 2013 to $9.2 billion in 2014.

The largest revenue jump for a Russian defense company was reported by Tactical Missiles Corporation, which makes air-to-air missiles for aircraft. The company's revenue from defense sales rose 48.6 percent to $2.8 billion in 2014. It ranked 31st on the list.

Russia's second-largest defense company, United Aircraft Corporation, which controls fighter jet manufacturers Sukhoi, MiG and Irkut, was ranked 14th on this year's ranking, posting revenues from defense sales of $6.24 billion, a 7 percent increase from 2013.

Russian Helicopters, a holding company that encompasses most of Russia's military and civilian helicopter producers, rose two positions in the ranking to 23rd, reporting defense revenues last year of $3.96 billion - a 16 percent increase over 2013.

United Engine-Building Corporation saw defense revenues rise 26 percent in 2014 to $3.3 billion, propelling the company up to 26th place from 34th in 2013.

Tank manufacturer Uralvagonzavod, which unveiled Russia's next-generation Armata battle tank earlier this year, ranked 52nd on the list. Its defense revenues were largely flat, rising 1 percent to $1.5 billion in 2014.

Finally, electronic components manufacturer RTI saw a 16 percent increase in defense revenues to $947 million, finishing 69th in 2014 - up 9 positions from 2013.

 [return to Contents] 

 #17
Moscow Times
July 29, 2015
Architects Clash Over Vladimir Monument

On Monday evening, Rustam Rakhmatullin, the coordinator of the social movement Archnadzor, brought together eminent architects and architecture experts to discuss the proposals to erect a 24-meter monument to Vladimir the Great in the capital. Also present was Yury Nikiforov, a representative of the Russian Society of War History, which has started an online survey asking Muscovites to choose the best location for the monument.

Concessions have been made since the initial proposal to place the monument on Vorobyovy Gory (Sparrow Hills), thus blocking the view of Moscow State University. Three locations are now in the running: on Lubyanskaya Ploshchad in front of the KGB building; in Zaryadye Park; and the current front-runner - on Borovitskaya Ploshchad, a stone's throw away from the Kremlin walls.

In a heated discussion that involved heckling, tantrums and shouting down, it was almost universally agreed that Borovitskaya Ploshchad is entirely unsuitable for the monument. In addition to obscuring the view of Dom Pashkova and potentially compromising the structural integrity of the shallow metro tunnels running underneath the square, a 24-meter structure would violate the laws safeguarding a UNESCO-approved protective belt around the Kremlin walls, within which nothing can be built that exceeds the height of any part of the Kremlin.

At the round-table discussion it was posited that further adjustments to the monument could still be made to reduce its height down to 12.5 meters if Borovitskaya Ploshchad was chosen. It was clear, however, that this change would not be enough to appease Moscow's architects, some of whom cast aspersions on the feasibility of the reduction, considering the monument is already in construction to the plans of the 330-ton original.

The online survey closes on Aug. 20, when detailed proposals regarding all three locations will be put to the Moscow City Duma for perusal. The monument, wherever its final location, will be open to the public, no doubt with great ceremony, on National Unity Day on Nov. 4.

 [return to Contents] 

 #18
Russia Insider
www.russia-insider.com
July 29, 2015
Russia Just Sent out a Message NATO Should Better Listen To
The key take away from the new official Russian naval doctrine is that Putin - together with his military men - has sent a clear message that NATO encroachment is unacceptable
The Saker

Russia has recently published her new official Naval Doctrine. The full document can be downloaded from the Presidency's website here (in Russian).

To be honest, there is nothing earth shattering in this document. The document explains the purpose of this doctrine, the missions of the Russian Navy and includes a region by region review of the challenges and opportunities for Russia on the world's oceans, including the Arctic and Antarctic regions. But there is one sentence which, I think, deserves a lot of attention.  On page 20, in the section 54 it says:

"Определяющим фактором в отношениях с НАТО остаются неприемлемость для Российской Федерации планов продвижения военной инфраструктуры альянса к ее границам и попытки придания ему глобальных функций".

Which I would translate as follows:

"A defining factor in (our) relations with NATO remains that for Russia the following is unacceptable: the alliance's plan to move its infrastructure  to the borders of Russia and the attempts to give the alliance a global role".

As somebody who has translated Russian official documents for a living for many years I can tell you that the Russians are extremely precise in their use of words and that they choice of this or that word or expression is considered very carefully, often with a maniacal attention to detail.

So when this official, President-approved, document says that it is unacceptable for Russia that NATO is trying to grant itself a global role - this is at least as official a statement as any public declaration by Foreign Minister Lavrov. Except for Lavrov was not tasked to deliver this message. Take a look at who was:
[Photo here http://russia-insider.com/en/russia-just-sent-out-message-nato-should-better-listen/ri9021]

This photo was taken on board the frigate "Admiral Gorshkov" and includes Victor Chirkov, C-in-C of the Russian Navy, Dmitri Rogozin, Deputy Prime Minister of Russia in charge of military matters, Vladimir Putin, Defense Minister Shoigu and the C-in-C of the Western Military District General Anatolii Sidorov. In other words, these are the men who would be in charge of fighting NATO should a war break-up.

There is clearly a 'message' sent here, and it is not sent to Obama, Merkel or any other western politician, nor is it sent to the public opinion of any country, but it is a message sent to those who will carefully analyze this document and this event: US and NATO defense analysts and their bosses and, for them, the message is very clear: we will not let you prevail.

I have often written here that in the Russian culture making threats is seen as a sign of weakness.  So none of the above should be seen as the Russians threatening anybody.  The recent British and US hysteria about Putin threatening the West with nuclear war is utter nonsense.

In fact, the Russian warning is clearly tied to current hostile actions by NATO, namely placing NATO forces on the Russian border and trying to become a global, planetary, police force or, better, colonial pacification and authority enforcement force.

So all the Russians are really doing is going on the record and declaring that they will oppose and resist the Empire's attempts to subdue Russia or achieve planetary hegemony.

Putin recently gave an interview to a Swiss TV channel.  To the question "do you believe that a war in Europe is possible?" Putin replied "I hope not. But I really wish that Europe would show more independence and sovereignty and was capable of defending her own national interests, the interests of her people and her countries".

I don't know about you - but I find that "I hope not" very disturbing, to say the least. Do you think that the people of Europe will ever wake up?

 [return to Contents] 

 #19
Russia Beyond the Headlines
www.rbth.ru
July 29, 2015
How effective is Russian drive to combat ISIS recruiters?
People in both Russian diplomatic circles and the security forces have been describing Islamic State (ISIS) as a "real threat" for a long time now. On Aug. 1 a hotline will start working in Russia for those whose friends or family members have joined ISIS. With experts warning that ISIS cannot be defeated with force alone, RBTH found out what else Russia is doing to counter Islamic radicals.
Yekaterina Sinelschikova, RBTH

As the Islamic State militant radical group (ISIS) continues to expand its global drive to recruit new followers and fighters to its cause, Russia has announced a new initiative that it hopes will help alert authorities to individuals that have succumbed to the lure of ISIS propaganda.

On August 1 the Russian Civic Chamber (CC) will launch a hotline for those whose relatives believe in the Islamic State ideology (the group is recognized as a terrorist organization in Russia) or, possibly, have already left to fight under its banner in Syria.

The chamber believes that currently the hotline "is a necessity." Yelena Sutormina, Chairwoman of the CC Commission on the Development of Social Diplomacy and Support for Compatriots Abroad, says that it was decided to establish the hotline after student Varvara Karaulova had tried entering Syria. In June the 19-year-old was detained on the Turkish-Syrian border and, according to an investigation, had been recruited by radical Islamists.

"Later, just recently, the Russian foreign minister announced that 2,000 former and current Russian citizens are now fighting in the ISIS army. That means there are many people," explained Sutormina, adding that "something must be done about it: Russia, as a multinational and multi-confessional country, is very attractive for ISIS militants."

The hotline will offer psychological support, as well as consultation on how to avoid falling victim to the recruiters.
 
A declining trend

In the last few months Russian mass media has been reporting more on the ISIS threat. Along with the official announcements that "there is a real ISIS presence near the Russian borders," there are also news on attempts to recruit young Muslims and migrants in the regions (ISIS offers the latter a monthly salary of 50,000 rubles, or $880).

Moreover, in June a video appeared on the internet reporting that the North Caucasus underground had sworn allegiance to Islamic State. However, according to Vitaly Naumkin, director of the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Middle Eastern Studies, "it is still to early to panic about this." Naumkin believes that the virtual "oath" does not mean that all North Caucasus groups are now controlled from one center, adding that "Russian law enforcement agencies have begun suppressing their activity more effectively."

Caucasus expert and International Crisis Group consultant Varvara Pakhomenko, meanwhile, said that if we look at the number of deaths and military clashes in Northern Caucasus, it becomes clear that recently there have been fewer incidents. According to the Kavkazsky Uzel internet publication, 1,149 people were killed or wounded in the North Caucasus in 2013, and 44 people in the second quarter of 2015.

The general decline is due to two factors, said Pakhomenko. Firstly, it is true that a substantial number of militants and radical Islamists have already left for Syria. Secondly, many militants and potential militants were killed, pushed out of the country or arrested on the eve of the Sochi Olympics.
 
Muslim youth needs a viable alternative

Experts admit that the main approach to fighting the radicals in Russia has been with force. But limiting the fight merely to combat operations is ineffective, "though it is definitely necessary," says Sergei Markedonov, Caucasus expert and professor at the department of Foreign Regional Studies and Foreign Policy at the Russian State University for the Humanities.

"It seems that these radicals are disappearing, but three or four years pass and they start reappearing because the environment that creates them is still there. There needs to be more 'soft power.'" In particular, Markedonov believes that the tactic of "working with brains" is much more important. Therefore, people who deal with Islam must be involved. They are the ones who have to create a project that would serve as an alternative for young people, for their careers and future.

When it comes to people in Muslim communities themselves, a "soft power" approach is favored. "We don't go out and catch anyone," said Rushan Abbyasov, First Deputy Chairman of the Russian Council of Muftis. "We try to enlighten, while it is the special forces who identity and apprehend the suspects."

The communities usually do not see the recruiters, who know that their views are unacceptable there. Yet there is still no talk of any new Islamic project among the country's Muslim segment that would seek to counter the influence of ISIS. It is just that "people are beginning to distinguish white from black," while the communities are focused on preaching sermons, said Abbyasov.
 
'Having the possibility to return'

Several years ago "soft power" methods were used on those who had already been on the side of militant radicals, said Varvara Pakhomenko. In 2010 there was a committee dedicated to helping militants readapt.

"Many of them had not had time to commit serious crimes. They had made a mistake and were given a chance to return to a peaceful life. It is very important to have the opportunity to return. People would just surrender," she said. But with the preparations for the Olympics the dialogue ended, the committee stopped working and the harsh methods only made people harder. As a result, Pakhomenko says that today the Russian republics of Dagestan and Chechnya are the main places from which recruits have gone to fight jihad in Syria.

The committee has renewed its work now, but only in the neighboring North Caucasus region of Ingushetia. "We are noticing that there are people in the government who understand the necessity of such measures," said Pakhomenko.

 [return to Contents] 

 #20
Russia Direct
www.russia-direct.org
July 28, 2015
US-Russia cooperation in space: One area not affected by sanctions
RD Interview: NASA official Bob Jacobs analyzes the current scope of U.S.-Russian collaboration in space, especially with regard to partnership with Roscosmos on the International Space Station (ISS) and plans for future missions to the moon and Mars.
By Uliana Malashenko

Despite the overhang of Western sanctions, space exploration is one area where the U.S. continues to collaborate with Russia. Ever since its shuttle program was closed down, NASA has been relying on Roscosmos to ferry its astronauts and supplies to and from the International Space Station, and those plans do not figure to change until 2024 at the earliest.

Below, Russia Direct discusses the pros and challenges of this collaboration between U.S. and Russian space agencies with Bob Jacobs, a deputy associate administrator for communications at NASA. Jacobs also shares his thoughts about potential future missions to the moon or Mars involving Russia.

Russia Direct: How do you assess the U.S.-Russia partnership in space in general today, amidst ongoing confrontation over Ukraine and the European system of international security?

Bob Jacobs: I think that the way the International Space Station was constructed and the agreement was built shows that we all depend on each other. No one country can continue to operate the International Space Station by itself. So, we need Roscosmos just like Roscosmos needs us.

We don't see a problem with this partnership at all; in fact, it's one of the few areas where our two nations agree - about the peaceful collaboration for the exploration of space. Right now, we have a Russian cosmonaut with an American astronaut doing a lot of research that's going to help us eventually to send humans to Mars. So, Russia is just as much a part of that exploration effort as is the United States.

RD: Speaking more specifically, how do you estimate your collaboration with Roscosmos?

B.J.: When we tragically lost the space shuttle Columbia, Russia stood up and took over our astronauts and delivered them to the ISS. Now the best way to send astronauts back and forth to the ISS is Soyuz. So, we are comfortable with what Roscosmos does about operating the ISS.

RD: Have the sanctions affected your cooperation with Roscomos? How do you collaborate with Roscosmos now?

B.J.: I can say that the safe operation of the ISS and peaceful space collaboration that we have between NASA and Roscosmos - those operations are the examples of what hasn't been influenced by sanctions. So, we don't expect that the sanctions will change operating the ISS.

RD: Have you ever had any negotiations with China or India about deeper collaboration than you have today?

B.J.: At the moment, NASA is forbidden by law from negotiating bilaterally, for instance, in the format of the U.S with China or NASA with the Chinese Space Agency, and discussing any type of long-term exploration plans. But the partnership, members of the ISS, can do so.

Up to now, China hasn't shown a great interest in being a part of the ISS partnership. By the way, China has its own independent space program. They have been built on the successes of the research that both the U.S. and Russia did in the earlier days of Mercury and Gemini to demonstrate orbital docking and do space walks. And then China decided to start its own space station. Now they want to go to the moon. So, I think that Chinese space program is one of national pride and it operates independently, outside the ISS.

RD: Do you think that the Chinese space program can compete with the NASA one?

B.J.: Of course, we pay attention to the Chinese space program but we tend to be focused on our own exploration efforts, which are focused on the safe and effective operation of the ISS. So, we have our own space programs to deal with and don't spend a lot of time looking over our shoulders at others.
 
RD: And what do you think about India's recent endeavors in space?

B.J.: We have cooperated with India. They have successfully sent a spacecraft to the moon, although I think its last effort got into problems once it got into orbit. There are many nations that are pushing the frontiers of space exploration and we are ready to help them with this when they are ready to do so. But we are also focused on helping American companies. For the first time we've got private space industry and they are dedicated to sending humans to the space station and returning American astronauts to U.S. soil.

RD: Let's come back to Russia. Some Russian pro-government experts, not necessarily affiliated with Roscosmos, suggest that Russia stop working with the U.S. and build its own international space station with the support of the BRICS. This would be totally separate from NASA. Do you think that it's technically possible?

B.J.: Technically, there is nothing to [prevent] Roscosmos from building a space station. But it's a decision by Roscosmos. They've been great partners as well as other nations. On the ISS, Roscosmos have been our major partner and we are going to continue this collaboration at least up to 2024.

Outside the ISS, nations have their own space programs, including Russia and the U.S. For example, we, the U.S., are going to send astronauts to Mars. If Russia has its own space plans outside the ISS, we can help Russia to achieve them.

RD: Some people in Russia argue that Roscosmos is facing a crisis and Russia's space industry is generally not in the best shape, given a lot of problems with launching satellites. How would you estimate the current technical capacity of the Russian space industry?

B.J.: We all use many similar systems and sometimes technical issues occur. For instance, Roscosmos lost the Progress. But we, in the United States, also had the SpaceX failure. But I don't think that several failures are enough to judge the capability of any nation to work on long-term space projects successfully.

Roscosmos is going through a big transition to private companies, which Russia wants to have with government organizations under the same umbrella. When I met Igor Komarov, the new head of Roscosmos, he seemed to be focused on the successful executing of the Russian space program.

But their difficulties with the transition to private companies are pretty much the same as ours. It just demonstrates that you never can be 95 percent sure - you must be 100 percent sure that you are right every time you have a launch.

RD: Let's talk about the SpaceX project. You had one unsuccessful Falcon launch. What has changed after that? How have the failure affected your plans about manned launches of Falcons?

B.J.: The agreement that we have demonstrates that each company must meet a certain number of milestones. The accident that involved the commercial cargo flight was unfortunate and nobody wanted that to happen. But we don't think that this accident will have major impact on the development of the commercial crew capacity.

We are in touch with Elon Musk [the CEO of SpaceX and Tesla Motors] and we have videoconferences with him regarding what he found out about the failure. But we've already had many more successful launches.

It was one of those unfortunate accidents which happen from time to time in the space industry. We have enough time to solve the problem and come back to SpaceX flights.

RD: How would you see the odds of the Russian space program and, particularly, its plans to go to the moon amidst the lack of funding, the country's tight budget and, more importantly, the sanctions?

B.J.: I don't see any reasons why Russia couldn't do that. In fact, we can provide our assistance to Russia and a couple of other nations who are interested in exploring the moon. We know that the moon is a great target for exploration. We've had our Apollo program in the 1960s.

In fact, we've never left the moon and we have been looking for water and other materials that can be found on the lunar surface. We are prepared to help not just all nations but also Roscosmos and commercial providers to get to the moon when they are ready.

But at the same time, we are focused on getting beyond the moon. We want to send our astronauts further in space than ever before. We are getting all the information that we can to send our astronauts to Mars. So, other nations are excited about the moon, we are excited for them but we are focused on Mars.

RD: It may seem that you've already negotiated the spheres of the influence in space with Russia. You're going to Mars, you're working very closely with the European Space Agency while Russia, China and India are going to the moon.

B.J.: All depends on the individual nation, its desires and its space program. Roscosmos is cooperating with the European Space Agency on the Mars lander. We are in the process of building the Mars 2020 robot.

I think that the international community is very interested in Mars and I think that Mars will be their next target. But a lot of these nations have to explore lower orbits.

We've already done that at the time of the Apollo program. We are still interested in exploring the lunar surface but we don't have to send our astronauts back to the moon.

However, there is a real scientific interest in going to the moon. They [Russians] say that they are interested in it because of its natural resources. Moreover, there is a lot more water on the moon than we thought at the time of the Apollo program. Also, the moon is not as far as Mars. It will take seven months to get there and, then, seven months to come back.  

Russian cosmonauts and U.S. astronauts are working together on the ISS, exploring how the long-term exposure to space may affect a human body and, so, we'll know how to medicate this. This knowledge can be used for the long-term exploration of the moon's surface as well as for flights to Mars.

RD: How do you see the partnership with Russia over the next five years?

B.J.: Certainly, I see no problem there because the original international agreement says nations are collaborating with each other on the ISS through 2024 and then we'll see where space exploration will lead us.

Now we are focused on operating the ISS, its support and collaboration on this project. In the future we are going to explore the solar system, we are interested in this type of missions. But again, Roscosmos has always been a reliable partner.

RD: I have one more question and I think that the Russian audience is interested in it. The Malaysian Boeing crash of MH17 is on the news now all over the world because of the international discussion on its investigation. Several days after the plane had been shot down, U.S. officials said that that have some satellite images of this crash but they have never been published. Therefore, Russian experts say that those shots don't exist. Does NASA have those shots?

B.J.: We are not aware of any satellite images. People have this mistaken idea that the ISS is able to see an entire part of the world but they don't realize how big the world is and how big space is.

At the time, the ISS wasn't flying there. Also, the ISS doesn't take pictures 24 hours a day in resolution that would allow you to see ground features like that.

People get excited about what they see in science fiction. I'm sure that if those images existed, they would have been published. We certainly don't have those images.

 [return to Contents] 

 #21
Bloomberg
July 28, 2015
Putin Hurts a Think Tank by Not Banning It
By Leonid Bershidsky

Russian President Vladimir Putin is nothing if not cunning when it comes to dealing with his adversaries. When he signed a law allowing the government to ban any nongovernmental organization deemed "undesirable," it was clear some foreign NGOs would suffer. What was less obvious -- though, in hindsight, inevitable -- is that organizations would start getting flak in the West for not having the law applied to them.

The Daily Beast published an article Monday by James Kirchick titled "How a U.S. Think-Tank Fell for Putin." Its target was Moscow Carnegie Center, a subsidiary of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, a 105-year-old think tank headquartered in Washington. Its Moscow office is tiny with just 10 senior researchers, but it's influential; Michael McFaul, U.S. ambassador to Moscow at the time of the ill-fated "reset" of the U.S.-Russian relationship, once worked there.

Now, Kirchick argues, the think tank has become "a 'Trojan horse' for Russian influence." His litany of accusations starts with the role of Carnegie Endowment's vice president for studies, Andrew Weiss, and his Moscow subordinates in organizing a conference in Finland where Russian and American policy wonks -- and no Ukrainian ones -- worked out a plan for peace in Ukraine. Back in August 2014, the measures it suggested were remarkably similar to the terms of February's Minsk cease-fire, which is still in effect despite numerous violations by all sides.

Kirchick goes on to suggest that researchers critical of Putin, such as Lilia Shevtsova, who now works with the Brookings Institution, were fired by the Carnegie Center. Shevtsova herself complained to the journalist of "a squeezing out of different points of view."

Here's what Kirchick wrote:

"As the Russian government ratchets up a xenophobic campaign targeting Western nongovernmental organizations, accusing them of espionage and attempting to foment a coup, Carnegie's presence in Moscow continues to be tolerated. Its name is conspicuously missing from the latest list of "undesirable organizations" compiled by the Russian government."

One of the law's drafters, Vitaly Zolochevsky, did suggest that the prosecutor general's office should investigate Carnegie Moscow Center. Nothing has come of that yet, though. The list Kirchick referred to -- the so-called Patriotic Stop List compiled by the Russian parliament -- features 12 organizations, such as the MacArthur Foundation, the National Endowment for Democracy and Freedom House. The MacArthur Foundation, which funded some Carnegie Center programs, last week announced that it was leaving Russia because it felt "unwelcome." On Monday, the first organization -- the National Endowment for Democracy, which has funded human rights groups and research programs in Russia -- was banned under the "undesirables" law.

Former chess champion Garry Kasparov, a fierce anti-Putin commentator, asserted in Kirchick's piece that the Carnegie office is a channel Kremlin insiders "use at a time when they need to communicate their messages to the West not from official structures but from something that is viewed as independent and even American." And there may be something to that, since Dmitri Trenin, Carnegie Moscow Center's director, has long held what are, by U.S. standards, rather hawkish views on Russia's interests on the global stage.

That, however, doesn't make the office a Putin puppet. No one who follows Carnegie's Andrew Weiss, a Russia expert, on Twitter or reads his writings about the Ukraine conflict would suspect him of a pro-Kremlin agenda; he watches the Russian operation closely enough not to allow it to be subverted. If the center does indeed serve as a channel of unofficial communication between Russia and the U.S., that's a legitimate function that helps forge useful, sometimes lifesaving, deals, such as the Minsk one. A think tank is not designed to fight unsavory regimes; its job is to make them more understandable and transparent by filtering out the noise and distilling the substance.

The Kirchick piece offended the staff at Moscow Carnegie Center. "The world of American Kirchick, like the world of a bad Russian TV presenter, is divided into those who work for the State Department and those who work for Putin," Carnegie.ru editor Alexander Baunov, a polyglot ex-diplomat (also my former colleague at two Moscow publications, and assuredly no fan of Putin), posted on Facebook. "His piece is written as a complaint to the U.S. authorities: Pay attention, these guys are deviating from the party line. There's only one excuse for the author: Americans have never lived in a totalitarian state and they haven't developed an immunity to the urge to write such complaints."

The emotion is familiar to me. I have written many times that while Putin's policies, both domestic and foreign, are not just illiberal and backward but also criminal, that doesn't make compromise for the sake of peace impossible. Here I agree with Carnegie's Trenin, who notes that such compromises were repeatedly made with much nastier Soviet rulers, which in the long run helped topple the Communist regime as Russians realized that the rest of the world didn't seek to isolate them, only their own leaders did. The debate about how to handle Putin's Russia, however, is defined by radicals on both sides, and to them I -- like Baunov and his colleagues -- am either Putin's stooge at a Western media outlet or an anti-Russian Washington drone.

That falsehood benefits Putin more than anyone. He hates all foreign NGOs as State Department outposts and hotbeds of potential insurgency. A month ago he accused "so-called foreign foundations and network organizations" of "vacuuming Russian schools -- they pick up high school graduates, get them hooked on grants and take them away." Now, armed with the "undesirables" law, he can bar them from Russia -- but it's much more fun to tarnish them by withholding reprisals and watching legitimate groups squirm from the scorn poured on them.

At the same time Carnegie employees must be wondering when they might end up on the "stop list." The think tank, unlike the MacArthur Foundation, doesn't fund any activities but its own -- it's a recipient of funds, not a donor -- so it may be perceived as less dangerous to the Kremlin. That, though, would be a weak source of immunity.  

Kirchick's piece, and others that will almost certainly be written on the same theme, does Putin's dirty work by undermining trust in the output of Western groups left off the "undesirable" list, and devaluing their comments when they do criticize the Russian government -- which may just be why the law was enacted in the first place.

 [return to Contents] 

 #22
Valdai Club/Gazeta.ru
http://valdaiclub.com
July 29, 2015
The Men and Women of Ruins
The July passions have not resolved the Greek crisis and the related euro debacle. Harsh and resolute measures are needed to transform the Eurozone and the EU.
By Fyodor Lukyanov
Fyodor Lukyanov is Chairman of the  Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Editor-in-Chief, Russia in Global Affairs journal, Scientific director of the Valdai Discussion Club.

"Having chosen a hard line, Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble led us to believe that we would benefit without Greece in the Eurozone, that this would cost us less. I believe that this is a distorted view. It is not right morally, as this would be the beginning of decline. No one will know what would happen next. Germany has taken a leading role in Europe, but it's not at all a positive role in this case," Austrian Chancellor Werner Faymann told the Austrian national daily Der Standard.

Austria is Germany's closest and most reliable ally in the European Union. The Austrian economy is closely connected to Germany and is based on the same model. Like the other donor countries, Austria is critical of the Greek economic policy, but the recent events have shocked it, along with other countries.

Prime Minister of France Manuel Valls said, trying to convince the divided French parliament to approve a new bailout package for Athens: "We have reached a crucial moment. First and foremost for Greece and the Greek people, but also for ourselves and European integration. [...] Keeping Greece in the euro[zone] and therefore in the heart of Europe and the EU is [...] of the utmost geostrategic and geopolitical importance."

France was first, even ahead of Greece, to ratify the agreements reached at the Brussels summit, by an overwhelming majority.

What is the root of this call for solidarity in France - which has always loved to give orders and hated to pay - and of its sympathy for Greece, which has been sharply and justifiably criticized for its irresponsible approach? The root cause is the feeling of self-preservation. The bulk of comments made in Europe indicate that the EU has changed, following a record-long summit in Brussels, primarily because Europeans have seen that Germany, for the first time in modern history, is not trying to persuade, but is dictating conditions.

In fairness, it should be said that Berlin has been rejecting the role forced on it for a long time. Since the mid-20th century, the European policy was based on the principle that Germany should have no political ambitions. It was allowed to develop economically and to support the policy of its older comrades, primarily financially. The victors, and primarily France, have learned the lesson of the Treaty of Versailles, when the desire to humiliate Germany after WWI resulted in WWII.

It was France that proposed the wonderful idea of European integration, as it combined a clear economic and a far-reaching political perspective.

The balance grew stronger with time. Germany's economic potential grew alongside France's political influence, with the two nations propping each other up. In fact, the idea of a common currency was a revolutionary breakthrough towards a new quality of integration and actual federalization of Europe.

Simply put, Paris's vision of the EU when urging the introduction of a common currency was as follows. Respected for its fiscal ethics, Germany would oversee the EU's finances by propping up the euro with the stability of the Deutschemark, while France would be the political master of the growing European structure. Unfortunately, Paris did not foresee the difficulties of managing a structure that was becoming increasingly more complicated, or that the external environment would worsen dramatically. In this situation, a healthy economy is a much better element of authority than political ambition.

It should be said that Germany did not accept France's vision immediately, as it was wary of giving up its national currency, which was a kind of talisman symbolizing the country's rise from the ruins left by Nazi rule.

The 28th issue of Der Spiegel carried a telling cover image: Angela Merkel sitting on broken Greek columns and the title, Die Trümmerfrau (The Woman of Ruins). Trümmerfrauen, literally translated as ruins women or rubble women, were women who helped clear and reconstruct the bombed cities of Germany and Austria after World War II.

The magazine was referring to the possible ruination of the euro: If the euro fails, Merkel fails. To be fair, it should be said that Angela Merkel cannot be held responsible for the fatal flaws in the foundation of the common European currency. But she will be held accountable, because she initiated a bailout program for Greece in 2010.

The results of the bailout are undeniably negative, but the point at issue is not Greece or the euro. The situation in and around the EU has changed beyond recognition over the past five years, turning Germany from a European political province into the indisputable leader and the only effective EU country.

It is logical that responsibility for the euro project shifted towards Germany as the strongest EU economy and the largest beneficiary of the Eurozone. But Germany's recent history has taught it not to claim leadership, especially when even the slightest movement in that direction immediately provokes fear among its European neighbors.

Berlin has been caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, it needs to preserve and strengthen the EU because its legal framework, along with its economic benefits, is evidence that Germany is not seeking undivided diktat. On the other hand, it has to take action intervening against its partners to ensure the normal operation of the Eurozone. But its attempts to pressure its partners provoke fear, and increased pressure boosts their resistance.

Berlin tried to avoid unnecessary audacity, instead resorting to insistent and repeated arguments. But Alexis Tsipras's decision to go for broke and announce a referendum against the creditors sent Germany into a rage. Merkel and Schäuble abandoned covenants and directed the EU's political and economic might against the Greek prime minister, forcing him to resume negotiations with what he viewed as a license for resistance. But Germany made short shrift of Greece, just to show all the others that unwarranted improvisations are punishable.

It went too far this time, frightening not only, and not so much, Greece, as all its other partners, primarily France and Italy. Francois Hollande, who used to do as Merkel did, demanded that the issue of the Grexit be put on hold. Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, who once criticized Greece for one-legged reforms, spoke up against Berlin too.

The so-called compromise that was reached in Brussels left an impression of impending doom. No one believes that the approved measures can help Greece. Even the IMF, which has shown no mercy for debtors, has called for a more humane approach to Greece. The Eurozone governments are forced to ask their parliaments, which are becoming increasingly anti-bailout, for permission to save Greece. As The Guardian has written, "the euro 'family' has shown it is capable of real cruelty."

And it would be bad taste to talk about democracy after the European bureaucrats denounced the results of the Greek referendum for which Tsipras fought tooth and nail.
Greece has been as good as stripped of its sovereignty and its future. It is being told not only what to do, but also how fast: immediately.

The main result for Berlin is that it has found itself in a moral vacuum, which is very bad for Germany. Considering its dramatic 20th century history, it needs its actions to be considered morally justified and without reproach more than any other country. The recent accusations of mercantilism and proclaimed shock at its alleged cruelty have sent the nascent German leadership reeling.

And now a few words about the possible consequences of this course.

Southern Europe, frightened by the specter of "German order," is rallying around France, the only EU country capable of balancing Germany.

But Paris itself is frantically groping for footing that can push it towards the United States. Washington is mightily displeased with the EU antics and tends to blame Berlin for inflexibility and unwillingness to consider all the circumstances, including the geopolitical importance of Greece. Meanwhile, the German-US relationship has again soured over a new scandal with the NSA tapping German chancellors' cell phones.

These developments have also affected the UK, where an "in-out" referendum on Britain's EU membership is to be held a year and a half. David Cameron has promised his electorate to wrench major concessions from Brussels and Berlin so that Britons would be able to vote for the EU with a clear conscience. But considering the recent developments, London is unlikely to be allowed to review some of the European rules to better protect the British. Germany stands sentinel to protect the status quo.

Taken together, this increases the probability of a US-European Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, which would reunite the West on a new foundation under US auspices.

The deeper the split in the EU, the stronger the desire to lean on the shoulder of the US, like in the good old days. For example, Germany could become wary of its new sovereign responsibility.

The July passions have not resolved the Greek crisis and the related euro debacle. Harsh and resolute measures are needed to transform the Eurozone and the EU, and Germany is the only country that can take them. But doing this will be much more difficult in light of the recent developments.

This article was originally published in Russian on www.gazeta.ru

 [return to Contents] 

#23
Ukraine Today
http://uatoday.tv
July 28, 2015
Probability of full-scale Russian invasion remains high - Ukrainian army general

50,000 Russian troops and over 30,000 militants are concentrated along the Ukrainian border

The threat of a full-scale Russian invasion has not receded and remains a distinct possibility according to remarks made by a Ukrainian army official.

"According to the available information, there is a high probability of a full-scale invasion of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation," Deputy Chief of General Staff General Hennadii Vorobiov said Monday (July 27).

Earlier this month Ukraine's National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine warned that Russia had completed preperations for a massive new invasion in three different directions along the contact line of forces in the Donbas.

Russia has massed a record number of Russian troops along the border with Ukraine and continues military drills. Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko says there are 64,000 troops in the wartorn Donbas region of eastern Ukraine trying to stem the advance of Russian-backed forces.

National Security and Defense Council head Oleksandr Turchynov said ( July 13) that there were presently 20 tactical groups of the Russian Armed Forces in eastern Ukraine and another 56 tactical groups located on Russia's border with Ukraine.

Earlier in July Ukrainian army officials said more than 50,000 Russian troops and over 30,000 militants were concentrated along the Ukrainian border.

 [return to Contents] 

 
#24
Voice of America
July 24, 2015
Ukraine Again Relies on Foreigners for Leadership Help
By Oleksiy Kuzmenko
 
As Ukraine is struggling to reform and survive during war, it is relying on a cohort of accomplished foreigners for leadership.

For example, foreign-born ministers are negotiating a way out of Ukraine's debt burden, and former statesmen from Georgia are at the forefront of Ukraine's fight against corruption.

Ukraine has an ancient tradition of being supported by foreign talent, said Alexander Motyl, professor of political science at Rutgers University in the U.S. state of New Jersey.

"The most spectacular example of foreigners contributing to Ukrainian history is the Varangians [vikings], who established the Kyivan Rus state - considered to be a distant predecessor of Ukrainian statehood - in the ninth century," Motyl told VOA.

At present, the most prominent foreign reformist in Ukraine is former Georgian President Mikheil Saakashvili, who was recently appointed governor of Odessa oblast. This province stretches along the Black Sea in the country's southwest and is known for its ethnic and cultural diversity - and deeply rooted traditions of corruption and smuggling. Saakashvili has already embarked on ambitious anti-corruption reforms.

Denis Kornyshev, chief editor of 368.media, an anti-corruption project in Odessa, told VOA that locals appreciate Saakashvili's openness. The governor is eager to pose for selfies and moves around the city without bodyguards.

Record of reform

While Saakashvili had to flee Georgia in 2013 after his party lost parliamentary elections and he was barred from seeking a third presidential term, Ukrainians seem to care most about his record of reform.

The latter seems impressive. Erekle Urushadze, program manager at Transparency International Georgia, told VOA that under Saakashvili, Georgia made "outstanding progress" in terms of fighting corruption and broader administrative reforms.

"In our Corruption Perceptions Index, Georgia moved from 123rd place in 2003 to 51st in 2012," Urushadze said.

However, it's not solely Saakashvili's achievements that fuel his current star status in Ukraine. The country's post-Orange Revolution president, Viktor Yushchenko, had a friendly relationship with Saakashvilli. They skied together, and Saakashvili was heaped with praise in Ukraine's media.

Challenges in Odessa

The challenges facing Saakashvili with regard to Odessa are grave.

Odessa was a site of deadly clashes between pro-Ukrainian and pro-Russian protesters last year and has recently become a target of bomb attacks allegedly perpetrated by the pro-Russian underground.

To the west, the region borders on unrecognized Transnistria, which hosts a sizable garrison of Russian troops. Saakashvili, who presided over Georgia's 2008 war with Russia, should be fully aware of the dangers of such a neighbor.

Olena Dobrovolska, a popular journalist in Odessa, told VOA that in order to succeed, Saakashvili will have to take on a well-established corrupt local elite and the region's population of Russia sympathizers.

Lack of ties to Ukraine are seen both as an advantage and threat. Some critics dismiss Saakashvili because of his ethnicity, Dobrovolska said.

Critic of foreigners

One of the most vocal critics of foreigners in the government is Oleh Lyashko, an outspoken member of parliament who finished a distant third in the 2014 presidential election. Lyashko recently took a swing at foreign officials in Ukraine by mixing up their last names with profanity.

In an interview with VOA, he stated that his Radical Party champions a top-to-bottom purge of the state apparatus. He doubts foreigners are accountable to Ukraine.

"If they fail, they'll board a plane and leave ... and it's us Ukrainians that have nowhere to go. It's our land and we have to fix it by ourselves. No one will help us, if we won't help our own selves," Lyashko said.

Where Lyashko sees a lack of ties to Ukraine as a shortcoming, others see a benefit.

"They're not included into any of Ukraine's major financial and political groups and therefore able to champion the interests of the Ukrainian people," said Svitlana Zalishchuk, head of the Ukrainian parliament's subcommittee on European and Euro-Atlantic integration.

Zalishchuk also said experienced foreigners are bringing virtues that are scarce among Ukraine's elite, like honesty. "Honest and competent individuals, regardless of age or ethnicity, are still a minority in Ukraine's power structures," Zalishchuk told VOA.

Odessa fix?

Saakashvili's methods in his native Georgia both enabled the country's transformation and led to his eventual downfall, according to Urushadze. For instance, he said, extreme consolidation of power led to abuses by the executive branch and law enforcement.

While there is no evidence that Saakashvili personally gained from corruption, some forms of it persisted. The prosecutor's office was involved in unlawful seizing of private property, and Saakashvili's party and some members of his team benefited from suspicious dealings, Urushadze said.

"Former Defense Minister Davit Kezerashvili turned into a wealthy and influential businessman shortly after leaving the government. A 2011 report by TI Georgia found that he controlled almost the entire advertising market in Georgia through a network of interconnected companies," Urushadze told VOA.

VOA has reached out to Saakashvili's office for comments. In the meantime, Odessa locals are waiting to see if his efforts bear fruit.

 [return to Contents] 

 
#25
Russia Insider
www.russia-insider.com
July 29, 2015
Exposing the Racism at the Heart of Maidan
The Maidan Revolution is not ultimately about democracy or human rights or Ukraine's European integration. Rather as the article attached shows, it is the expression of some Ukrainians' paranoid hatred of Russia
By Alexander Mercouris

Any attempt to understand the Ukrainian conflict and why it is so intractable must confront the ideology of the Maidan revolution.

Once this attempt is made it becomes very clear very quickly that the single overriding factor that is driving the conflict is not a Ukrainian desire to establish a liberal European democracy, but the fear and hatred - to the point of pathological obsession - that a small minority of Ukrainians have for Russia and for Russians.

As an example of the fanatical nature of these views, we reproduce an article supposedly providing an outline of Russian history published by Euromaidan Press - an agency that is by no means considered extreme in Ukraine but which on the contrary represents what could be called the Maidan mainstream.

To refute in detail the tissue of nonsense and paranoid fantasy that makes up this article would take too long.  We would merely make three points:

1. The article is profoundly racist. Putting aside the fact that the claim that Russians are not "real" Slavs has nothing to support it (for what it's worth DNA testing suggests close genetic relationships between Russians, Byelorussians, Ukrainians and Poles suggesting membership of a single ancestral kin group), the article's ugly characterisations of Finno-Ugrics and Mongol-Tatars who the article claims are the "true" ancestors of modern Russians are deeply distasteful and off-putting.

What is one to make for example of passages like this?

"The Great Russian psychology absorbed many characteristics - the Tatar-Mongol instincts of a conqueror and despot, with the ultimate aim: world domination.

"Thus by the XVI cent. was established the type of a conqueror who was horrible in his lack of education, rage and cruelty.

"These people had no use for European culture and literacy. All such things like morality, honesty, shame, justice, human dignity and historical awareness were absolutely foreign to them.

"A significant amount of Tatar-Mongols entered the makeup of Great Russians from the XIII to XVI centuries and they accounted for the genealogy of over 25% of Russian nobility.

"Here are some Tatar names that brought fame to the Russian Empire: Arakcheev, Bunin, Derzhavin, Dostoyevsky, Kuprin, Plekhanov, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Turgenev, Sheremetiev, Chadaev and many others."

The suggestion that cultural giants like Bunin, Derzhavin, Dostoevsky, Saltykov-Shchedrin and Turgenev belonged to a people who "had no use for European culture and literacy. All such things like morality, honesty, shame, justice, human dignity and historical awareness were absolutely foreign to them" - would be offensive to most people.  The comments anyway are deeply racist.

2. The article entirely fails to explain why if the Russians had no connection to Kievan Rus they would pretend that they did and would go so far as to pretend that Kievan Rus's history was their own. At the time when the article claims Russia's leaders were inventing a history "stolen" from Kievan Rus its glories lay far in the past. It is not obvious why the Russians - descendants supposedly of Finno-Ugrics and "conquering Tatars" - would base their history on Kievan Rus if they really had no connection to it.    

3. The claim that Russia only came to be known as the "Russian empire" in the time of Peter the Great and that the Tsar of Russia (or of "Muscovy" as the article insists on calling it) was not referred to either in Russia or Europe as the "emperor of Russia" until Peter the Great's time is simply wrong.  Europeans routinely called the country "Russia" and routinely referred to the Tsar of Russia as the "emperor of Russia" well before Peter the Great's time.  An example can even be found in Shakespeare: Hermione's words in Act 3, Scene 2 of the Winter's Tale (published 1623, first performed 1611)

The Emperor of Russia was my father:
O that he were alive, and here beholding
His daughter's trial! that he did but see
The flatness of my misery, yet with eyes
Of pity, not revenge!

So long as these fanatical beliefs hold sway in Ukraine peace between that country and Russia and within Ukraine itself is impossible.

Meanwhile what is the West doing supporting people who hold such racist views?
-----

This article first appeared at Euromaidan Press

How Moscow hijacked the history of Kyivan Rus'
http://euromaidanpress.com/2014/05/14/how-moscow-hijacked-the-history-of-kyivan-rus/

This essay was first published in a collection by Yaroslav Dashkevych, PhD. in "Learn to Speak the Truth with Non-Lying Lips" - K:Tempora, 2011, 828pp. Yaroslav Dashkevych was a prominent Ukrainian historian, who during his long academic career wrote more than 950 works on Ukrainian historiography, source studies and special historical disciplines, Eastern Studies, Ukrainian-Armenian, Ukrainian-Turkish, and Ukrainian-Jewish relations.

In creating their nation, Ukrainians need to examine and analyze their own history, based on truth, verified facts and historical events. For centuries under the rule of conquerors, Ukrainians were basically deprived of the opportunity to influence the formation of national awareness and the development of their history, with the result that Ukraine's history was composed predominantly to the advantage of their conquerors. Especially troublesome is the question of the pretensions and demands of Moscow, and later Russia, concerning the historical legacy of Kyivan Rus.

In his historical work "The Land of Moksel or Moskovia" (Olena Teliha Publishing House, Kyiv 2008, 2009, 3 vol.) V. Bilinsky presents historical sources (predominantly Russian) which testify to the total misrepresentation of the history of the Russian Empire, which was geared to create a historical mythology about Moscow and Kyivan Rus sharing common common historical roots, and that Moscow possesses "succession rights" to Kyivan Rus.

Moscow's outright fraud that appropriated the past of the Great Kyiv kingdom and its people dealt a severe blow to the Ukrainian ethos. Our obligation now is to utilize hard facts to uncover the lies and amorality of Moskovian mythology.

Let's examine these problems.

The tsars of Moscow and, later, Russia understood that without an imposing past it was impossible to create a great nation and empire. Therefore it was necessary to glorify their historical roots and even to hijack the history of other nations. So, starting with Ivan the Terrible (1533-1584) the tsars of Moscow applied all their efforts to appropriate the history of Kyivan Rus, its glorious past, and to create an official mythology for the Russian Empire.

This might have been less consequential if their mythology had not affected the central concerns of Ukraine and if it had not aimed at the utter destruction of Ukraine: its history, language and culture. Over time, it became clear that Russian Imperial chauvinists did and continue to do everything possible to realize this aim.

Over hundreds of years and especially starting with the early XVI century, they brainwashed and continue to brainwash everyone, saying that the origins of the Russian nation and people are the Great Kyivan kingdom. They assert that Kyivan Rus was the cradle of three sibling nations - Russians, Ukrainians and Belarus; and that because the Russians are "older brothers", they have the right to the legacy of Kyivan Rus. To this day, Russian historians and officials make use of this woeful lie, which is repeated by the 'fifth column' of communists and almost all Party of Regions deputies in our Parliament.

At the time of the Kyivan Empire there was no mention of a Moscow nation. It is well known that Moscow was created in 1277 as a subservient vassal region or 'ulus' to the Golden Horde, established by the Khan Mengu-Timur. By that time, Kyivan Rus had existed for more than 300 years.

There are no indications of any connection of Kyivan Rus with the Finnish ethnic groups in the land of 'Moksel' or later of the Moscow principality with the Principality of Kyivan Rus up until the XVI century. At the time when Kyivan Rus had officially accepted Christianity, the Finn tribes in 'Moksel' lived in a semi-primitive state.

How can anyone speak of 'an older brother' when that 'older brother' did not first appear until centuries after Rus-Ukrainians? He has no moral right to call himself an 'older brother', nor to dictate how people are to live, nor to force his culture, language, and world views. It is clear that until the end of the XV century, there was no Russian nation, there was no older brother 'Great Russian', nor were there any Russian people. Instead, there was the land of Suzdal: the land of Moksel, later the Moscow princedom, which entered into the role of the Golden Horde, the nation of Genghis Khan. From the end of the XIII to the beginning of the XVIII century, the people in this land were called Moskovites. And Moscow historians are silent about this question of their national origins.

During the IX to the XII cent. the large area of Tula, Riazan, and today's Moscow region, including the tribes of Mer, Ves, Moksha, Chud, Mari and others - all this was inhabited by the people called 'Moksel'. These tribes eventually became the foundation of the nation who now call themselves 'Great Russians'.

In 1137, the younger son of the Kyivan prince Monomakh, Yuri Dolgoruky (who had been left without a princedom in the Kyivan empire) arrived in this land.

Yuri Dolgoruky began the rule of the 'Riurykovyches' in 'Moksel', becoming prince of Suzdal. To him and a local Finnish woman was born a son Andrey, called 'Bogoliubsky'. Born and raised in the forest wilderness among the half savage Finnish tribes, prince Andrey cut all ties with his father's entourage and with their old Kyivan customs.

In 1169 Andrey Bogoliubsky sacked and destroyed Kyiv. He destroyed all the churches and religious artifacts, something unheard of in those times.

Andrey was a barbarian who did not feel any familial ties with Kyiv, the holy city of Slavs.

Within a brief time (50-80 years) every Finnish tribe was imposed with a prince of the Riurykovyches, whose mother was either a woman of Mer, Murom or Kokshan... Thus appeared the 'Moksel' princedoms: Vladimir, Riazan, Tver, and others. At this time, some missionaries appeared in the land of Moksel to spread Christianity. It is impossible to consider a mass 'migration' of Slavs from the Dnipro river region, as Russian historians insist. Why should the Slavs leave behind their fertile Dnipro lands and relocate more than a thousand kilometers through impassable undergrowth and swamps into an unknown semi-savage land?

Under the influence of Christianity, the land of 'Moksel' started to form their language, which in time became Russian. Up until the XII century, only Finn tribes lived in the land of 'Moksel'. The archaeological findings of O.S. Uvarova (Meria and their everyday life from kurhan excavations, 1872 - p. 215) support this. Out of 7729  excavated kurhans, not a single Slavic burial was discovered.

And the anthropological investigations of human skulls by A. P. Bohdanov and F. K. Vovk support the differentiated characteristics of the Finnish and Slavic ethnoses.

In 1237 the Tatar-Mongols entered the lands of Suzdal. All who bowed, kissed the boots of the Khan and accepted subservience remained alive and unharmed, all others who did not submit were destroyed.

The princes of Vladimir, Yury and Yaroslav Vsevolodovich accepted subservience to Khan Batey. In this manner, the land of 'Moksel' entered the ranks of the Golden Horde Empire of Genghis Khan, and its fighting forces were combined with the army of the Empire. The commander of the Moksel division within Batey's army was Yury Vsevolodovich, the prince of the city of Vladimir. In 1238, Finnish tribe divisions were formed and marched together under Batey in his invasions of Europe in 1240-1242. This is direct evidence of the establishment of the rule of the Khan in the lands of Rostov-Suzdal.

While Yuri Vsevolodovich was away taking part in Batey's European invasion, his younger brother Yaroslav Vsevolodovich was placed at the head of the Vladimir princedom. Yaroslav left his eight year old son Alexander Yaroslavich as hostage with the Khan.

Living with the Horde of Batey from 1238 to 1252 Alexander, only much later named 'Nevsky', adopted all the customs and organizational ideas of the Golden Horde. He became a blood brother of Sartak, the son of the Khan, married the Khan's daughter, and eventually became a loyal vassal of the Golden Horde and prince of Vladimir from 1252 to 1263. He never took part in any significant battles - all the 'victories' of Alexander Nevsky are transparent lies. Prince Alexander simply could never had taken part in the battles on the Neva in 1240 and on Chud or Peipus Lake in 1242 (fantasized in Eisenstein's film) because he was still a child.

It is important to mention that the ruling powers of the local princes of Rostov-Suzdal were minimal. Khan Batey installed his own administrators in all the "ulus" princedoms: on top was the Great Baskak, and under him were the regional administrative baskaks.These were full-fledged rulers from the Golden Horde, who followed the laws of the Genghis Khans. Russian historians are lying when they state that the princes of Suzdal, and later Moscow, were independent from the Golden Horde. The Khan's covenant named the primary rulers of the princedoms his baskak, or 'daruha', while the local princes were relegated to second and even third place importance.

The big lie was introduced: that Moscow was founded in 1147 by Yuri Dolgoruky. This is a myth with no supportive evidence. Moscow was established as a settlement in 1272. That same year the Golden Horde conducted their third census of the populations in their domain. Both in the first census (1237-1238) and in the second census (1254-1259) there is no mention of any Moscow at all.

Moscow appeared as a princedom in 1277 at the decree of the Tatar-Mongol Khan Mengu-Timur and it was an ordinary 'ulus' (subdivision) of the Golden Horde. The first Moscow prince was Daniel (1277-1303), younger son of Alexander, so-called 'Nevsky'. The Riurykovich dynasty of Moscow princes starts from him. In 1319 Khan Uzbek (as stated in the afore-mentioned work by Bilinsky) named his brother Kulkhan the virtual Prince of Moscow, and in 1328 the Great Prince of Moscow. Khan Uzbek (named in Russian history as Kalita), after he converted to Islam, destroyed almost all the Riurykovich princes. In 1319-1328 the Riurykovich dynasty was replaced by the Genghis dynasty in the Moscow 'ulus' of the Golden Horde. In 1598 this Genghis dynasty in Moscow which began with Prince Ivan Kalita (Kulkhan) was finally broken. Thus for over 270 years, Moscow was ruled solely by the Khans of Genghis.

Still, the new dynasty of the Romanovs (Kobyla) promised to follow former traditions and solemnly swore allegiance to the age-old dynasty of Genghis.

In 1613 the Moscow Orthodox Church became the stabilizing force to safeguard the sustainment of Tatar-Mongol government in Moscow, offering Masses for the Khan, and issuing anathemas on anyone who opposed this servitude.

Based on these facts, it becomes clear that Moscow is the direct inheritor of the Golden Horde Empire of Genghis and that actually the Tatar-Mongols were the 'godfathers' of Moscow statehood. The Moscow princedom (and tsardom from 1547) up until the XVI century had no ties or relationships with the princedoms of the lands of Kyivan Rus.

The tribe of Great Russians, or the Russian people as known today, appeared around the XV to XVII centuries from among the Finn tribes: Muroma, Mer, Ves and others. This was when their history started. There is no history of Great Russians on Kyivan lands! The history of Great Russians starts with the 'Beyond the Forests Land' in Moscow, which was never Kyivan Rus. The Tatar-Mongols who entered these lands were a big element in the formulation of 'Great Russians'. The Great Russsian psychology absorbed many characteristics - the Tatar-Mongol instincts of a conqueror and despot, with the ultimate aim: world domination.

Thus by the XVI cent. was established the type of a conqueror who was horrible in his lack of education, rage and cruelty. These people had no use for European culture and literacy. All such things like morality, honesty, shame, justice, human dignity and historical awareness were absolutely foreign to them. A significant amount of Tatar-Mongols entered the makeup of Great Russians from the XIII to XVI centuries and they accounted for the genealogy of over 25% of Russian nobility. Here are some Tatar names that brought fame to the Russian Empire: Arakcheev, Bunin, Derzhavin, Dostoyevsky, Kuprin, Plekhanov, Saltykov-Shchedrin, Turgenev, Sheremetiev, Chadaev and many others.

In order to appropriate the history of Kyiv lands and to immortalize this theft, the Great Russians had to squash the Ukrainian people, drive them into slavery, deprive them of their true name, exterminate them via famine, etc.

Ukrainians had emerged as a nation in the XI to XII centuries, and probably, even earlier. Later they were labeled 'Little Russians' when Russians began to brainwash the world with their 'version' of history. For the smallest deviation from this official version, people were tortured, killed, and sent off to the GULAG. The Soviet period was especially brutal and vicious. During that time, Ukraine lost over 25 million of her sons and daughters, who perished in wars for Russian interests, and during collectivization, tortures, and forced relocations.

This is the way the 'older brother' forced the 'younger brother', the 'Little Russian', to live in the savage 'embraces of love'.

Back in the times of the princedom of Vasily III (1505 - 1533) Moscow gave birth to the idea of its greatness, articulated by the representative of Moscow orthodoxy, the monk Filofey: "Two Romes fell, a third still stands, and there will never be a fourth".

From there, they created the idea of an all-powerful and 'God chosen' Moscow - the 'third - and final Rome'. These ideas spread and were confirmed throughout Moskovia. And how much blood was spilt by the princes of Moscow, and later the tsars, over this fantasy-myth!

During the reign of Ivan IV (the Terrible) they grasped not only after the inheritance of Kyivan Rus, but now also the Byzantine Empire. Thus, according to accounts, the cap of Monomakh was believed to have been given the Kyivan prince Volodymyr Monomakh by his granddad, the basileus Constantine IX.

This was considered the symbol of the transfer of power from Byzantium to Kyivan Rus. In addition, Yuri Dolgoruky, the sixth son of Volodymyr Monomakh, was the first prince of Suzdal, so the appearance of this cap in Moscow was a 'proof' of the legacy legitimacy of the Moscow rulers not only to the Kyiv Great Throne, but now also to the inheritance of the former Byzantine Empire. Furthermore, Moscow fabricated a deceptive last will of Volodymyr Monomakh about handing over 'legacy rights' to his son Yuri Dolgoruky, the conqueror of the so-called 'Beyond the Forests Land'. This was all fiction. In reality, the cap of Monomakh was a gold 'bukhar tubeteyka', which Khan Uzbek presented to Ivan Kalyta (1319-1340) who maintained this cap in order to further his fame. (Логвин Ю. Кобила, Калита і тюбетейка «Мономаха» // Час. - Київ, 1997, 27 березня).

Ivan IV (the Terrible) in 1547 was anointed in the cathedral with the title of 'Moscow Tsar' as the 'inheritor' of the Greek and Roman emperors. Of the 39 signatures who affirmed this document sent from Constantinople, 35 were forgeries. Thus, Ivan the Terrible became the 'inheritor of the Byzantine emperors'. Thus, the lie was made official.

Peter I began the massive falsification of his people's history. In 1701 he issued a decree to eliminate from all subjugated peoples all their recorded national historical artifacts: ancient chronicles, chronographs, old archives, church documents etc. This was especially directed at Ukraine-Rus.

In 1716, Peter I 'changed the copy' of the so-called Königsberg Chronicles to now show the 'joining' of the old chronicles of the Kyivan with the Moscow princedoms. The aim was to lay a foundation for the unity of Slavic and Finnish lands. However, both the false 'copy' as well as to the original were sealed.

Peter's falsification became the basis for further falsifications - the composition of the so-called 'General Rus Chronicles Collections' which purported to establish Moscow's rights to the legacy of Kyivan Rus. On the basis of these falsifications, on October 22, 1721, Moscow proclaimed itself the Russian Empire, and all Moskovites were now to be - Russians. In this manner, they stole from the legitimate inheritors of Kyivan Rus the Ukrainians' historical name of Rus.

Peter imported from Europe a large number of specialists, including professional historians, who were assigned the rewriting and falsification of the history of the Russian state.

In addition, every foreigner who entered government work, swore an oath not to reveal state secrets and to never betray the Moscow state. The question remains, what government secrets regarding the 'formation of Russian history' of ancient times could there be? In any civilized European country, after 30-50 years all archives are opened. The Russian Empire is very afraid about the truth in its past. Deathly afraid!

Following Peter I, who transformed Moscow into the Russian state, the Moscow elite began to consider the necessity of creating a comprehensive history of their own country. Empress Catherine II (1762-1796) intensively took on this task.

She could not admit the idea that common Tatar-Mongol elements existed in the dynasty of the Tsars. Catherine was an intelligent and educated European woman and once she had examined the archival sources, she called attention to the fact that all the history of her country was based on oral traditions ('bilyny') and had no factual support.

Therefore on December 4, 1783, Catherine II issued a decree, creating a 'Commision for the Collection and Organization of the Ancient Russian History' under the leadership and oversight of Graf A. P. Shuvalov, with a staff of 10 renowned historians. The principal task before this commission was to 'find' new chronicles, rewrite others, and create new collections of archives and other similar falsifications. The aim was to lay the foundations for the 'legitimacy' of Moscow's hijacking of the historical legacy of Kyivan Rus and to create an official historical myth about the origins of the Russian state. This commission labored for ten years. In 1792, 'Catherine's History' saw the light of day. The commission worked in the following manner.

- the gathering of all written documents (archives, chronicles, etc). This effort had partly begun under Peter I. This collection of materials was conducted not only within the Empire, but also from other countries like Poland, Turkey etc.

- the analysis, falsification, rewritings or destruction of historical materials. Thus they rewrote the chronicles: 'The Tale of Ihor's Campaign', 'Tale of bygone years', 'Lavrentiivsky Chronicles', and many others. Many chronicles were rewritten several times, and the originals either locked up or destroyed. Thus were also locked up: the 'History of the Scythians' by A. I. Lyzlov (published in 1776 and 1787), and the 'Russian History from Ancient Times' by V. M. Tatishchev (published in 1747). In his 'Scythian History' Lyzlov showed that the inhabitants of Moscow were a separate people, who had nothing in common with Kyivan Rus, Lithuania, Poland, etc.

- the writing of new 'Rus Chronicles Collections' which were now being composed in the XVIII cent., but purported to be from the XI to the XIV centuries. These collections all propagated the 'General Rus' idea. This was in reference to the times when Kyivan lands were inhabited by Slavic tribes (Poliany, Derevliany, Siveriany etc) who were Christians, while the 'Beyond the Forests Land' was populated by Finn tribes (Muroma, Mer, Ves, Moksha and others) who lived a semi-primitive existence, and these tribes had nothing historical in common up to the XVI century.

- the new composition of thousands of various collections to establish the 'unity' of Kyivan Rus with the Finn tribes. All these chronicles and collections, according to author Bilinsky, exist only in the form of copies, not one original. Not one! All this points to the almost unbelievable in scope and shameless, massive plundering and falsification of the creation of the history of the Russian state.

It is impossible to live a lie forever!

It is time for Ukrainian historians to write the actual true history of Ukraine, which would not be based on the lies of the 'Catherine Chronicles', the falsifications and newly written in the XVIII century 'General Russian Chronicle Collections', but rather based on historical reality, established in documents, especially those preserved in countries like Poland, Turkey, Greece, Iran and others. People deserve to know the truth.

 [return to Contents] 

#26
Moscow Times
July 29, 2015
Civilians Stuck in the Middle of Donbass Horror
By Tanya Lokshina
Tanya Lokshina is the Russia program director and senior researcher at Human Rights Watch

Vasily Nikolaevich, a 63-year-old resident of Mariinka, a small town in Ukraine just 20 kilometers southwest of rebel-controlled Donetsk, was in his vegetable garden at around 10 a.m. on July 19 when he heard sounds of shooting coming from the neighboring street. He said these were Ukrainian servicemen firing from an armored personnel carrier toward Donetsk.

He finished weeding his garden, walked into the house, and told his wife he'd wager for return fire within 20 minutes. He was just making conversation really - living in Mariinka, which is basically on the front line, you don't run into the basement every time you hear shooting. You cannot put your whole life on hold, right?

So, he had a cold drink - it was a hot, sunny morning - and went back into the garden to wash off. And indeed, the return fire did not make him wait. "It was loud and coming from different weapons from two different directions ... targeting the Ukrainian checkpoint at Moskovskaya Ulitsa, some 50 meters from my house," he told me as I sat on the edge of his hospital bed.

So, Vasily Nikolaevich was standing next to his outdoor shower when there was an explosion right in his garden, just a few feet away, knocking him out for a second. When he came to he was almost deaf, a shell fragment was stuck in the center of his forehead, and some fragments caught him in his left lower leg, which was bleeding profusely.

His wife was standing next to him and screaming hysterically. He told her to call for an ambulance. She tried, but the networks were down and the call would not go through.

Vasily Nikolaevich got up, found his bicycle, and rode to the nearby checkpoint, using his unwounded leg. Several Ukrainian servicemen at the checkpoint quickly dressed his wounded leg, and one soldier drove him to a safer area, where an ambulance picked him up fairly quickly.

When I spoke to Vasily Nikolaevich in the hospital in the town of Kurakhovo two days later, the splinter from his forehead and two shell fragments from his leg had been removed, and he was waiting for another operation the next day to have the last remaining fragment removed - it was deeply imbedded, and the doctors couldn't get it the first time around.

He seemed cheerful enough: "It could've been worse, a tiny bit closer and I wouldn't be talking to you," he said. "Also, now I know that this whole idea of a shell not falling twice in the same crater is absolute nonsense. My house was hit on Sept. 22 last year - the roof had a huge hole in it, all the glass in the windows was gone. So, we thought, OK - we've had our share of the trouble, and had it all fixed.

''Now we need to put in the glass in the windows again. The house walls are damaged by shells fragments again and the fence is all destroyed. Well, what can you do. With those checkpoints all over the place, and the both sides firing at each other on a regular basis, you should be grateful for being alive."

More than a year into the armed conflict in Ukraine, pro-Russian rebel forces and Ukrainian forces continue to engage in hostilities despite the truce established by the Minsk agreements. The fighting seems low-intensity now, but it is civilians who are bearing the brunt of it.

Those who happen to live in the vicinity of military targets, like checkpoints or armed personnel quarters, are particularly at risk of being showered with metal fragments on a regular basis. There's a nine-story apartment building in Avdiyivka, a town controlled by Ukrainian forces some 10 kilometers north of Donetsk, that local residents had nicknamed "the ornamental place" because its facade was painted in several different colors.

Now, that nickname has an ironic ring to it - the building suffered particularly severe damage from shelling, with some of the apartments turned into craters as a result of direct hits. And it is not surprising that this building is in such bad shape - Ukrainian soldiers are using the apartment building next door as a base, with military vehicles parked in the yard, some weaponry in plain view, and a checkpoint on the other side.

There is little doubt rebel forces are pounding the neighborhood to eliminate this particular target, hitting the "ornamental place" instead. Several other buildings nearby also show serious damage from shelling. And people live in all of them - they have nowhere else to go.

The "ornamental place" was hit again on July 18, the day before I arrived in Avdiyivka - with a shell exploding in an apartment on the eighth floor, killing a 73-year-old woman, Anna Kostina, and her 20-year-old grandson, Sergei Malashkov.

"Granny Anya had a fractured hip, she could barely walk," a neighbor told me. "So we took care of her all winter, bringing her boiled water for tea and some food. Her grandson, Seryozha had some disability and could not speak."

When the shelling began at around 4:30 a.m., residents who live on lower floors made it to the basement but those high up just sat in the hall in the dark. When it was finally over, they went out to assess the damage and saw that Kostina's apartment was gone.

Two women rushed up to see whether their neighbors were still alive and needed help. "We saw Seryozha's body in the hall, it was all bloody. Apparently, he tried to run for it," one of the women said. "We left him there and entered what was left of Granny Anya's flat. At first we could not see her amid the debris ... I even thought, what if she's alive and someone else got her ahead of us and actually got her out ... and then, I saw a fragment of her face in a pile of debris."

Practically every civilian I spoke to in eastern Ukraine, while on a trip with monitors from International Partnership for Human Rights last week, had one and the same plea to make: could the military please move their checkpoints and quarters away from our homes?

That message is equally applicable to Ukraine-controlled towns, like Avdiyivka and Mariinka, and rebel-controlled territories. In Donetsk, one can see the rebel Donetsk People's Republic bases all over the city, and the residents of the nearby houses pay dearly for it.

The laws of war, applicable to the fighting in Ukraine, require all parties to the conflict to avoid deploying their military forces in densely populated areas - or to remove civilians to the extent feasible from areas under their control.

"I live in the Kirovsky district of Donetsk, and the separatists have a fire position right under my windows, imagine the fun," said Lena, another woman I met in Avdiyivka, where she travels for work across the front line. Or rather - traveled for work.

The cosmetics company Lena worked for was located just a few steps away from the "ornamental place" in Avdiyivka, facing that building full of Ukrainian military. It got hit on the evening of July 17 and then on the morning of July 18, in the same attack that Granny Anya and Seryozha were killed - and the level of damage is staggering.

Lena lit a cigarette and stared moodily at the remains of her workplace. "So, you've got the military here and you've got the military there - and you're in between. It's been more than a year and it's becoming simply unbearable. Is there an end to it?"

 [return to Contents] 

 #27
Reuters
July 28, 2015
Ukraine Struggles to Control Volunteer Fighter Squads

KIEV - From a basement billiard club in central Kiev, Dmytro Korchynsky commands a volunteer battalion helping Ukraine's government fight rebels in the east. A burly man with a long, Cossack-style mustache, Korchynsky has several hundred armed men at his disposal. The exact number, he said, is "classified."

In the eyes of many Ukrainians, he and other volunteer fighters are heroes for helping the weak regular army resist pro-Russian separatists. In the view of the government, however, some of the volunteers have become a problem, even a law unto themselves.

Dressed in a colorful peasant-style shirt, Korchynsky told Reuters that he follows orders from the Interior Ministry, and that his battalion would stop fighting if commanded to do so. Yet he added:

"We would proceed with our own methods of action independently from state structures."

Korchynsky, a former leader of an ultra-nationalist party and a devout Orthodox Christian, wants to create a Christian "Taliban" to reclaim eastern Ukraine as well as Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in 2014. He isn't going to give up his quest lightly.

"I would like Ukraine to lead the crusades," said Korchynsky, whose battalion's name is Saint Mary. "Our mission is not only to kick out the occupiers, but also revenge. Moscow must burn."

Such talk and recent violent incidents involving members of unofficial armed groups have raised government concerns about radicals running out of control. President Petro Poroshenko now says that all "illegal groups" must disarm because they threaten to make the country even more unstable than it already is.

"No political force should have, and will not have, any kind of armed cells. No political organization has the right to establish ... criminal groups," Poroshenko said on July 13.

The president said he might legislate for emergency powers to deal with armed groups, and that anyone armed who was not a member of the law enforcement agencies "will be classed as a terrorist."

But interviews with members of volunteer battalions and Ukraine officials suggest it will not be easy for Poroshenko to impose his will. Some battalion leaders, while ostensibly under the control of the government, are increasingly critical of Ukraine's political leaders. They want to press them to sack judges seen as favoring the rich and powerful, to oust oligarchs who control much of the economy and to prosecute the riot police accused of killing more than 100 people during protests early last year.

Haphazard Formations

Most of Ukraine's almost 40 volunteer battalions grew out of squads of protesters who battled the Berkut riot police during the protests on Kiev's Independence Square, or Maidan Nezalezhnosti, which began in November 2013.

After the protests toppled President Viktor Yanukovych, pro-Russian separatists rose up in the east of Ukraine in April, 2014, demanding independence from the new government in Kiev, which they called a "fascist regime." In response, several leaders of the Maidan protests raced east with fellow protesters to try to stop the rebel advance.

Numerous brigades and battalions formed haphazardly, with most leaders accepting anyone willing to fight. Serhiy Melnychuk, who founded the Aidar battalion in eastern Ukraine and is now a member of parliament, said he signed up people between the ages of 18 and 62 and "from the homeless to pensioners."

Irregular though theses forces were, some acquired weapons from the Defense Ministry, officials and battalion leaders said. Others received money and equipment from wealthy oligarchs. They became powerful forces in the struggle against pro-Russian separatists.

In an interview in Kiev, Melnychuk, wearing a cross around his neck and a wristband in the national colors of Ukraine, said that he had five men on the day the Aidar battalion formed, but 250 within two weeks. They had all fought on the Maidan and "didn't need military training," he said.

He conceded some Aidar members ran out of control. "I don't deny people were looting there (in eastern Ukraine)," he said.

Melnychuk now faces various charges from Ukrainian prosecutors connected to his time in the east. They include robbery and forming an illegal group; Melnychuk denies the charges.

In addition, the human rights group Amnesty International has documented cases of abuse which it says were committed by members of Aidar last year and "amount to war crimes." The allegations include abducting and beating men suspected of collaborating with pro-Russian separatists, and extorting money.

Last year the Ukrainian government tried to bring Aidar and other volunteer groups under its control. It ordered Aidar to reform into the 24th assault battalion as part of Ukraine's official forces.

Melnychuk described that order as "criminal," but said most of his men had demobilized or come under official control by this year.

He and other battalion leaders said that their soldiers' loyalty did not always lie with the authorities and that some groups still operate beyond official control.

Melnychuk was scornful of attempts to crack down on the battalions, saying such moves had been provoked by Russia spreading propaganda. He said Russia was scared of the battalions because the volunteers inflicted the most losses on the pro-Russian rebels, "so they pretend that we eat little children for breakfast."

The political situation in Ukraine remained difficult and fragile, he said, criticizing the lack of change in government. "The (Maidan) revolution was interrupted by the aggression (in the east) and the patriots left Maidan and went to the east to protect Ukraine," he said. "Only 10 percent of people in positions of power are new; the rest are all the same, pursuing the same schemes they always did."

Andriy Filonenko, a founder of the Tornado battalion, was equally defiant about accusations against his fighters. Eight members of the battalion have been accused of crimes including rape, murder and smuggling. Ukrainian officials say one video shows a re-enactment of how members of Tornado forced two captives to rape another man; they also say some 40 members of the battalion have criminal records.

Filonenko told Reuters the charges were ridiculous. "I don't understand all this talk about criminal records," he said. "All I know is that people spilt their blood for Ukraine, for the motherland."

Like Melnychuk, Filonenko said the "old order" was out to protect itself. He said the charges were only made after the Tornado battalion had uncovered what it said was a smuggling ring involving local politicians in east Ukraine. Officials say the charges came before Tornado's alleged smuggling discovery.

Filonenko, who wore a black T-shirt with a red Ukrainian trident on it, defended the battalion's actions, citing the violence and lack of resources in the east. "It's a war. They're not handing out sweets," he said.

"Think of it this way: There's a task, for the task you need a vehicle to get there and back - but they don't give you any vehicle or petrol to fulfill the task ... You have to pick up wounded ... so what do you do? ... Of course, you stop a car and take it."

'They Steal a Lot'

Close to bankruptcy, Ukraine has struggled to implement reforms demanded by the Maidan protesters. Its police and courts are still widely seen as favoring the powerful, and bribes are still used for everything from avoiding speeding penalties to getting into good schools.

For some powerful interests, the rule of force, not law, remains tempting. In March, a group of armed men in combat fatigues raided the Kiev offices of the state-owned oil company UkrTransNafta. Two parliamentary deputies accused the billionaire Ihor Kolomoisky, who harangued journalists at the scene of the raid, of sending the masked men into the building after one of his allies had been sacked as chairman of the company.

Kolomoisky is widely credited with funding volunteer battalions that defended the city of Dnipropetrovsk and fought against pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Poroshenko moved to assert his authority, meeting Kolomoisky in the aftermath of the raid. As a result, Kolomoisky stepped down as governor of Dnipropetrovsk, in the east of the country, though he remains a powerful business figure with political influence. Kolomoisky did not respond to requests for comment.

Interior Minister Arsen Avakov told Reuters Ukraine was now "rebooting" all of its power structures to start with a "clean sheet," and at the same time trying to root out criminal elements in the battalions.

"As in all big communities of people, there are different types," he said. "We must tell the truth: Some have looted and we will punish them."

He said that some armed groups "appropriated the names" of established battalions and that "no one really knows where they are fighting or where they have fought."

Ukraine's military prosecutor, Anatoly Matios, says he is determined to take action. He told Reuters he intends to take members of Tornado battalion to court for their alleged offenses.

"Who made the decision, turned a blind eye to their criminal record and allowed them to become police officers? Who gave them weapons and did not foresee the possible tragic consequences?" he said in an interview at the prosecutor's office. He said he wanted to check all police battalions "in order not to have a second Tornado."

Matios recognizes that his moves may prove unpopular. "I understand a very large part of society may even hate me for the thankless but legal work that we do. It's not comfortable at a minimum."

On July 8, activists poured manure at the front entrance of his office. He described it as a paid-for protest.

A shoot-out earlier this month between the police and forces linked to the political group Right Sector showed the issue of independent armed groups had to be dealt with, officials said.

Right Sector, a far right Ukrainian nationalist party that runs volunteer battalions, said two of its members were killed after being set upon by police in the town of Mukacheve, western Ukraine. The Interior Ministry said the group had fired first.

After the incident, Right Sector called for the interior minister to resign and threatened to send battalions of fighters to Kiev.

Ukraine's government says that Right Sector and other groups have to decide whether they want to be political groups or combat battalions, but cannot be both. Inevitably, though, battalion commanders have political views.

In his billiard club headquarters, commander Korchynsky of the Saint Mary battalion made his disdain for the government plain. "Like the majority of Ukrainian people, I think (the new leadership) is bad ... They steal a lot. When Yanukovych was stealing, that was bad. But these people are clearing up when the country is at war, so they are guilty on two counts. This is marauding."

He said the revolution that began with the Maidan had been interrupted, but would one day be completed. He did not say when.

If so, he will have to confront Poroshenko. On July 16, the president, decried the problems posed by unspecified "internal enemies" of the country. He told parliament: "I will not allow anarchy in Ukraine."

 [return to Contents] 

 #28
Wall Street Journal
July 29, 2015
Cut Off From Ukraine, Business in Rebel-Held East Turns Toward Russia
Russian goods, rubles proliferate as access to rest of Ukraine is squeezed
By JAMES MARSON

DONETSK, Ukraine-At Ten-Eleven restaurant in this separatist-held eastern city, customers can settle their bills in Russian rubles after washing down a meal with Russian beer that has bumped Ukrainian brews off the menu.

The owner said it is a practical, not political, choice made after Ukraine's government in June tightened restrictions on goods entering areas controlled by Russian-backed militants. "We have to make a living," said Boris Bit-Gevorgizov, 57 years old. "Ukraine is pushing us away."

The preponderance of Russian currency and products in rebel-held areas is deepening separation from the rest of Ukraine and muddying the prospects for a European-brokered peace plan.

The February cease-fire has damped, but not ended, fighting that has cost more than 6,000 lives. It also was supposed to reintegrate the two self-proclaimed republics into Ukraine. But political progress has stalled amid disagreement over how much autonomy they would receive.

Meanwhile, Ukraine has gradually squeezed flows of money, people and goods in and out of those areas since last fall, saying it needs to prevent the spread of rebel fighters, weapons and potentially counterfeit currency.

"Kiev won't support and subsidize murderers and gunmen, help bandits to keep afloat," President Petro Poroshenko told Parliament in June. He said full economic ties would be restored once Kiev regains control of the border with Russia from the separatists, as foreseen by the peace deal.

Officials in Kiev say Ukrainians in rebel-held areas should be persuaded that their future is with Ukraine, not in a separatist gray zone. Ukrainians can receive pensions by crossing into Ukraine-controlled territory, they say, and the government is planning logistics centers at checkpoints, including stores selling food and medication and ATMs to disburse cash.

Still, the areas are drifting ever further from Kiev as businesses strengthen ties to the east. Russian goods dominate in central Donetsk food stores: juice from the Kuban region just over the border, water from Nalchik in Russia's North Caucasus and beer from a town on the Volga River advertised as "from the heart of Russia."

Rubles make up more than half of the currency in circulation, according to businessmen and rebel officials. Separatist leaders in March declared rubles and dollars legal tender, as the closure of banks meant hryvnias were running low. In many stores and restaurants, prices are displayed in both currencies, and change is given in rubles even when the customer pays in hryvnias.

To be sure, many changes are largely cosmetic. New license plates for the so-called Donetsk People's Republic can be registered for the equivalent of $15, but most drivers have kept Ukrainian ones. A few display loyalty to the separatist regime by sticking its red, black and blue flag over Ukraine's colors on the plate.

Mr. Bit-Gevorgizov, who also owns real estate and a logistics firm, said rebels have restored a semblance of order compared with last summer, when armed groups stole expensive cars, including his, and some business owners disappeared amid demands for cash.

Pyotr Savchenko, a separatist lawmaker and rebel commander, called the DPR "our not-quite-state."

The consolidation of fighters into a regular army has been patchy, with only one in three getting paid, said Mr. Savchenko. Officials say there are no plans to issue passports.

With no fully functioning banking system, businessmen drive to Russia to make purchases with bags of cash, often taking several colleagues as Russian customs allows each person to carry only $10,000. The drive to Rostov-on-Don, the nearest large Russian city, is dangerous because of armed gangs who know about the supply runs, Mr. Bit-Gevorgizov said.

Those businesses that are still functioning have adopted different survival strategies.

Some large enterprises have re-registered outside rebel-held areas and continue to pay taxes to Kiev to avoid legal complications that could endanger their business. Separatist leaders quietly acquiesce to that, needing them to keep paying their workers to prevent an economic and social collapse.

Ukrainian officials say most of the tax revenue from the region still comes from firms in rebel-held areas.

Some companies are paying taxes to Kiev and making cash payments to separatists, disguising them in their ledgers to avoid trouble. Others are just paying taxes to the rebel powers-that-be.

Vladimir Trubchanin, chief executive of Yasynuvata Machine Building Plant near Donetsk, said he began paying taxes to separatists at the start of the year after shelling from Ukrainian forces destroyed a quarter of his factory and killed a driver who was delivering bread to workers.

"I don't want to pay taxes to a country that bombs me," he said.

Mr. Trubchanin used to sell 30% of the large digging equipment his plant produces in Ukraine. But, with the de facto border closed, he said he would have to sell locally and in Russia. "It isn't because we don't want to, but because they don't want us to," he said, referring to Ukraine's government. "It isn't politics, but business."

Sitting on the terrace of his largely empty restaurant, Mr. Bit-Gevorgizov, whose surname comes from Assyrian ancestors, showed photographs of his warehouse in a Donetsk suburb that was destroyed by shelling. He said he had put his businesses in a holding pattern and is spending his time resting and reading philosophy, although he keeps Ten-Eleven running out of loyalty to staff and in the hope things will improve.

Kiev says the blockade is needed to contain the separatists, but locals say the system is rife with corruption.

Goods from Russia often work out cheaper than ones brought through Ukrainian checkpoints with the help of a bribe, Mr. Bit-Gevorgizov said.

Still, Ten-Eleven, which serves homey fare such as fried chicken and potatoes, buys some foodstuff from the city market that come from villages under Ukrainian control and are sold at a hefty markup.

 [return to Contents] 

 #29
Reuters
July 29, 2015
Guns and Underpants: Ukrainian Army Hobbled by Bureaucratic Woes

KIEV - After more than a year of fighting in eastern Ukraine, the country's regular army remains disorganized and poorly equipped. "The Defense Ministry needed to test underpants for a year before approving them for use. I'm not kidding," President Petro Poroshenko told a meeting of regional chiefs this month.

Building up an army to withstand the threat from Russia and pro-Russian separatists has been a formidable task. When Moscow annexed Crimea and conflict erupted in Ukraine's east, Kiev had outdated Soviet equipment and just 180,000 troops, of whom only 5,000 were battle ready, according to a speech Poroshenko made last month. The government has since boosted military spending to an unprecedented 5 percent of gross domestic product and increased troop numbers to 250,000. Some 50,000 are actively serving in the east.

But examples of incompetence and corruption within the military regularly appear in Ukrainian media. In June, Segodnya newspaper reported that an administrative error had left eight servicemen on their way to the front stranded for days in the city of Kharkiv.

Vladislav Seleznyov, a spokesman for the Ukrainian military, denied any error and said the eight men had gone AWOL. "They went on some adventures and came back to the collecting point in a state of intoxication and refused to go to the conflict zone," Seleznyov said. Military police guarded them for eight days and then officials from the men's brigade collected them to take them to the front. "They physically resisted, saying, 'We won't go,'" said Seleznyo.

In a separate case, a wounded serviceman took four months to prove to the Defense Ministry that he was alive after it mistakenly classified him as "killed in action" and stopped paying his salary. In a statement, the Ministry blamed an administrative error and said the money had now been paid.

Families have also faced delays in receiving compensation for soldiers killed in combat, according to the Ukrainian media. Ukraine's military prosecutor, Anatoly Matios, has written on Facebook several times about cases where the military has been slow to compensate families.

Businessman Yuri Biryukov, who advises Poroshenko and manages voluntary efforts to equip the military, has blamed the problems on mismanagement. "There are 100,500 reasons: from the idiotic over-bureaucratisation of our army to the lack of enough computers, from under-qualified military suppliers to fears of reporting problems to high command," he posted on Facebook.

Seleznyov, the military spokesman, said the Ministry of Defense was implementing "a genuine process of reform," but added: "It would not be honest to say that we don't have problems."

Military prosecutor Matios told Reuters that he has investigated numerous cases of bribery and theft in the past year and has made some progress. But, he said, it would require a sea change in attitudes for real progress. "Society wants irreversible and immediate change because the economic situation has been bad for so long. Not enough has been done either by us, by the government or by lawmakers," he said. "We have laws, (but) we don't have the culture of implementing them," he said.

The Ministry declined to comment on the corruption allegations.

 [return to Contents] 

 #30
Moscow Times
July 29, 2015
Moscow, Kiev Grapple With Historic Ties to Prince Vladimir
By Ivan Nechepurenko

Tuesday marked the passage of a millennium since the death of Vladimir the Great. As both Kiev and Moscow honored the occasion with high-profile celebrations, leaders of each took advantage of the opportunity to emphasize the strength of their own countries' ties to the medieval ruler.

Prince Vladimir is revered for having introduced Christianity to the Kievan Rus, a federation of Slavic principalities that at times included portions of Russia, Ukraine and much of the former Soviet space.

In 988, Prince Vladimir was baptized in modern-day Crimea, converting from Slavic Paganism. He went on to Christianize the Kievan Rus, declaring Orthodox Christianity the official religion of his people.

According to the Kremlin, sometime between the late 13th and early 14th centuries, Prince Vladimir was "made a saint equal to the apostles by the Russian Orthodox Church." He is celebrated annually on July 15.

President Vladimir Putin marked the occasion in style this year, inviting some 400 members of the Russian clergy, state officials and public figures to a grand reception at the Kremlin.

Meanwhile, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko attended a church service at Kiev's St. Vladimir's Cathedral and a celebratory concert was held in one of the capital's central squares.

Though both festivities centered on one man, Moscow and Kiev offered divergent views of what it was that Prince Vladimir ruled over.

While the Kremlin referred to him in a statement as the Prince "who baptized the people of Rus into Christianity," the Ukrainian presidential administration referred to him as the "Grand Prince of Kiev" who Christianized "Kievan Rus-Ukraine."

Russian and Ukrainian historians interviewed Tuesday by The Moscow Times agreed that any version prioritizing the ties of one country over the other is erroneous.

Prince Vladimir ruled neither over Russia nor Ukraine; he ruled over an early medieval state that united many Slavic people, and which only centuries later would evolve into the nations we recognize today.

"Both Ukraine and Russia are attempting to claim their common history as their own. In the time of Prince Vladimir no one had ever even dreamt of Ukraine or Russia. [Kievan Rus] was in the very early stages of development," said Igor Danilevsky, a history professor at the Higher School of Economics, a prestigious Moscow university.

While analysts interviewed by The Moscow Times agreed that the use of history as a means to accomplish political ends often leads to its distortion, they likewise agreed that this is nothing new. Many politicians have employed this strategy as a source of state-building and to bolster national identity.

Speaking at the Kremlin's celebration of Prince Vladimir, Putin said "Christianization was a key turning point for Russian history, statehood and culture. Our common duty is to honor this crucial state of Russia's development."

"By halting internecine strife [between the different principalities making up Kievan Rus], by defeating external enemies, Prince Vladimir laid the foundation for the formation of a united Russian nation; in fact, he cleared the way for the establishment of a strong, centralized Russian state," Putin told his illustrious audience at the grand Kremlin palace.

Beyond the Kremlin walls, numerous other Russian celebrations have been hosted in recent days to honor Prince Vladimir, in an apparent attempt to emphasize the country's link to the early medieval leader - who ruled from the capital of modern-day Ukraine.

Overall, the Russian state earmarked upwards of 274.5 million rubles ($4.5 million) for festivals, forums and renovations across Russia in Prince Vladimir's honor, the RBC news site reported last week.

On Monday, Putin visited the newly restored church of St. Vladimir at the Moscow Diocesan house, which in Soviet times hosted a studio where documentary films were produced.

The Russian authorities also courted a great deal of media attention in recent weeks by deciding to change the location of a massive statue of Prince Vladimir that has already been constructed, and which was meant to be erected on Vorobyovy Gory (Sparrow Hills).

The original plan was for the monument to overlook the city center, and to resemble a monument to the medieval prince that has towered over the banks of the Dnepr river in Kiev since 1853.

During his last visit to Ukraine in July 2013, on the occasion of the 1,025th anniversary of the Christianization of Kievan Rus, Putin had visited the monument with then-President Viktor Yanukovych.

Since then, much has changed.

A few months later, in February 2014, a popular uprising led to the Kremlin-friendly Yanukovych's ouster, and cleared the way for the current pro-Western government to take power.

Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula and a bloody conflict between pro-Russian insurgents and Ukrainian government forces has erupted in eastern Ukraine, claiming the lives of upward of 6,000 victims and leaving more than a million people displaced, according to the United Nations.

The Russian government was eventually forced to scrap plans to install the monument at Vorobyovy Gory due to public outrage with the notion that Moscow's would dominate a portion of the Moscow skyline. More than 60,000 people signed a petition disputing the planned location.

Moscow authorities have yet to choose a new location.

But as Moscow scrambles to showcase its ties to Prince Vladimir, Kiev is doing its best to sever that cord, Ukrainian historian Alexander Karevin told The Moscow Times.

"The Ukrainian government is attempting to claim Prince Vladimir as its own, making it seem as though he had nothing to do with Russia," Karevin said in a phone interview from Kiev.

"Unfortunately, many people are afraid to talk openly about this fact in Ukraine right now" he said.

Putin addressed members of the clergy of the Russian Orthodox Church, led by Patriarch Kirill.

Poroshenko attended a service led by Patriarch Filaret, head of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church's Kiev Patriarchate, which has remained severed from the same church's Moscow patriarchate since 1992.

While the Moscow patriarchate has many adherents in Ukraine, Kiev authorities have thrown its weight behind the notion of unifying the patriarchates into a single church.

Prince Vladimir was active on the territories of both present-day Russia and Ukraine; today's borders would seem alien to him, said Vladimir Kuchkin, head of the Center of Ancient Rus History at the Russian Academy of Sciences' Institute of Russian History.

"There were differences between numerous principalities of the ancient Rus, but all of them spoke a very similar language, and all of their rulers were related to each other by blood," said Kuchkin, one of Russia's most prominent historians of early medieval Rus.

"Prince Vladimir came to rule in Kiev from Novgorod [an ancient city in present-day Russia], but we don't say that a Russian had conquered Ukraine at the time," he said in a phone interview.

 [return to Contents] 

 #31
www.opendemocracy.net
July 28, 2015
Ukrainian refugees in Russia receive a mixed welcome
Many people took refuge in Russia after fleeing eastern Ukraine last summer. Their experiences are far from uniform.
By Dmitry Okrest
Dmitry Okrest is a former staff writer with The New Times and currently works as an independent journalist.

While the West thinks Russia is fighting a war with Ukraine, and Moscow calls the conflict a 'civil war', civilians continue to flee the combat zone in eastern Ukraine.

Last summer, many people made their way to the border crossing at Rostov, and from there-across Russia.

Ukrainians have been coming to work in Russia for a long time. If you take into account labour migrants from Ukraine (of which there are 3.6m), there are almost five million Ukrainians living in Russia. And for many Russian-speaking Ukrainian citizens, Moscow was the only place they could move after the outbreak of war in the east.

But how have Ukrainians fared here, in a country where 'Banderites' (followers of Stepan Bandera) and 'supporters of Maidan' are far from popular?

Give evidence or else

At the start of July, Sergei, 25, who left for Moscow after war broke out in south eastern Ukraine, received a call from the district Prosecutor's Office.

They invited Sergei to give evidence as part of a criminal investigation into war crimes committed by the Ukrainian military in Donbas. If Sergei didn't co-operate, they said sternly, he would be issued a summons.

'The questions were like: have you heard anything about the use of weapons, which aren't sanctioned by the OSCE? Have I, my property or my family suffered as a result of the war?' remembers Sergei.

'After every question, I wrote that I didn't know anything, or if I did, I found it out from the press, and then signed my name,' explains Sergei, one of many Ukrainians in Moscow who have received these invitations. 'I was told they want to question as many people as possible, and then send the case to court. Straight off, the investigator said that this was all a formality.'

Sergei comes from the port city of Nikolaev (Mykolaiv) on the Black Sea coast, and he is sure that the prosecutor's office found his telephone number via the Federal Migration Service (FMS), who have a record of him.

'They didn't ask any informal questions, they just asked me what I plan to do next,' remembers Sergey.

'I told them [the investigators] the truth: I want to stay here and work. No one asked why I came here. Obviously, no one wants to die in a war. Some people go to Europe, other people come here, and then there are those who are buried somewhere in Odessa. A friend of mine went to fight as a volunteer. He died on his first mission.'

'There's no work for us here'

Sergei left his home town of Nikolaev just as the draft was kicking in. Indeed, despite the fact Sergei was a student and is exempt from military service, a draft summons was delivered to his address shortly after he moved to Moscow.

Sergei tells me that many of his acquaintances fled to Moscow to avoid the draft. People are sympathetic to his plight, he notes, when he tells them where he's come from and why he left.

However, in a new town, and with Ukrainian citizenship, people aren't having much luck when it comes to jobs: they have to choose between working as a loader or a courier.

Employers want Russian citizens. For them, Ukrainians are labour migrants just like citizens of Kyrgyzstan or Uzbekistan-the traditional means of low-skilled labour. As a result, Sergey hasn't managed to find a job, and now makes his money by busking.

'There's no work for us here,' says Sergei. 'One guy, he's over 50, left so he didn't have to fight. He's an engineer, but the only work for people like us is unskilled labour-bring this, bring that. But still, it's better than being at the front. At the start, they told us they'd mobilise us for a month, then six months. The lads who wound up in the army last year are still there.'

Regardless of the conflict in Ukraine's south east, Sergei doesn't consider himself a 'traitor', although he admits that his friends who stayed behind have called him one.

'They called me a renegade, of course. I had one really unpleasant conversation with a neighbour when he saw a picture of me on Red Square. Another one asked me not to shoot at them after I'm called up to the DPR [Donetsk People's Republic] militia, but I'm not planning on joining them at all.' Sergei was never interested in politics, and saying that he isn't planning to return to Nikolaev any time soon.

All of Sergei's relatives have left Nikolaev, though his mother recently visited home. 'She went back,' Sergei tells me. 'She said that the local television had changed its tune. Before, everyone said they were against Russia, but now they criticise the new government too. The country is in crisis, default, pensions aren't being paid.'

'A neighbour of ours, a school teacher, lost her job after she refused to sign a document saying she would instill a real national spirit in her students, that's how they got her. On the whole, I don't miss that Ukraine.'

'Later that night they started to shell our side of town'

So far, it seems the Prosecutor's Office is only searching for witnesses in Moscow. Refugees living in other cities have not been questioned.

For instance, Tatyana Sukhinova, 34, who now lives in the small village of Luknovo some 300km east of Moscow. Originally from Amvrosievka, a town halfway between the Russian border and Donetsk, Tatyana is from a mixed Russian-Ukrainian family.

Amvrosievka has been shelled since 15 June 2014 (both sides have blamed one another).

'I was at my mum's dacha [country house] at the time,' Tatyana remembers, 'and later that night they started to shell our side of town. There were Ukes [Ukrainians] with guns all over town. You'd be walking along and you wouldn't know whether you'd get home or not. Everyone was scared, praying that their house wouldn't be shelled and that they'd remain alive.'

Tatyana decided to evacuate after a shell hit her home. 'I remember the border crossing clearly, the moment itself. Back then loads of people wanted to get across in time-some by bus, others by car. People, including us, were traveling without even knowing where they were going.

'When I crossed the border, I felt a pain in my heart: where am I going, what will happen next, how I'm going to look after my children, how will we live. My eyes were constantly full of tears, though I tried not to cry. Not a happy time whatsoever.'

Tatyana arrived in Moscow a month later, and migration service officials requested she fill in a pile of documents. She had to negotiate a place for her children Snezhana and Valentin on her own. 'It was only thanks to some good people that my children didn't have to sleep on the street, and I could get my bearings,' Tatyana recalls.

'People say we're the reason there's a crisis in Russia'

After the humanitarian catastrophe in Donbas, when thousands of people made their way to central Ukraine or neighbouring regions in Russia, numerous volunteer initiatives were set up to help refugees. For several months, refugees from the war lived in tents while volunteers identified potential housing for them. Several of these projects are also involved in supporting the unrecognised republics in Donetsk and Luhansk.

Today, Sofia, Tatyana's 14-year-old daughter, is waiting for her mother in Rostov, the largest city near the border between Russia and Ukraine.

When the refugees tried to cross, the border guards didn't let Tatyana's older daughter through: Sofia has her father's surname, and she didn't have a document certifying his permission.

Soon, Tatyana will go to Rostov to collect her daughter, and then on to the border crossing in order to extend her migration card, otherwise she faces a fine. Tatyana also has to travel to Amvrosievka to receive her children's school certificates: without them, Sofia will have to repeat the seventh grade.

'If I'm honest, I really don't know how we're going to survive'

Meanwhile, Tatyana has to receive a temporary residence permit before September. She has to undergo a medical examination and sit exams on Russian history, language, and literature.

The examination costs 2,700 roubles (£28) per individual family member, and the tests will come to 7,500 roubles (£79) in total: money this family doesn't have. 'If I'm honest, I really don't know how we're going to survive,' says Tatyana, a single mother. 'I can't find the money we need to continue living in Russia.'

Tatyana earns 5,000 roubles (£52) per month working as a seamstress at a linen factory, and she earns extra, waitressing at two cafes on the highway. Here, she receives 350 roubles (£3.70) a day for waitressing, washing dishes and cleaning.

Tatyana couldn't find work immediately. She lost her job at a plastic bottle factory due to the economic crisis: her employers prefer to keep the local workers. 'We are living in another country and among different people, who hate us, and it seems like it's a bad dream. There are thousands of people like us in every town. You just want to wake up and return to your old life. We aren't having an easy time of it here, of course, but there's no way back for us either.'

'The hardest thing in my life is losing everything: home, friends, family,' Tatyana reflects. 'And to find yourself in another country where nobody needs you, apart from your children. Here in Russia, wherever I work, there are people who say we're [Ukrainians] the reason there's a crisis in Russia. And now we've come in droves, asking for help.

'At first, even my kids had conflicts with their new classmates-they'd overheard their parents. Some people hate the fact that Ukrainians have come here en masse. They accuse me of being responsible for the unemployment rate, and that Putin is sending truckloads of humanitarian aid to the Ukrainians instead of helping his own people and his own state. Although to be fair, people helped us in the beginning with firewood and getting the kids into school.'

'This is all fascism'

Many refugees or the volunteers who help them refused to comment: they're afraid of 'provocations'.

For instance, one woman who left Donestk for Russia has been attacked from the other side: 'I posted an announcement on the internet. Someone rang me on the pretext of helping me and asked for my address. Then they called us traitors, and promised to come with guns and get my children.'

'This is all fascism,' says Anastasiya Bykova. 'Fascism, that's the current situation in Ukraine.' Bykova, 27, left the town of Slavyansk (Slovyansk) with her children after the separatists surrendered the town in July 2014.

Now, Anastasiya lives with other refugees in Serpukhov, a small town between Moscow and Tula. Despite her Russian sympathies, Anastasiya was denied official refugee status, and as a result she cannot find permanent employment.

But the Prosecutor's Office decided to get in touch all the same-perhaps given how close Serpukhov is to Moscow. 'Our conversation started with a request to inform them of the last 10 years of my life, right up to how old I was when I gave birth, who the father was, why we divorced, what I'd lost and how I got here.

'They even asked about my previous husbands' dates of birth. It was like I was at confession for two hours. Well, I told them that I'd realised back in May [2014] that this was real war. But all the same we weren't ready to leave.'

'Let's just say that people don't want to talk about this'

It is not only Ukrainian refugees that are finding life difficult. In late July, Russia's Federation Council publicised the so-called 'patriotic stop list', which declares 12 organisations 'undesirable', invites the justice ministries to investigate their activities, and stipulates fines and even prison time for people co-operating with them.

Aside from Open Society Foundations and the National Foundation for Democracy, the Ukrainian World Congress (Toronto) and the Ukrainian World Coordination Council (Kyiv) were also included on this list. The Ukrainian World Congress has partner organisations in 34 countries, including Russia.

These developments have left some people in an uncertain situation. As Viktor Girzhov, co-chairman of Ukrainians of Moscow, explains, the Congress and Council co-ordinate activities all over the world, including a partnership with his organisation. Girzhov says that his group's relationship with these organisations is no more than a partnership, and as part of this, he travels to meetings once a year.

Girzhov doesn't receive a penny from foreign funding, and the last grant was given to hold a cultural festival in 2009. 'You need to look at things how they really are, we're not involved in any subversive activities,' says Girzhov.

'But now they've searched the library of Ukrainian literature. The Ministry of Justice has refused us registration twice. We don't doubt that they'll refuse us again.

'In the Far East, they sacked a choir manager after she visited Maidan, and in order for the choir to continue, they demanded she come out against the events in Kiev. I haven't met any "curators", but some people have had phone calls, and have been invited to meetings. Let's just say that people don't want to talk about this.'

'There's a tension in society, like before a storm'

Everyone, it seems, has decided to lay low. No demonstrations are being held. Activists say that many people from Ukrainian organisations have left the regions, places like Tatarstan and Ekaterinburg.

'People who made their position clear before have gone quiet,' admits Girzhov. 'And that's when you consider that we don't conduct political activities, which could subvert Russia's independence. After all, we're all citizens of Russia. We just identify ourselves as Ukrainians, who speak their native language at home, and who observe tradition.'

Girzhov says that the authorities are yet to demand demonstrations of loyalty from local Ukrainians. Instead, public officials are concerned only with preventing conflict.

Girzhov is a frequent guest on Russian state television. Indeed, it's thanks to Girzhov that discussion on talk shows is possible: often guests come on with exactly the same position.

'On an everyday level, it feels like attitudes have gotten worse,' says Girzhov. 'There's a tension in society, like before a storm. People who didn't say anything against Ukrainians before are now very negative.'

'They're pleased that Russia took Crimea. For them, Russia should have taken almost all of Ukraine. You can find people who think like this even among distant relatives of mine. Just imagine: people who've lived for centuries together, who've fought together, are now at each other's throats. The war in Donbas, Crimea, both of these events have divided Russian society.'

'This is an abyss you just can't cross. Now we have to build bridges. It seems like the search for enemies among Ukrainians has lost its shine. Compared to the annexation of Crimea last year, people are a bit tired of all this now.'

 [return to Contents] 

 #32
www.rt.com
July 29, 2015
Russia to veto MH17 tribunal draft at UN Security Council

Russia is expected veto a draft UN Security Council resolution calling for an international tribunal to be formed to probe the downing of a Malaysian airliner last year. President Putin said he regretted that a compromise deal could not be worked out.

The Russian president explained to Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte why Russia would not support the establishment of a tribunal into the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 in a phone call, the Kremlin said.

Moscow opposed the draft document submitted by Malaysia and supported by several nations, including The Netherlands and Ukraine, saying that its description of the tragedy as a threat to international security is a strained interpretation meant to subject it to the council's authority.

"We believe it is not in the UN charter. The UN Security Council is not supposed to deal with issues like this," Russian UN envoy Vitaly Churkin said, adding that Russia would veto the document.

The Security Council ordered creation of special tribunals to tackle several cases, including war crimes committed during the Balkan wars and the genocide in Rwanda. But Russia believes it would be wrong to treat the MH17 downing differently from other similar incidents with civilian aircraft, such as the downing of Iran Air flight 655 by the US in 1988 or the downing of Korean Air Lines flight 007 by Soviet Union in 1983. The call for a tribunal is confrontational, Moscow believes.

An alternative draft resolution proposed by Russia and seen by RT called for more transparency in the ongoing investigation of the MH17 incident by the Dutch authorities. It also criticized UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon for a failure to appoint a special representative to tackle the case.

Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 was shot down on July 21 as it was flying over a war zone, where Ukrainian armed forces were fighting against rebels, who rejected the new government imposed by an armed coup in Kiev. The tragedy has been the subject of much speculation, with Kiev and its foreign sponsors accusing the rebels of taking down the plane with a Russia-supplied missile.

The rebels rejected the accusations and blamed the Ukrainian army for the downing. Moscow denied supplying anti-aircraft missiles to the rebels and made public evidence of Ukrainian military activities in the area.

A preliminary report by the Dutch investigators in September 2014 confirmed that the Boeing airliner was taken down by an outside force, but did not indicate which side could have carried out such an attack even what kind of weapon was used. The final report is still being completed.

 [return to Contents] 

 #33
www.rt.com
July 29, 2015
MH17 crash tribunal would 'extend Dutch-led investigation indefinitely'

Malaysia and the Netherlands are putting the cart before the horse by proposing to set up a tribunal on the MH17 Malaysia plane crash before obtaining the results of the international investigation, Alexander Mercouris, International Affairs Editor at Russia Insider told RT.

RT: There has been a proposal to create a tribunal on the basis of a UN Chapter dealing with global threats. But is that appropriate in the case of MH17?

Alexander Mercouris: First of all, it's not the UN that is proposing this; it is two countries that propose it: Malaysia and the Netherlands, which have been undertaking the investigation. Is it appropriate? It has never been done before. There have been many cases where there have been airplane crashes. The Security Council has never involved itself by setting up a tribunal to try those responsible. The Security Council is concerned with threats to international security, not with setting up criminal courts. I would say it was not appropriate.

RT: The results of the Dutch-led investigation into MH17 are yet to be seen.  So with the Joint Investigation Team still working, why insist on a tribunal now? Russia's envoy to the UN said on Monday that UN tribunals had been far from productive in the past.  Is that a fair point?

AM: That is a very good question to which of course we don't have a very clear answer. The Russian government and the Russian ambassador of the UN Mr. Churkin have made precisely that point. They said: Why set up a tribunal or even talk about setting up a tribunal before we know what the results of the international investigation are? It is a case of putting the cart, as they say, before the horse. First we wait the results of the investigation, which we are expecting around October, then we look at what kind of tribunal there is. The concern must be that what is actually happening is that that report is not going to be very conclusive. Those who are now talking about setting up a tribunal are trying to use that device just to extend the investigation indefinitely.

RT: If this tribunal's initiated now, would it be a negative effect on the official investigation?

AM: It would be, because it would prejudge what that investigation is going to say. It would imply for example that there is an international crime that is being committed. When as at this moment in time we have no information from the report that says that.

RT: We've heard expert opinion that this tribunal might be biased and that it might be politicized.  Do you agree?

AM: One has to look here at those cases when tribunals were set up. There was the one on Yugoslavia; there have been various other ones that have been set up on an ad hoc basis. I think it is fair to say that outside the Western world they have been controversial, and that there is a widespread perception that they have been biased and that they followed the Western political agendas. One has to worry that the same thing would happen here.

RT: Moscow has also made clear that it will veto the resolution.  So why then insist on the voting?

AM: We're not yet sure that they will insist on it. But if they do insist on it, when Russia has made it very clear that they will veto it. The only purpose presumably would be to make a kind of political point or rather perhaps I should say to make a propaganda point, because that's what it would amount to. It would be a way of showing that Russia is obstructing the setting up of the enquiry, and certain people in the West, in the media, and Western governments would try to spin that to mean what they wanted it to mean.

 [return to Contents] 

 #34
Unlike Putin, Russian People Think that a Malaysian Plane Tribunal Would Hold Ukraine Responsible, Gudkov Says
Paul Goble

Staunton, July 29 - The Russian government is totally opposed to the creation of an international tribunal to investigate the downing of the Malaysian airliner a year ago and will likely veto a proposal for such a venue at a meeting of the UN Security Council today. But a recent poll shows about half of all Russians are quite ready to see such a tribunal set up.
                 
he reason for that, Lev Gudkov, the head of the Levada Center Analytic Center which conducted the poll (On that survey, see windowoneurasia2.blogspot.com/2015/07/kremlin-gets-only-half-loaf-from.html.), says that those taking that position generally believe that such a tribunal would condemn the Ukrainian side (nv.ua/opinion/Gudkov/pochemu-rossijane-podderzhivajut-tribunal-po-mn17-61388.html).

"Only a small part of the citizens of the Russian Federation are inclined to believe that it would condemn" either pro-Moscow separatists or "Russia which gave them arms. Those who think that guilt falls on the Russian Federation are mostly against a corresponding tribunal or at least more cautiously evaluate the prospects of its being set up."

"For the domestic consumer," he says, the Russian government explains "its protest against the creation of an international tribunal at the UN by saying that such a decision is premature, not objective, politicized, and isn't necessary until the completion of investigations by other courts."

"The presumption of Ukraine's guilt exists," Gudkov continues.  The Russian media is still full of stories saying that the Ukrainians are "exclusively" guilty, and "the majority of Russians" as a result are inclined to believe that either the Ukrainian military or Kyiv itself is guilty of the shoot down.

Thus, Gudkov argues, "the absolute majority of the Russian population on this issue supports the position of the official authorities," even though they are more willing to have a tribunal formed than the Kremlin is. Their view has been formed by "a most powerful and extraordinarily aggressive one-sided demagogic" position."

Russians "cannot check the facts and believe everything they are told, especially in the provinces. After more than a year and a half of unceasing anti-Ukrainian campaign, people are ready to view Ukraine a priori as guilty of all sins."

A small but declining percentage blame the US. A year ago, 22 percent of Russians said the United States was responsible for the shooting down of the Malaysian plane. Now, 17 percent do, and this opinion is found most often among the least educated strata of the Russian population.

The small share of Russians who are ready to blame the Russian side for the shooting down of the plane, in contrast, Gudkov says, are "more educated, politically better informed, and critically inclined toward the authorities. In general," he adds, "this is the urban population of the major cities."

 [return to Contents] 

 #35
Putin Confirms Russia's Readiness to Cooperate in MH17 Crash Investigation

MOSCOW, July 29 (Sputnik) - Russian President Vladimir Putin during a phone conversation with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said that Russia was ready to work closely on the investigation of the Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 crash in eastern Ukraine in 2014, the Kremlin said Wednesday.

"The Russian side emphasizes its readiness to work closely on the issues of investigating the reasons and conditions of the Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crash in eastern Ukraine," the Kremlin said on its official website.

Vladimir Putin confirmed Moscow's unchanging position on the inexpediency of setting up a tribunal in regard to the Malaysia Airlines plane crash.

"The unchanged position in the inexpediency of establishing such a court organ was confirmed by the Russian president. It was also noted that many questions remain in the investigation," the press service said in a statement.

Later on Wednesday, the UN Security Council will vote on whether to set up a tribunal to investigate and prosecute those responsible for downing the flight MH17.

The initiative to establish the tribunal was proposed by Malaysia earlier in July, and backed by Australia, Belgium, the Netherlands and Ukraine. On Monday, Russian envoy to the United Nations Vitaly Churkin said that Moscow would vote against the draft resolution on the creation of the tribunal.

At the same time, Vladimir Putin expressed his regrets on the UN Security Council's decision on the compromise project of the MH17 plane crash investigation that was not supported by the countries pushing for an international tribunal of the crash, the Kremlin said on its website Wednesday.

"Regret was expressed over the fact that the compromise project was not supported by states pushing for the creation of an international tribunal on the Malaysia Airlines airplane catastrophe," the statement on the site reads.

On July 17, 2014, Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 crashed in Ukraine's eastern region of Donetsk en route from Amsterdam to Kuala Lumpur. All 298 people on board, mostly Dutch citizens, died.

The preliminary report by the Dutch Safety Board suggested that the plane broke up in mid-air after being hit by numerous high-energy objects that had penetrated it from the outside. A final report is expected to be released in October.

 [return to Contents] 

 #36
Sputnik
July 28, 2015
US Gives $245Mln of Security Aid to Kiev - Ambassador

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - Washington has provided $245 million worth of security-related aid to Ukraine, US Ambassador in Kiev Geoffrey Pyatt said Tuesday.

"We do not believe there is a military solution to this conflict [in Ukraine], but we do believe Ukraine has a sovereign right to defend its own territory. That is the logic of our security sector assistance, which has now reached $245 million," Pyatt said in a telephone conference.

According to the ambassador, the same logic applies to the US training program for Ukraine's National Guard. Pyatt noted US cooperation with several European and NATO countries, such as the United Kingdom, in strengthening Ukrainian armed forces.

The United States has been providing Kiev with non-lethal military assistance since the conflict in Ukraine began last year.

In April 2015, the United States sent 300 troops to Ukraine to train the country's National Guard.

Earlier this month, US Secretary of Defense Ashton Carter said the Ukrainian military had requested additional security aid from Washington.

 [return to Contents] 

 #37
The Daily Signal
http://dailysignal.com
July 27, 2015
US Support Quietly Increases for Ukraine as Peace Remains Elusive
By Nolan Peterson
Nolan Peterson, a former special operations pilot and a combat veteran of Iraq and Afghanistan, is The Daily Signal's foreign correspondent based in Ukraine    

KYIV, Ukraine-A Department of Defense plan to send Ukraine advanced, long-range counter-battery radars highlights both an evolution of the Ukraine war and a ratcheting up of U.S. military support for the post-Soviet state, which continues to fight a war in its eastern territories against combined Russian-separatist forces.

On Wednesday, the Wall Street Journal reported on a Pentagon plan to send Ukraine AN/TPQ-37 and 36 Firefinder radars, which have ranges from 15 to 31 miles. The White House has not yet decided on whether to approve the deal, according to the report, and the radars would probably not be available until next year.

Subsequently, on Friday, the U.S. State Department announced that the U.S. Army training exercise in the western Ukrainian town of Yavoriv called "Fearless Guardian," which is currently limited to training the Ukrainian National Guard, will expand this fall to include the regular army.

"The continuation of the training is part of our ongoing efforts to contribute to Ukraine's long-term military reform and professionalization and to help improve Ukraine's internal defense capabilities and training capacity," U.S. Army Europe spokesman Donald Wrenn said in an email to The Daily Signal.

"We in U.S. Army Europe see this as a continuation of a valuable partnership with Ukraine that began more than 20 years ago."

The Russian Ministry of Foreign Affairs did not immediately respond to a request for comment. But the Kremlin has previously labeled the U.S. training mission in Yavoriv provocative.

Reports of Pentagon proposal to send Ukraine more advanced radars come as the U.S. training mission in Ukraine expands.

"This is a dangerous process," said Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin in an interview with the Rossiiskaya Gazeta daily in April, speaking about Fearless Guardian.

"We would push for all foreign and illegal military units to be removed from Ukraine," he added.

An Evolving War

If approved, the proposed radar deal would bolster Ukraine's defensive capabilities, particularly for the war Kyiv anticipates fighting if the conflict evolves according to recent diplomatic negotiations.

Currently, combat in Ukraine is an artillery and sniper tit-for-tat fought largely in World War I-style trenches across a no man's land sometimes less than a kilometer wide. The opposing lines are usually within a few kilometers of each other, and troops rarely come under fire from the much greater distances radars like the AN/TPQ-37 and 36 are capable of monitoring.

Long-range weapons, including Grad (approximately 28-mile range), Smerch (approximately 56-mile range), and Uragan (approximately 22-mile range) rockets, as well as Msta 152-mm howitzers (approximately 18- to 22-mile range), are still used, although less frequently and often to target command posts farther back from the front lines.

According to earlier news reports, the United States has already sent Ukraine 20 tactical counter-battery radars, mainly designed for locating mortar fire within a range of about six miles. Ten more are scheduled for delivery this year.

Yet the 20 tactical radars provided by the United States-some of which have been lost or destroyed in combat, according to news reports-are inadequate to cover the breadth of the 200-mile-long front line or attacks from long-range weapons systems.

Consequently, Ukrainian combat forces still mainly rely on modified off-the-shelf drones (purchased and modified for military use by civilian volunteers), spotters and scouts to detect separatist artillery positions and coordinate return fire.

The type of combat in Ukraine, however, could soon change if recent diplomatic agreements are successfully implemented.

Talks this week between the leaders of Ukraine, Russia, the self-proclaimed separatist republics and the EU point to a possible pullback of both Ukrainian and combined Russian-separatist forces along a 30-kilometer (19-mile) buffer zone-greatly increasing the distance between the opposing sides and making longer-range counter-battery radars like the U.S. AN/TPQ-37 and 36 uniquely valuable.

"I have instructed the Ukrainian representatives in the Trilateral Contact Group to immediately sign an agreement with the OSCE and the Russian side, which is a party to the Trilateral Contact Group, to guarantee the establishment of a 30-kilometer buffer zone along the line of contact and to withdraw artillery that is still left there, withdraw tanks, and withdraw mortars, making the constant shelling impossible," Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said Wednesday, according to the Ukrainian news service UNIAN.

Poroshenko's call for a weapons pullback parallels a similar separatist measure.

On July 19, the self-proclaimed separatist republics in the Donbas announced they were pulling back tanks and armored vehicles equipped with weapons under 100-mm caliber to three kilometers behind their front-line positions. The OSCE (the multinational group charged with monitoring the Ukraine cease-fire) observed the removal of some separatist weapons but could not confirm the full withdrawal.

The Diplomatic Front

The bilateral calls for weapons removal come as Western European leaders continue to put pressure on Kyiv to make diplomatic concessions to the self-proclaimed separatist republics and Russia.

Last week, both German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President François Hollande urged Ukraine to grant the separatist territories greater autonomy-a key demand pushed by Russia and the separatist republics in the February cease-fire negotiations.

Opponents of the move to set up a buffer zone, including many Ukrainian soldiers in the field, consider it a capitulation to Russia and a sign of weakness that will provoke more offensive action in the future.

Buffer zone proponents, however, claim that the current military situation in the Donbas is untenable, and political concessions are necessary to prevent a complete collapse of the cease-fire and the resumption of large-scale offensive operations.

Yet, despite the diplomatic back-and-forth, fighting continues in eastern Ukraine-Ukrainian troops and combined Russian-separatist forces exchange both small arms and heavy weapons fire every day. And in scenes reminiscent of fighting in World War II, tanks on opposing sides occasionally duel across no man's land, lobbing rounds at each other before retreating to hiding spots.

Congress Pushes to Arm Ukraine

Like the Ukraine war, the debate in Washington about whether the United States should send Kyiv lethal weapons has not let up.

In March, the U.S. House of Representatives passed a non-binding measure urging President Obama to supply Ukraine with both offensive and defensive weapons. And the Senate's military policy bill, passed June 16, includes provisions for sending Ukraine weapons such as mortars and grenade launchers.

The White House, however, has not approved sending weapons to Ukraine, citing concerns about escalating the conflict.

The consensus among Ukrainian soldiers in the field is that U.S. weapons would be valuable, but better training and other technologies such as counter-battery radars, GPS navigation units (many units still use paper maps), more advanced drones and night-vision technology are also critical.

Many Ukrainian soldiers also point to encrypted communications as a key requirement. The radios they currently use share frequencies with the combined Russian-separatist forces. And with landlines hard to establish since troops frequently shift positions to evade artillery strikes, soldiers sometimes rely on runners to deliver messages.

The cash-strapped army still has shortages of basic supplies, and civilian volunteers continue to play a key role in sustaining the Ukrainian war effort, procuring and delivering food, water, uniforms, first aid kits and body armor to soldiers in the field.

"We can fight our own war," said Ivan Kharkiv, a Ukrainian National Guard Azov Battalion soldier, during an earlier interview with The Daily Signal from a front-line position in Shyrokyne.

"We have plenty of people who can fight," he added, "but we need weapons."

 [return to Contents] 

 #38
Interfax-Ukraine
July 29, 2015
Kyiv expects to get 1,240 Javelin missiles from U.S. - Poroshenko
 
Ukraine expects to receive 1,240 Javelin portable anti-tank missiles from the U.S., Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko has said.

"We're looking for just 1,240 Javelin missiles, and this is absolutely fair," Poroshenko said in an interview with the Wall Street Journal.

According to Poroshenko, the number 1,240 has special significance as that was the number of nuclear warheads Ukraine gave up under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, signed by the U.S., the UK and Russia.

"Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear arsenal and in exchange for that the United States of America and Great Britain promised to guarantee our sovereignty and territorial integrity," Poroshenko said.

Poroshenko said that Ukraine needs the solidarity of western countries to rebuff the Russian aggression in the east of the country.

"We aren't demanding that British, American or French soldiers come here and fight for us... We're doing this ourselves, paying the most difficult price - the lives of my soldiers. We need just solidarity," Poroshenko said.

In his words, if the international community does not stop the Russian aggressor, global security doesn't exist.

"Anytime, any plane or submarine can make a missile attack, including against the U.S.," the president said.

The FGM-148 Javelin is a U.S.-made man-portable anti-tank missile, developed in 1986 and which entered into service with the U.S. army in 1996.

 [return to Contents] 

 #39
Wall Street Journal
July 29, 2015
Message From Battlefield Ukraine
The President of an invaded country asks the West: Are you with the barbarian or with the free world?
By SOHRAB AHMARI
Mr. Ahmari is a Journal editorial-page writer based in London.

Kiev-As befits a head of state managing a war, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko is blunt in an interview Monday evening at the presidential-administration building here. Asked about the kind of weapons his armed forces would need to deter further aggression by Russia and its separatist proxies in eastern Ukraine, Mr. Poroshenko gets specific: "We're looking for just 1,240 Javelin missiles, and this is absolutely fair."

The number 1,240 has special significance for Mr. Poroshenko. He says that was the number of nuclear warheads Ukraine gave up under the 1994 Budapest Memorandum, jointly signed by the U.S., Britain and Russia. "Ukraine voluntarily gave up its nuclear arsenal," Mr. Poroshenko says, "and in exchange for that the United States of America and Great Britain . . . promised to guarantee our sovereignty and territorial integrity."

Compared with strategic weapons, 1,240 Javelin missiles are small beer. Yet the Obama administration has thus far refused to transfer to Kiev the antitank system-or any other form of lethal aid. Mr. Poroshenko is thankful for American political support, loan guarantees and nonlethal assistance, including Humvees, night-vision goggles, military-to-military training and artillery computers that allow Ukrainian troops to better protect themselves against shelling. Yet such assistance has so far failed to change Russian supreme leader Vladimir Putin's calculus in the war.

Rather than helping Kiev impose real costs on the aggressor, Washington and the European powers are pushing both sides to work through the Minsk process, a series of accords negotiated in the Belarussian capital and aimed at de-escalating the conflict. Under the latest iteration of the deal, known as Minsk II, the parties have been required since early February to cease fire, create a buffer zone and withdraw heavy weapons, among other steps. "We think Minsk is not working from the Russian side," says Mr. Poroshenko.

Russian forces and proxies in the east violate the letter and spirit of Minsk II on a daily basis. The latest evidence: Ukrainian forces over the weekend apprehended a Russian officer transferring a truck loaded with ammunition to a separatist position near Donetsk. "Today he gave up his full name," Mr. Poroshenko says, for the first time confirming the officer's rank and home base. "He is a major of regular forces who comes here to kill my people." The officer's home base is in Russia's Rostov region.

Then there is the constant shelling. On Sunday there were 70 instances of shelling from separatist positions. The daily average during the past two months was 100. The numbers are lower compared with the height of the conflict, Mr. Poroshenko says, but the suffering "is still tremendous. Altogether the number of civilians and military personnel [dead] is now close to 9,000. Nobody can imagine that this can happen in the center of Europe in the 21st century."

Nor does Minsk II address Russia's illegal annexation of Crimea. The concern in Kiev is that the West would be willing to trade away the peninsula in exchange for calm in eastern Ukraine. "If anybody proposed to the U.S. to give up the Florida Peninsula," the Ukrainian president says, "something like that would not work. This is our land. . . . Whether it's Donetsk, Luhansk or Crimea, at the end of the day, they will be freed."

Kiev doesn't entirely despair of Minsk II. The deal's value, Mr. Poroshenko says, lies in the fact that "we have on Minsk II Putin's signature, which is delivering his direct responsibility for all the disasters we have here." Still, the president has few illusions about talks with the Kremlin, and he worries that the moral and strategic stakes at the heart of the conflict may be obscured by diplomacy for its own sake.

"We aren't demanding that British, American or French soldiers come here and fight for us," Mr. Poroshenko says. "We're doing this ourselves, paying the most difficult price"-here his voice breaks momentarily-"the lives of my soldiers. We need just solidarity."

The West would ultimately pay the price for appeasement and myopia. "If we do not stop the aggressor," Mr. Poroshenko says, "that means global security doesn't exist. Anytime, any plane or submarine can make a missile attack, including against the U.S."

That's a lesson the West should have learned from the July 2014 Malaysia Airlines Flight 17 tragedy, in which putative separatists armed by Moscow shot down a passenger jet en route to Kuala Lumpur from Amsterdam.

The United Nations Security Council on Wednesday will vote on a resolution co-sponsored by Australia, Belgium, Malaysia, the Netherlands and Ukraine calling for an international tribunal to investigate that attack. Moscow has threatened to block the resolution. That "would be a disaster for Russia itself because it would be an admission of responsibility," Mr. Poroshenko says. "This is the Middle Ages approach, the barbarian approach to solving international disputes."

As Mr. Poroshenko puts it, the question the Ukrainian people are posing to the world is: "Are you together with the barbarian or together with the free world?" How is the leader of the free world doing on that front? Mr. Poroshenko's response is marked by subtle elisions: "I think the most important, we feel the support of the people of the United States-very, very strong support-no matter if they're Republicans or Democrats."

He never mentions President Barack Obama by name during our interview.

 [return to Contents] 

 #40
RFE/RL
July 28, 2015
uly 28, 2015
Ukraine As A Bargaining Chip?
by Brian Whitmore

If you believe all the talk out there lately, Vladimir Putin is not only duplicitous and hypocritical -- he's also been pretty damn busy lately. Busy cutting secret deals with the same Europeans and Americans he has been vilifying for years.

And if you believe the rumors, the Europeans and Americans have also been busy selling out Ukraine to the Russians.

Not that any of this would be unusual or particularly surprising. Cynicism, duplicity, and hypocrisy are often the reserve currencies of politics, where interests tend to trump values.

There have long been suspicions out there that the United States and Europe might give Ukraine up in exchange for Moscow's support in securing a deal to curb Iran's nuclear program.  

Additionally, Washington has been seeking Moscow's backing in securing a managed, orderly, and negotiated exit for Syrian leader Bashar al-Assad, which would go a long way toward ending the conflict in that country.

And over the past two weeks, speculation has intensified that some kind of quid pro quo has in fact been reached with Putin. It began in earnest on July 14 when U.S. President Barack Obama praised Moscow's role in securing a deal to curb Iran's nuclear program.

The suspicion only increased two days later, on July 16, when U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland traveled to Kyiv to persuade lawmakers to include language in amendments to the Ukrainian Constitution recognizing the special status of separatist-held areas of Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts.

This is something Moscow has long sought, but that Ukraine had been resisting.

And the speculation reached a fever pitch when people began connecting the last couple months' data points: U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry traveled to Sochi on May 12 for talks with Kremlin leader Vladimir Putin on Iran, Syria, and Ukraine; a bilateral diplomatic channel on the Ukraine conflict was subsequently opened between Nuland and Russia's Deputy Foreign Minister Grigory Karasin; Obama and Putin had two long phone conversations, on June 25 and July 15.

Moreover, in addition to the Iran deal, Moscow also appears more open to helping broker Assad's exit in Syria, The Wall Street Journal reported.

"A deal was cut without Ukraine, and at Ukraine's expense," Andrei Illarionov, a former Putin adviser turned critic, wrote in Kasparov.ru.

Likewise, political analyst Vladimir Socor wrote that "the White House has reordered its policy priorities toward working with Russia on the Middle East, correspondingly becoming more accommodating to Russia's position on implementing the Minsk armistice in Ukraine."

A Quid Pro Quo?

It's tempting, it's elegant, and it seems to fit. But is it true?

Asked about a potential quid pro quo in Kyiv, Nuland said it was "offensive to suggest that the U.S. does tradeoffs."

Offensive or not, it's worth asking, what exactly has Russia gained? Two things, actually -- but neither really qualifies as a wholesale sellout of Kyiv.

Establishing the Nuland-Karasin diplomatic channel gives Moscow something it has always craved: a bilateral format to decide the Ukraine crisis with the United States -- one that doesn't include the Ukrainians. It's exactly the kind of great-power politics -- where big countries decide the fates of small ones -- that the Kremlin loves.

And with all the predictable echoes-of-Munich allusions, it is also horrible optics. But in and of itself, the Nuland-Karasin channel doesn't really give Moscow anything deliverable.

The second thing Moscow has gained came on July 16, when the Ukrainian parliament passed the first reading of constitutional amendments that would grant more power to the country's regions.

After intense lobbying from Nuland, the legislation included the line that: "The particulars of local government in certain districts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions are to be determined by a special law."

This was widely interpreted as giving Moscow what it really wants in Ukraine: a dysfunctional federalized state where its proxies in the separatist-held areas of Donbas will be able to paralyze decision making in Kyiv.

The United States and the European Union have been pushing Ukraine to grant greater autonomy for Donetsk and Luhansk and the legalization of separatist forces, as stipulated by the Minsk cease-fire, before Moscow and its proxies cease military operations and pull back heavy weapons.

"Western powers are increasingly pressuring Ukraine to fulfill the [Minsk agreement's] political clauses unilaterally, without seriously expecting Russian compliance with the military clauses," Socor wrote.

But the legislation that passed its first reading on July 16 doesn't actually give Moscow anything -- at least not yet.

The amendments still need to win a two-thirds majority in parliament in their final reading, far from a certainty -- especially given the mood of the Ukrainian public, which is strongly opposed to granting autonomy to the rebel-held areas and legal recognition to their leaders.
 
And even then, the separate law that will determine Donetsk and Luhansk's status won't be drafted and debated until the autumn.

Moscow's Dirty Little Secret

Which effectively leaves us pretty much where we were before -- in a stalemate. Ukraine insists that Moscow fulfil the military end of the Minsk deal before it fulfils the political end; and Russia insists Kyiv deliver the political changes first.

Writing in the pro-Kremlin daily Izvestia, Russian political commentator Aleksandr Chalenko wrote that "the Minsk process is deadlocked" and Moscow should just consider annexing the separatist-held territories.

Similarly, a recent article by defense analyst Valery Afanasyev in the influential military journal Voennoye Obozreniye argued that the rebel territories should be turned into "a second Belarus...an autocratic state completely dependent on Moscow."

This could be seen as an implicit threat to annex these territories of turn them into a protectorate. But Russia's dirty little secret is that these are the last things it wants. Who, after all, would want to be saddled with the cost of rebuilding and the hassle of administering these places?

And Russia's dirty little secret is no longer so secret. It's clear to anybody paying attention that Moscow's endgame is to embed these territories back into Ukraine as a Trojan horse. And it is desperate to cut a deal to secure this result.

"As long as Putin is in Ukraine, he is dependent on others. And this dependence can be used," Ukrainian political analyst Petr Oleshchuk wrote.

 [return to Contents] 

 #41
BBC
Ukraine: Odessa Region media highlights 18-24 Jul 15

The following are media highlights from Odessa Region's First City TV channel website, Yuzhnyy Kuryer newspaper website, news agency website Trassa E-95, and websites Dumskaya, Timer, Informatsionnyy Tsentr and Bessarabiya INFORM for 18-24 July 2015:

Political

About 300 people have taken part in a rally in Odessa'a Kulykove Pole Square, demanding that Odessa Region governor Mikheil Saakashvili and President Petro Poroshenko should cancel the "blasphemous" decision transferring the House of Trade Unions, where many people died during the tragic events of 2 May 2014, to the Admiralty of the Ukrainian Navy, the Informatsionnyy Tsentr website reported. "I, together with all residents of Odessa present here, as well as tens of thousands of those who are afraid of coming here, declare mistrust in the authorities. We will not allow to have the Admiralty here. This is an insult to the memory of the Odessa residents," the leader of the pro-Russian Kulykove Pole movement, Moris Ibrahim, told the rally. (Informatsionnyy Tsentr website, info-center.od.ua, 2214 gmt 18 Jul 15)

Saakashvili has not yet got a passport of a citizen of Ukraine, the Informatsionnyy Tsentr website reported. Saakashvili told a briefing that he had long ago submitted all the necessary documents to the migration service but had not got a reply yet. He said that the subject of his nationality was being manipulated by Ukrainian oligarchs. "They have not found my billions, so they are finding fault with the documents. There is a process, it is a matter of time. I have something to say to the oligarchs: you'd better find fault with what I do," Saakashvili said. (Informatsionnyy Tsentr website, info-center.od.ua, 1540 gmt 24 Jul 15)

A candidate for the post of Odessa Region deputy governor, Russian national Mariya Gaydar, does not know whom Ukraine is fighting with, the moderately pro-Russian website Timer reported. In an interview given to a Ukrainian channel, Gaydar said that people living in Russia and Ukraine are fraternal peoples. She three times evaded a journalist's question asking her whom the Ukrainian state was fighting with after all. (Timer website, timer-odessa.net, 1220 gmt 19 Jul 15)

Future Odessa Region deputy governor Gaydar does not want to give up her Russian citizenship, but has already started learning the Ukrainian language, the Trassa E-95 regional news agency website reported. Gaydar said that she would be acting in accordance with the law and was prepared to work in Saakashvili's team in any capacity, be it an adviser or a volunteer, but she does not want to give up her Russian citizenship. (Trassa E-95 news agency website, trassae95.com, 1542 gmt 20 Jul 15)

Odessa activists representing pro-Ukrainian nongovernmental organizations have held a rally in front of the building of the regional state administration protesting against the appointment of Mariya Gaydar as Odessa Region deputy governor, the popular privately-owned website Dumskaya reported. The activists were critical of Gaydar's ambiguous statements concerning the annexation of Crimea by Russia, current relations between Ukraine and Russia and her "offensive" statements regarding Saakashvili. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1329 gmt 20 Jul 15)

Gaydar will be Saakashvili's deputy with a free mandate and will be placed on a three-month probation period, the website Timer reported. The decision was made during a meeting of volunteers with Saakashvili after the activists expressed their dissatisfaction with the appointment of Gaydar. (Timer website, timer-odessa.net, 1508 gmt 21 Jul 15)

Governor Saakashvili has presented four heads of district state administrations to the public. Izmayil District will be headed by a 57-year-old female activist and entrepreneur, Valentyna Stoykova, the Bessarabiya INFORM news website reported. In the governor's words, the woman won him by her strong position, when she said that, should she receive the post, she would drive away all bribe takers and corrupt officials. There is also Crimean Tatar Arsen Zhumadilov, who has graduated from the London School of Economics, sea captain Oleksiy Smolyar and French businessman Roman Filinyuk among the newly appointed district state administration heads. President Petro Poroshenko has not signed the appointments yet. (Bessarabiya INFORM news website, bessarabiainform.com, 1518 gmt 24 Jul 15)

As Saakashvili promised, he has halved the regional state administration staff, having left only 10 offices and departments out of the 27, Dumskaya reported. The regional state administration used to have 781 employees. It now has only 399 employees. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1243 gmt 24 Jul 15)

The director of the Illichivsk commercial seaport, Yuriy Kruk, has been removed from the post over the transfer of two berths to an offshore company, the First City TV Channel reported. Governor Saakashvili said that Kruk indirectly, through intermediaries, offered him to "hush the case up". "If trade unions intervene for Kruk and hold protest rallies in his support, I will disperse them," Saakashvili warned. (The First City TV Channel, www.1od.in.ua, 1114 gmt 23 Jul 15)

Six men have attacked one of the leaders of the Odessa-based Euro-Maydan movement and head of the Odessa regional branch of the UDAR party, Andriy Yusov, and his wife Ivanna in the resort village of Zatoka, Odessa Region, the Trassa E-95 news agency website reported. As the wife of the victim said, the attackers approached the couple, shouting "Glory to Ukraine!" and asked whether the man was really Yusov. When they received the affirmative answer, they tried to knock Yusov down, began beating him on the head and body with their fists and feet and even threatened to kill him. The victims were also outraged at the way the police responded. "We had been trying to write a complaint in the police station for three hours. Among the four of the police officers [present] there turned out to be only one young investigator whom we want to specially thank for his humane attitude, because we were not even offered water during our stay in the police station until I shouted loud enough to make them understand that the victim was losing consciousness," Ivanna said. (Trassa E-95 news agency website, trassae95.com, 1548 gmt 19 Jul 15)

A car belonging to well-known public activist and former head of the public council under the Odessa regional state administration, Tamila Afanasyeva, has been set on fire in Odessa, Timer reported. Practically nothing was left from the car, a car parked nearby was also badly damaged. (Timer website, timer-odessa.net, 0933 gmt 23 Jul 15)

Economic

A Russian bank wants to appropriate Odessa Region bakeries over their debts, the website of the privately-owned newspaper Yuzhnyy Kuryer reported. Odessa-based bakeries filed lawsuits against the subsidiary bank of Russia's Sberbank because of the loan taken back in 2010 and spent for the purchase of grain-producing enterprises in Crimea. The Odessa Karavay bakery gave the Russian bank all its production and trade capacity as collateral. After the annexation of the Crimean peninsula, all the bakeries were nationalized, while the Russian bank demanded that the Odessa Karavay bakery should return its Crimean loan. (Yuzhnyy Kuryer newspaper website, uc.od.ua, 22 Jul 15)

Yet another private terminal will be built in Odessa Region's Pivdennyy port, the construction of which will take 100m dollars, the website of the newspaper Yuzhnyy Kuryer reported, quoting Prime Minister of Ukraine Arseniy Yatsenyuk. According to Yatsenyuk, the money will be given by the Cargill company, which had decided to build a terminal with a transshipment capacity of 4m t. A memorandum on the construction of the terminal has already been signed. (Yuzhnyy Kuryer newspaper website, uc.od.ua, 21 Jul 15)

The Odessa Port Plant will be sold as early as September, the website of the Yuzhnyy Kuryer newspaper reported. The State Property Fund sped up the sale of the 94.5 per cent of the plant's shares. The fund failed to explain why it was in a hurry to sell it. (Yuzhnyy Kuryer newspaper website, uc.od.ua, 23 Jul 15)

Military

Ukraine has deployed around 5,000-7,000 soldiers on the border with the Moldovan breakaway Dniester region and the region's capital Tiraspol sees this as an unfriendly act, the Informatsionnyy Tsentr website reported, quoting leader of the Dniester region Yevgeniy Shevchuk. According to Shevchuk, the number of border guards is also being increased and engineering structures are being set up. "In international practice, everyone knows and understands that the concentration of the armed forces on the border is, to put it mildly, an unfriendly act," Shevchuk said. (Informatsionnyy Tsentr website, info-center.od.ua, 2034 gmt 24 Jul 15)

Odessa police will now work in two shifts to maintain public order and ensure traffic safety, the Trassa E-95 news agency website reported. On average, more than 400 car and foot patrols will be on duty round-the-clock. The patrols will include more than a thousand police officers as well as National Guard and Shtorm special detachment servicemen. (Trassa E-95 news agency website, trassae95.com, 1330 gmt 18 Jul 15)

The Odessa port has allocated two berths for warships, the Trassa E-95 news agency website reported. One of them is located in the Zavodska Harbour, the second one is to the left of the Odessa-based passenger ship terminal. "We must show understanding of the situation our state has found itself in and pay special attention to the assistance to the Ministry of Defence," head of the port administration Mykhaylo Sokolov said. (Trassa E-95 news agency website, trassae95.com, 1749 gmt 23 Jul 15)

A hundred of US Humvees has been delivered to Odessa, the popular privately-owned website Dumskaya reported, quoting US Ambassador to Ukraine Geoffrey R. Pyatt. The ambassador reported this on his page in a social network, noting that the agreement concluded in March, when Ukraine received the first 30 Humvees, was being implemented. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1716 gmt 18 Jul 15)

The ultranationalist Right Sector volunteer corps has established a checkpoint on the border with Moldova's Dniester region near Odessa Region's village of Tymkove, Dumskaya reported. As described by the Right Sector, the purpose of the checkpoint is to control the border with the breakaway republic and combat smuggling. "Customs officers and border guards have reacted positively to the initiative and are willing to cooperate," Right Sector representatives said. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1155 gmt 20 Jul 15)

The Right Sector's checkpoint on the border with the Dniester region is not a regular one, Dumskaya reported, quoting the commander of the Odessa branch of the Right Sector party, Serhiy Sternenko. He denied reports that members of the organization took pictures against the backdrop of the checkpoint and almost immediately left it. "The activists were on duty for about two hours. The activists of the Right Sector's branch in the city of Balta were involved in setting up the checkpoint. In addition to this task, they were also solving some other problems. So today, in particular, they had to leave the checkpoint and go to Balta, where there was an emergency situation," Sternenko said. He added that the establishment of a regularly operating checkpoint is not part of their current plans. Earlier, an unnamed source of the Interfax news agency directly linked the arrival of the Right Sector activists at the border with reports that unidentified individuals had allegedly fired mortars on the territory of the Dniester region from Ukraine. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1900 gmt 20 Jul 15)

Human rights

The Libertin gay club has been blown up in the centre of Odessa, the moderately pro-Russian website Timer reported, quoting a statement issued by the press service of the Odessa city police department. The explosive device was planted on the doorstep, as a result of the explosion a security guard was injured and hospitalized, the press service said. According to preliminary information, the attackers used a RGD-5 hand grenade. (Timer website, timer-odessa.net, 0924 gmt 20 Jul 15)

The explosion at the Libertin bar for sexual minorities on Rishelyevska Street in the heart of the city has been linked to the Right Sector, the Trassa E-95 regional news agency website reported. An inscription saying "Family values come first, Right Sector" appeared near the blown up bar only after the incident, the website said. (Trassa E-95 news agency website, trassae95.com, 1231 gmt 20 Jul 15)

Crime

The Security Service of Ukraine (SBU) has detained four persons in Odessa, including two mobilized National Guard servicemen, who kept explosives, 15 boxes of ammunition and five rocket-propelled grenades at home, , the popular privately-owned website Dumskaya reported. The crime was qualified under the article on illegal possession of weapons, but it is possible that over time the investigation will receive evidence of other illegal activities of the military. (Dumskaya website, dumskaya.net, 1836 gmt 23 Jul 15)

 [return to Contents]