LA Times: Russia sends tanks and troops into Ukraine, seizes a strategic town

[Predicto]

I cannot fathom living in a country that cannot defend itself. Maybe thats why im having such a hard time understanding what is going on.

 

 

That would be pretty much every country in the world except the USA, China and Russia.  

 

For example, imagine being Canadian, and the US riles up French separatists, annexes Quebec, and starts sending troops into Ontario.  There would be very little you could do about it.    Sure, you could fight the separatists, and try to maintain your unity, but you couldn't actually fight the USA straight up.   You would be annihilated if it came to all out, country vs. country war.  And even if you were friends with, say, China, there isn't really much China could do about it from the other side of the world (and China wouldn't send troops anyway because it doesn't want to get itself into a shooting war with the crazy Americans and all of their nukes....) 

 

Ukraine is in the same awful situation.   It needs to fight within its borders and quash the rebellion without getting caught in an escalation into direct war with Russia.  

[Predicto]

I don't think it would be particularly helpful to send Us troops into Eastern Ukraine anyway.  I'm sure there are some things we or other allies could do to assist short of that though.

But of course it's hard for any of us to be sure what we are or aren't doing already.  Obviously we haven't done anything visible, but we're probably sharing intel.

 

 

 

There also is a value in letting Ukraine fight and win this thing itself (with our covert help).   It would do wonders for Ukranian national pride and unity, and would give hope to all of Russia's neighbors.  

 

We want to help, but we don't want to take over the fight ourselves, not only because it might lead to a larger conflict between nuclear Russia and nuclear America, but also because our recent track record on military interventions overseas tends to show that we eventually will be viewed as a villain in the drama, no matter what we do.

[zoony]

Ukraine needs to split to survive. Russia has done nothing so far in Eastern Ukraine that hasn't been blessed by the locals. What Russia is doing in the East would be impossible in the West. That tells you everything you need to know

[visionary]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/11065126/Mariupol-digs-its-trenches-and-awaits-an-attack-from-the-troops-of-New-Russia.html

Mariupol digs its trenches and awaits an attack from the troops of 'New Russia'

 

"They're different to the fighters in Donetsk. We know what they're like, we've fought them before. These guys are different. Their kit, their uniforms, everything – they're Russian armed forces."

 

Standing among the sandbag redoubts dotting the grounds of the Azov battalion's headquarters in Mariupol, the city of 500,000 that has become the front line in the five-month old war in Ukraine, "Kirt" as the officer insisted on being called, seemed unperturbed by the presence of a well-equipped Russian army just 20 miles away.

"It's a psychological offensive," he said. "We're ready for anything, but I don't expect them to mount some massive attack."

 

Since a lightning offensive seized the town of Novoazovsk earlier this week, an army that Ukrainian and Western governments say is increasingly composed of regular Russian units – has been poised to move against this strategic port city on Ukraine's Azov Sea coast.

 

Russia vehemently denies that any of its troops are serving in Ukraine, mocking Western accusers for producing "no evidence" to back the claims.

Historically, Novorossia refers to a vast area brought under Russian rule by Catherine the Great in the 18th century.

 

It covered tracts of modern southern Russia and extended all the way to what is now Moldova. In between, it took in chunks of what is now Ukraine, including Kharkiv, Odessa, Mykolaev and Kherson.

 

The very choice of name suggests the separatists have designs far beyond the Donetsk and Luhansk regions, to which the war has so far been confined.

But if Mr Putin and the rebels he backs are to achieve their stated dream of resurrecting that state, Mariupol will have to fall first. And it is not quite ready to do that yet.

 

After an initial panic with news of the "Novorussian" advance and the arrival of Russian troops in the war zone spread, a sense of calm has returned to the city. On Thursday, several thousand people rallied in the centre with Ukrainian flags.

 

 

https://twitter.com/carlbildt  FM Sweden earlier today.

We must call a spade a spade:  this is the 2nd Russian invasion of Ukraine within a year.

7:57 AM

[zoony]

Maps

[JMS]

Ukraine needs to split to survive. Russia has done nothing so far in Eastern Ukraine that hasn't been blessed by the locals. What Russia is doing in the East would be impossible in the West. That tells you everything you need to know

 

Or here.   

 

It's called FUD and it's very effective when conducted by folks with enough resources to really dominate the populous.

[visionary]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/30/world/europe/ukraine-conflict.html

The military commandant of the town, who offered only his nickname, Svet, said the soldiers there were with the Army of Novorossiya, rather than either of the main separatist groups, the Donetsk and Luhansk people’s republics.

 

The militiamen flew the flag of “Novorossiya” or New Russia, a reference to Russia’s historical claims over the area in southeast Ukraine that encompasses the rebellious Donetsk and Luhansk regions along with much of southern Ukraine.

 

In his statement on the Kremlin website, Mr. Putin referred to the “Novorossiya Militia,” pointedly using the reference to the broader area.

 

“Now we are fighting for all of southeastern Ukraine, for Novorossiya, which was historically a Russian province,” said Svet, interviewed outside an auto repair shop he had set up as a command post. “We plan to take Mariupol.”

 

[visionary]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/anne-applebaum-war-in-europe-is-not-a-hysterical-idea/2014/08/29/815f29d4-2f93-11e4-bb9b-997ae96fad33_story.html

War in Europe is not a hysterical idea

 

Over and over again — throughout the entirety of my adult life, or so it feels — I have been shown Polish photographs from the beautiful summer of 1939: The children playing in the sunshine, the fashionable women on Krakow streets. I have even seen a picture of a family wedding that took place in June 1939, in the garden of a Polish country house I now own. All of these pictures convey a sense of doom, for we know what happened next. September 1939 brought invasion from both east and west, occupation, chaos, destruction, genocide. Most of the people who attended that June wedding were soon dead or in exile. None of them ever returned to the house.

 

In retrospect, all of them now look naive. Instead of celebrating weddings, they should have dropped everything, mobilized, prepared for total war while it was still possible. And now I have to ask: Should Ukrainians, in the summer of 2014, do the same? Should central Europeans join them?

 

I realize that this question sounds hysterical, and foolishly apocalyptic, to U.S. or Western European readers. But hear me out, if only because this is a conversation many people in the eastern half of Europe are having right now. In the past few days, Russian troops bearing the flag of a previously unknown country, Novorossiya, have marched across the border of southeastern Ukraine. The Russian Academy of Sciences recently announced it will publish a history of Novorossiya this autumn, presumably tracing its origins back to Catherine the Great. Various maps of Novorossiya are said to be circulating in Moscow. Some include Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk, cities that are still hundreds of miles away from the fighting. Some place Novorossiya along the coast, so that it connects Russia to Crimea and eventually to Transnistria, the Russian-occupied province of Moldova. Even if it starts out as an unrecognized rump state — Abkhazia and South Ossetia, “states” that Russia carved out of Georgia, are the models here — Novorossiya can grow larger over time.

 

Russian soldiers will have to create this state — how many of them depends upon how hard Ukraine fights, and who helps them — but eventually Russia will need more than soldiers to hold this territory. Novorossiya will not be stable as long as it is inhabited by Ukrainians who want it to stay Ukrainian. There is a familiar solution to this, too. A few days ago, Alexander Dugin, an extreme nationalist whose views have helped shape those of the Russian president, issued an extraordinary statement. “Ukraine must be cleansed of idiots,” he wrote — and then called for the “genocide” of the “race of ****s.”

 

But Novorossiya will also be hard to sustain if it has opponents in the West. Possible solutions to that problem are also under discussion. Not long ago, Vladimir Zhirinovsky — the Russian member of parliament and court jester who sometimes says things that those in power cannot — argued on television that Russia should use nuclear weapons to bomb Poland and the Baltic countries — “dwarf states,” he called them — and show the West who really holds power in Europe: “Nothing threatens America, it’s far away. But Eastern European countries will place themselves under the threat of total annihilation,” he declared. Vladimir Putin indulges these comments: Zhirinovsky’s statements are not official policy, the Russian president says, but he always “gets the party going.”

 

A far more serious person, the dissident Russian analyst Andrei Piontkovsky, has recently published an article arguing, along lines that echo Zhirinovsky’s threats, that Putin really is weighing the possibility of limited nuclear strikes — perhaps against one of the Baltic capitals, perhaps a Polish city — to prove that NATO is a hollow, meaningless entity that won’t dare strike back for fear of a greater catastrophe. Indeed, in military exercises in 2009 and 2013, the Russian army openly “practiced” a nuclear attack on Warsaw.

[PeterMP]

There also is a value in letting Ukraine fight and win this thing itself (with our covert help).   It would do wonders for Ukranian national pride and unity, and would give hope to all of Russia's neighbors.  

 

We want to help, but we don't want to take over the fight ourselves, not only because it might lead to a larger conflict between nuclear Russia and nuclear America, but also because our recent track record on military interventions overseas tends to show that we eventually will be viewed as a villain in the drama, no matter what we do.

 

Do they actually have a chance of doing so and actually maintaining a country?

 

Can they do it and not become Afghanistan 2.0?

 

What are the longer term implications to the US if Ukraine (which by all accounts that I read was a (pretty) functional state before Russia took Crimea) becomes an nonfunctional state?

 

(I'll point out that when you start ranking foreign policy issues, to me, this is way above ISIS.  We might be able to do less about this, but you've taken a pretty functional state and had it invaded by another country simply because they could.  Syria/Iraq were a mess from a governmental state (yes, I guess Syria pre-invasion Iraq may have been stable, but that's only because the governments in those countries had not problems slaughtering populations that opposed them), and I suspect they will remain in flux for quite a while into the future).

[88Comrade2000]

We aren't going to do anything militarily, just like when China goes after Taiwan ,we won't do anything.

[visionary]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/08/30/us-ukraine-crisis-idUSKBN0GS10C20140830?feedType=RSS&feedName=worldNews

Ukraine seeks to join NATO; defiant Putin compares Kiev to Nazis

 

 Ukraine called on Friday for full membership in NATO, its strongest plea yet for Western military help, after accusing Russia of sending in armored columns that have driven back its forces on behalf of pro-Moscow rebels.

Full Ukrainian membership of NATO, complete with the protection of a mutual defense pact with the United States, is still an unlikely prospect. But by announcing it is now seeking to join the alliance, Kiev has put more pressure on the West to find ways to protect it. NATO holds a summit next week in Wales.

 

In 2008 NATO denied Ukraine and Georgia a fast track towards membership. Russia invaded Georgia a few months later.

 

NATO Secretary General Anders Fogh Rasmussen said he respected Ukraine's right to seek alliances.

 

"Despite Moscow's hollow denials, it is now clear that Russian troops and equipment have illegally crossed the border into eastern and southeastern Ukraine," Rasmussen said. "This is not an isolated action, but part of a dangerous pattern over many months to destabilize Ukraine as a sovereign nation."

 

http://www.cnbc.com/id/101959558?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

EU will not decide new Russia sanctions on Saturday: Finland PM

 

Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb said European Union leaders would not decide on new sanctions against Russia over the Ukraine crisis at an EU summit in Brussels on Saturday.

 

"It is clear we will discuss new sanctions as the situation has changed in the last few days ... but we will not decide on any new sanctions today," Stubb said in an interview with YLE public radio.

 

"If Russia continues with its destablizing efforts (in eastern Ukraine), I think it is right that sanctions will be toughened, but I hope that will not happen.

Uh huh.

 

 

I wonder if nearby countries could support Ukraine without the EU's permission.

[JMS]

In 2008 NATO denied Ukraine and Georgia a fast track towards membership. Russia invaded Georgia a few months later.

 

 

In 2008 George Bush favored NATO membership for both Georgia and Ukraine.    Germany and France declined and the membership votes must be unanimous.    Now here we are with both Georgia and Ukraine being partitioned...

 

The 2008 Bucharest Summit.

 

 

NATO Divided On Georgia, Ukraine

Thursday April 03, 2008

BUCHAREST, Romania -- France and Germany were poised to thwart a drive by President Bush to place the strategically important Black Sea states of Ukraine and Georgia on track for NATO membership at a tense alliance summit.

 

http://news.kievukraine.info/2008/04/nato-divided-on-georgia-ukraine.html

[JMS]

 

I wonder if nearby countries could support Ukraine without the EU's permission.

 

The sanctions are really pathetic so far.   We don't want to do anything unilaterally because unilateral action would impact us more than Russia.    Germany and Italy seem are thwarting any hard sanctions so far which would impact their own economies.    So what we are left with are sanctions which target individual Russians.. not all individual Russians either but individual named Russians,   and a few credit card transactions at a few Russian banks...  Pathetic.

 

Amazingly Russia's sanctions against us are arguable harder than our sanctions are on them..   Not only harder on us, but actually more impactful on Russia too.

 

On a brighter note,  while government sanctions aren't working, ( or our anemic version of sanctions being applied to Russia aren't doing much)...  The free market has really picked up the slack.   Foreign investment is fleeing Russia costing her hundreds of billions and pushing her economy in recession.   Also Russia has been forced to defend the ruble in the currencies market to keep it from falling dramatically.   This has cost Russia many billions of dollars too.    

 

This free market repercussions continue to be the only real stick Russia is feeling from the west, however; as her ruble sinks and the interest rates she's willing to pay for investors climbs,   how long really will it be that foreign investors with shun Russia with the dearth of western governmental reaction to this now open aggression against her Neighbor.

[JMS]

http://news.yahoo.com/polish-president-warns-germany-putins-empire-ambitions-103652284.html

 

Polish president warns Germany of Putin's 'empire' ambitions

 

BERLIN (Reuters) - Polish President Bronis law Komorowski said that Vladimir Putin is trying to build a new Russian empire for Moscow and that the region now had to choose whether it wanted "a Cossack Europe or a democratic one".

"Russia has carried out an invasion in Ukraine," the Polish head of state told German public radio, according to excerpts of an interview to be broadcast later on Saturday.

Komorowski said Putin was quite open about his ambitions to "rebuild the empire". The Cossacks long served Russian czars in military and security roles on the borders of the empire and their brand of Russian Orthodox patriotism is admired by Putin.

The Polish president, whose post is largely ceremonial but does give him a say in foreign policy, is an ally of Prime Minister Donald Tusk from the centrist Civic Platform (PO).

"I hope Germans are sufficiently mindful of what a Soviet empire meant for Europe," Komorowski told Deutschlandradio Kultur and Deutschlandfunk, warning against any reprise of the pre-World War Two "appeasement policy of yielding to Hitler".

"First the challenge was Crimea, now it is about further regions of Ukraine and everyone is asking where it will end," he said, reiterating a call from Poland and the Baltic states in particular for NATO's eastern flank to be reinforced.

[JMS]

http://theconversation.com/after-ukraine-nato-has-a-role-again-but-americans-look-to-europe-and-say-whos-paying-27834
 

After Ukraine NATO has a role again, but Americans look to Europe and say: who’s paying?
 
 

What does this red button do? EPA/Olivier Hoslet

The Russian response to what Moscow perceives as its three main security challenges – Western enlargement, China and terrorism/separatism in the Caucasus – has been expansionism. First in Abkhazia in 2008 and then in Crimea this year. With regard to the latter, Putin has set in motion events within Ukraine that, as yet, may still have a very unpredictable outcome.
For their part, the members of the NATO alliance have to reconsider their long-term approach to an emboldened Russia. How NATO Europe – and especially Germany – reacts over the coming months to the Ukrainian crisis will be telling.
So far the response from both the US and the European allies has been categorically economic rather than militaristic. Recently, there have only been some temporary military moves – but, ultimately, there will be stronger calls for NATO to forward deploy in Eastern Europe.
This raises the sticky questions of who will do this, what resources will be needed and who will pay the bill? One thing seems clear, NATO is back in business and the NATO summitin Wales this September will be a real test with regard to how that business is being run.
On a recent visit to Poland the US president, Barack Obama, attempted to reassure central and eastern European allies by declaring the US commitment to their security as “sacrosanct”. He also announced US plans to conduct more joint exercises and pledges to position more equipment in the region. A US$1 billion fund (subject to Congressional approval) was even offered as proof of support.
Deterring Russia today is not the same as deterring the Red Army at the Fulda Gap during the Cold War. From a military point of view, this should be a manageable deterrent requirement. We are not talking about redeploying the United States 7th Army. But there have already been calls to send NATO forces to Poland, the Baltic States and Romania. Politically this is not simple. Proposals for permanent NATO bases – especially US configurations – have already been met with suspicion among some NATO allies.
The German Defence Minister was quite cagey in her response to a Der Spiegel question concerning the need to establish NATO combat troops in Eastern Europe. When asked about the need for Europeans to make “greater financial contributions” to NATO, her answer was even more evasive. The point is this: while the recent financial crisis has forced most European countries to shrink their defence budgets, this has been more of a choice than a necessity for Germany.
Despite being in a relatively comfortable economic position, Germany spends only 1.4% of GDP on defence. This does not seem set to rise and the German electorate is fairly unanimous that it should not do so. When asked if the defence budget would increase if the German economy did likewise, her silence was deafening.
German defence minister, Ursula von der Leyen, said that “Russia has destroyed a massive amount of trust” when it comes to its relationship with the West. But it must be said that since Berlin’s decision not to join the NATO mission in Libya, there are those who may now also question Germany’s willingness to contribute meaningfully to European collective defence.

Relying on Uncle Sam – again
There is a built-in paradox for the Americans though. Since the pronouncement of the so-called “pivot” to Asia, the US has been telling the Europeans to contribute more to NATO and to European security in general.
Yet, if the events in Ukraine translate into more active US willingness to re-engage robustly with Europe – potentially by even increasing its permanent military commitment and capabilities – then this could be perceived as America “has our back” once again. In other words, Europe can continue to ignore US calls to increase defence expenditure.
But if the Americans perceive the Europeans to be free riding at the next NATO summit, then a real crisis of NATO solidarity could be exposed. From Putin’s point of view this is a win-win-win situation; he will have effectively caused a NATO rift while obtaining a decentralised federal Ukraine and essentially securing Russian ownership of Crimea.
Poland, the Baltics and Romania have all signalled an intention to raise their respective defence budgets to the NATO-set target of 2% of GDP – and their ultimate ambition is to have US forces permanently stationed on their territory. Germany following suit is almost inconceivable. Or is it? A recent statement by the defence spokesman for Merkel’s Christian Democrats that “should the security situation intensify, then we would have to consider possibly increasing the defence budget”, is cause for US optimism.
Germany also has other options that might help it avoid an obvious rift in the transatlantic relationship come September. For example, it could circumvent stationing elements of theBundeswehr (which includes the German military) further east or raising its defence budget (politically challenging) by offsetting potential US costs through payments via the NATO infrastructure.

Fall-out among friends
But nonetheless, if the US agrees at the Wales summit to redeploy troops back to Europe and then asks the Europeans: “What are you prepared to do?” If the answer is: “Oh that seems awfully militaristic – or, "Sorry, my treasury is still struggling”, there could potentially be a real schism in the alliance.
The best outcome for all this is that the Ukrainian situation will be handled through diplomatic channels. Both Obama and Merkel are, by nature, both cautious and prodigious deliberators – although Merkel’s caution goes down better with the German public than Obama’s does with Americans. But underpinning diplomacy through reinforced conventional deterrence is NATO’s core raison d'être. The problem is in the sharing of the burden across the alliance.
It’s not a new story – but the situation is becoming increasingly politically unsustainable in the US. Come September the US will be looking to Europe – and especially to Berlin – to gauge just how much deterrence they are willing to manage and how far they are prepared to let the Americans foot the bill.

 

[Larry]

In 2008 George Bush favored NATO membership for both Georgia and Ukraine. Germany and France declined and the membership votes must be unanimous. Now here we are with both Georgia and Ukraine being partitioned...

The 2008 Bucharest Summit.

Flip side of that, though, is . . . If the vote had gone the other way, then would we now be sending troops to those countries, to fight the Russian Army?

[visionary]

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-28989875

Italy's Mogherini and Poland's Tusk get top EU jobs

 

EU leaders have appointed Italy's Federica Mogherini as EU foreign policy chief and Poland's Donald Tusk as European Council president.

 

The announcement came in tweets from the current council president, Herman Van Rompuy, at an EU summit.

 

Ms Mogherini, a centre-left politician, is Italy's foreign minister. She will replace the UK's Catherine Ashton.

 

Mr Tusk, Poland's centre-right prime minister, has been Polish leader since 2007. He will chair EU summits.

 

European Parliament President Martin Schulz, a Socialist, spoke warmly of Ms Mogherini as he arrived for the summit, calling himself a "fan". It was a strong indication that she would be a popular choice among MEPs.

 

The parliament's approval is required for all 28 members of the new Commission, and the EU foreign policy chief, officially called the High Representative, is also a vice-president of the Commission.

 

Baroness Ashton, a centre-left UK politician, has been in the job since 2009. The High Representative runs the EU External Action Service (EEAS).

 

Italy's centre-left Prime Minister Matteo Renzi pushed hard for Ms Mogherini, 41, to get the job.

 

However, last month the EU failed to get a consensus on her candidacy, as the Baltic states and Poland saw her as inexperienced and too soft on Russia. She has only been Italian foreign minister since February.

 

http://news.yahoo.com/hollande-eu-sanctions-russia-increased-over-ukraine-111349967.html;_ylt=AwrBEiRMCAJU6woAAEnQtDMD

EU readies new Russia sanctions as Ukraine conflict spirals

 

The European Union geared up a fresh wave of sanctions against Russia on Saturday with warnings that the escalating conflict in Ukraine was putting all of Europe at risk of war.

 

Fears of a wider confrontation spiralled after allegations that Russia has sent troops and weapons across the border to help a bloody new counter-offensive by pro-Kremlin rebels.

 

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko visited Brussels to plead his case for a firm response, before the EU's 28 leaders were to hold talks on the worsening situation.

 

The latest rebel push in a conflict that has claimed nearly 2,600 lives has wrested several key towns in southeastern Ukraine from Kiev's control in recent days.

 

EU Commission head Jose Manuel Barroso warned that the crisis was near a "point of no return" and said Brussels had drawn up tougher sanctions against the Kremlin.

 

http://www.reuters.com/video/2014/08/30/russia-effectively-at-war-with-eu-lithua?videoId=341710936

Russia effectively at war with EU -Lithuanian President 

 

Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite said Russia is at war with Ukraine and so effectively at war with Europe.

[RansomthePasserby]

Flip side of that, though, is . . . If the vote had gone the other way, then would we now be sending troops to those countries, to fight the Russian Army?

On the other hand, if those countries were part of NATO, would the Russian Army invade?

[visionary]

https://twitter.com/laurnorman

Latest EU draft language on Russia sanctions: "The European Council remains engaged in the monitoring and assessment of the measures adopted by the European Union and stands ready to take further steps, in light of the evolution of the situation on the ground. It requests the Commission to urgently undertake preparatory work, jointly with the EEAS."

10:30 AM 

 

@FedericaMog takes firmish line on Russia. Talks about EU ramping up sanctions while maintaining dialogue. Says dialogue not worked so far

2:11 PM

[nonniey]

Flip side of that, though, is . . . If the vote had gone the other way, then would we now be sending troops to those countries, to fight the Russian Army?

Come on now Russia would not have invaded because of the alliance. The US doesn't want to fight Russia and Russia doesn't want to fight the US. Wish they had become NATO members all this would have been avoided.

[zoony]

In 2008 George Bush favored NATO membership for both Georgia and Ukraine.    Germany and France declined and the membership votes must be unanimous.    Now here we are with both Georgia and Ukraine being partitioned...

 

The 2008 Bucharest Summit.

Hmm wonder if it had anything to do with those two hypocritical whores wanting cheap energy

[visionary]

http://www.mfa.gov.lv/en/news/press-releases/2014/august/28-1/

Statement by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of the Republic of Latvia

 

Latvia condemns the invasion of Ukrainian territory by armed forces of the Russian Federation. This represents open aggression against the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine and undermines the fundamental principles of international law. The offensive actions undertaken by the Russian Federation pose a threat to peace and stability throughout Europe. 

 

Latvia supports an urgent review of this matter at the UN Security Council and other international organisations, and Latvia will propose that the 30 August European Council decide on further actions by the European Union in the context of Ukrainian crisis.

 

Latvia calls on Russia to immediately withdraw its armed forces from Ukrainian territory, and stop sending weapons and mercenaries to the terrorist groups of the so-called “people’s republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk.

 

 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/reuters/2014/08/29/world/europe/29reuters-ukraine-crisis-nato-military.html?_r=1&referrer=

Seven NATO Allies to Create New Rapid Reaction Force-Report

 

Seven NATO allies plan to create a new rapid reaction force of at least 10,000 soldiers as part of plans to boost NATO defences in response to Russia's intervention in Ukraine, the Financial Times reported on Friday.

 

The aim is to create a division-sized joint expeditionary force for rapid deployment and regular exercises. The British-led force would include air and naval units as well as ground troops, the newspaper said.

 

Countries involved include Denmark, Latvia, Estonia, Lithuania, Norway and the Netherlands. Canada has also expressed an interest in taking part, it said.

 

British Prime Minister David Cameron is expected to announce the creation of the force next week, coinciding with the Sept. 4-5 NATO summit in Wales.

 

Since Russia annexed Ukraine's Crimea region in March, NATO members have taken a number of short-term steps to reinforce the security of allies in eastern Europe that are worried by Russia's new assertiveness.

 

At the Wales summit next week, U.S. President Barack Obama and other NATO leaders are expected to agree on a longer-term plan for boosting NATO's eastern defences.

 

One element of the plan will be shaking up NATO's existing rapid reaction force so that some units of it are capable of responding to a crisis in a few days, NATO diplomats say.

 

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-29001596

EU set to tighten Russia sanctions 'within a week'

 

The European Union has given Russia one week to reverse course in Ukraine or face new sanctions.

 

European Council President Herman Van Rompuy said the EU was working urgently on further restrictive measures.

Speaking after a summit in Brussels, Mr Van Rompuy said the EU "stands ready to take further significant steps in light of the evolution of the situation on the ground.

 

"Everybody is fully aware that we have to act quickly."

 

He did not specify the nature of further sanctions, but said the proposals would be ready within a week.

 

Mr Van Rompuy's comments were echoed by other EU leaders:

 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the new sanctions would be imposed in Moscow did not change course, adding that there was no military solution to the conflict

 

French President Francois Hollande said: "Are we going to let the situation worsen, until it leads to war? Because that's the risk today. There is no time to waste."

 

The US applauded the EU's move.

 

"We welcome the European Council's consensus today to show strong support for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity and to prepare further sanctions for consideration in coming days," White House National Security spokeswoman Caitlin Hayden said.

[visionary]

http://www.twitlonger.com/show/n_1s705no?new_post=true

A Shot Across the Bow: The Biggest Thing in Kazakh-Russian Relations in Years

 

The video from yesterday of Putin answering a question about Kazakh nationalism is a really big deal (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hl0HdcdA9Uk#t=69). I think this is the most important political development in Kazakh-Russian relations in the last five years. I’ve noted that the transcripts in Russian and the translations in English are missing not only a lot of subtleties, but also actual text. So this version is a complete translation, from the video. I’ve hewed as closely as I can to what is said, including little tics and digressions that are important. I also added notes below on why I think this is such a huge deal and the context for understanding it.

 

Some notes:

 

Question:

- The most important thing is that this question was asked. Putin doesn’t do unscripted events. The question is at an absolute minimum vetted – and I think far more likely planted. It is rehearsed, as you can tell from the way the questioner formulates her thoughts. It is no accident at all that this question was asked publicly, to Putin, on national television. Note that when she shifts to the cardigan question she says “And now something from me”.

- She really does say, “We have a proposal, we would like them to join”. She doesn’t say what Kazakhstan would join, but the only logical answer is “Russia”. Kazakhstan is already a member of the Customs Union and the Eurasian Union. It can’t join them. The only thing it could join is Russia. I cannot overemphasize how shocking that is to hear at an official Putin event.

- When she talks about Russian political rhetoric and how Kazakhs don’t understand it correctly, she is probably referring to strong recent reactions against Russian nationalist statements about Kazakhstan. The way this is phrased is quite condescending. I heard it as, “Why don’t these dumb Kazakhs understand us better?”

 

Putin’s Answer:

- Kazakhstan’s population is 17 million people, Russia’s is 143 million. It has taken a lot of work for Kazakhstan’s government to get the population to 17 million after it declined in the post-Soviet collapse. Putin knows the number isn’t 15 million. This is intended as a slight, as you can see from the “all the same it’s a very big country”. I heard this as, “Kazakhstan is a kind of pitiful place compared to Russia, but they have a lot of territory.”

- The statement that is getting the most attention: is У казахов не было никогда государственности is literally “The Kazakhs had never had statehood.” It is not “The Kazakhs have no state.”

- He always refers to “Kazakhs” not “Kazakhstanis” (казахи vs. казахстанцы). This gives the speech an ethnic tone. When he’s talking about Kazakhs never having statehood, he means the nomadic Kazakhs before the Russian Empire. This is a very live issue in Kazakhstan, where Kazakh nationalism based in pride in Kazakh history has been growing stronger and stronger. The speech will be incredibly inflammatory for Kazakh nationalism. Putin knows that.

- When he talks about the Eurasian Union and how it was Nazarbaev’s idea, he seems irritated. Since the Ukraine crisis started, Nazarbaev has been saying loudly that the EEU is not a political project, that it is only economic, and that Kazakhstan could leave if it doesn’t suit them. He watered down the treaty in May right before it was signed. There is no question if you watch the video that Putin is irritated with Nazarbaev’s behavior on the EEU. And when he says the EEU will be taken to its logical conclusion, I read that as meaning a political union. 

- The little tangent on philosophers and Eurasia – he’s indicating the roots of Eurasianism in Russian thought going back to the 19th century and how this is a Russian idea.

- The section on why Kazakhs see the EEU as good for them is the other one that’s been most mistranslated and misquoted. Putin clearly says that Kazakhs think the EEU is good for them because it allows them to stay in the greater Russian world, which is a part of world civilization. The implication is that Kazakhstan is not a part of world civilization without being a part of the greater Russian world. This is shockingly insulting. 

- (He also doesn’t say российский мир, which would mean the world of people identifying with Russia the state or Russian language, but the русский мир, meaning the world of people that are ethnically Russian. You can imagine how this might make ethnic Kazakhs (or others) feel.)

 

In sum: this is an extraordinary event. I don’t know how the Kazakh government will respond to this, but assuredly there are people in Astana in very high places who are both scared and furious.

[visionary]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/ukraines-soldiers-defend-city-of-mariupol-amid-fears-of-russia-backed-rebels/2014/08/30/766696cf-0f22-472f-ab54-61a0dd909434_story.html

Ukraine’s soldiers defend city of Mariupol amid fears of pro-Russian rebels

 

Soldiers fortified trenches and protesters formed a human chain Saturday to try to defend this strategic port city in southeastern Ukraine as fear spread that Russia would expand its incursion into its neighbor.

 

Military analysts think Mariupol could be a next target because it has access to the sea and also would provide a valuable land bridge to Crimea, the former autonomous Ukrainian territory annexed by Russia in March. Rebels supported by Russian soldiers, tanks and armored personnel vehicles seized control of the town of Novoazovsk — just 30 miles east of here — Thursday, according to Ukrainian military officials.

Ukrainian military spokesman Andriy Lysenko said that the army was ready to defend Mariupol, having organized round-the-clock patrols and reinforced entrances to the city. Hundreds of Ukrainian army troops were at posts around the city, according to Mariupol’s mayor, Yuriy Khotlubey.

 

Mariupol’s residents were preparing in their own way. Many had stocked up on bread and other provisions. There were long lines of cars exiting the city through checkpoints. Supplies of some medicines ran low. More than 800 basements and shelters had been designated for use in case of shelling, the mayor said.

 

The city gave free train tickets to refugees from other parts of the war-torn country so they could flee yet again — to safer areas.

At a modest brick building Saturday, groups of families who had fled the fighting in the rebel-controlled cities of Donetsk and Luhansk arrived, toting their possessions, to pick up free train tickets out of the city.

 

Ludmila Kosych, 55, who ran a small food store, fled with her family from the Donetsk region Aug. 20 after they witnessed continued horror: missile fire, dead children, an average of 10 funerals a day.

 

They thought they had reached a safe place in Mariupol. But now she said she was wrong.

 

“Imagine if a bomb is flying over there,” she said, gesturing to a nearby column of trees. “It explodes and by any piece of it you could be killed. You don’t know where it’s coming from, the Ukrainians or the rebels. It’s human, animal fear.”

[visionary]

http://mobile.nytimes.com/2014/09/01/opinion/arm-ukraine-or-surrender.html?smid=tw-share&_r=2&referrer=

Arm Ukraine or Surrender

 

By BEN JUDAH

AUGUST 31, 2014

 

MOSCOW — Russia and Ukraine are now at war. At least 2,200 people have died in the conflict; thousands more may die yet. The Western powers — America, Europe, NATO — now have no good options, but they cannot do nothing. President Vladimir V. Putin has left us with two dire choices, both fraught with risk: Either we arm Ukraine, or we force Kiev to surrender and let Mr. Putin carve whatever territories he wants into a Russian-occupied zone of “frozen conflict.”

 

It is a stark choice, and Mr. Putin is not rational. Any rational leader would have reeled from the cost of Western sanctions. Russia’s economy is being hit hard by a credit crunch, capital flight, spiraling inflation and incipient recession. This will hurt Mr. Putin’s surging popularity at home. But none of this has deterred the smirking enigma.

 

Ukraine cannot win this war. Mr. Putin has made it clear that the Russian Army will annihilate Ukrainian forces if they attempt to liberate Donetsk and Luhansk. Ukraine’s ramshackle army cannot rout the crack troops and conscript forces of an oil-fueled giant.

 

The West needs to be honest with Ukraine. We talk as though this country were one of us — as if, one day, it will become a member of the European Union and the NATO alliance. That is Kiev’s wish, but the West is not giving Ukraine the means to fight this war.