Washington will not consider Russian proposals on no expansion of NATO, and has no intention of even discussing the idea. So much for “dialogue”. by Pepe Escobar, posted with theThis Is How the U.S. Does ‘Dialogue’ — The Vineyard of the Saker
December 09, 2019
The first thing we need to do is the remember what each participant wanted from this summit. Here is a summary of what I think (not how they officially stated
(…) „Looks pretty self-evident to me but, still, I will offer my personal reaction to what just happened next.
First, let’s sum it up in plain language. First, the actual results:
- There might be a ceasefire
- There might be a prisoner exchange
- There might be future talks
Next, what has been reaffirmed:
- The Minsk Agreements are the only way out and cannot be changed
- The Steinmeier Formula is the only way out and cannot be changed
Again, I think that the outcome is rather obvious:
- Zelenskii achieved nothing
- Merkel achieved nothing
- Macron achieved a little
- Putin prevailed
Really, it’s that simple.“ (…)
MH17 Evidence-Tampering Exposed: Cover-Ups, Hiding Records, Witness Misreporting, & FBI Seizures
A new documentary from Max van der Werff, the leading independent investigator of the Malaysia Airlines Flight MH17 disaster, has revealed breakthrough evidence of tampering and forging of prosecution materials; suppression of Ukrainian Air Force radar tapes; and lying by the Dutch, Ukrainian, US and Australian governments. An attempt by agents of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to take possession of the black boxes of the downed aircraft is also revealed by a Malaysian National Security Council official for the first time. (…)
Ivan Katchanovski 22.04.2019
The new Ukrainian government is faced with reopening an inquiry into evidence of an organized mass killing in Kiev that Poroshenko stonewalled. Ivan Katchanovski investigates. By Ivan Katchanovski Special to Consortium News Five years ago, the Maidan massacre in Kiev, Ukraine, of Feb. 18-20, 2014
The author posted on Twitter:
My article on
#Maidan massacre in #Ukraine, its cover-up and stonewalled investigation, and its misrepresentation by @nytimes and US architectural company 3D model. #UkraineElection #UkraineElections2019
Datum: Dienstag, 27. November 2018 um 08:05
Just as the corporate media is not reporting that the USA and Russia are on a collision course which can end up in nuclear war, the corporate media is not reporting that the Ukraine is falling apart. That does not mean, however, that this is not happening. It is. In fact, it has been for a long while already, but since that collapse is smoothed out by a lack of military action and by the political support of the Empire, it does not appear to be catastrophic (in the sense of causing a sudden dramatic change).
STATEMENT BY THE FOREIGN MINISTRY OF RUSSIA on terror attacks in Crimea5454 ViewsAugust 11, 2016 55 Comments STATEMENT BY THE FOREIGN MINISTRY OF RUSSIAAugust 11, 2016Russia’s Federal Security Service (FSB) has disrupted a plot to carry out terrorist attacks in the Republic of Crimea. The attacks, planned by the Ukrainian Defence Ministry’s Chief Intelligence Directorate, targeted…
über — Eirenae’s blog
Dank eines Hinweises der Nachdenkseiten dokumentiere ich eine Neuveröffentlichung des Canadiers Ivan Katchanovski:
The “Snipers’ Massacre” on the Maidan in Ukraine
This academic investigation concludes that the massacre was a false flag operation, which was rationally planned and carried out with a goal of the overthrow of the government and seizure of power. It found various evidence of the involvement of an alliance of the far right organizations, specifically the Right Sector and Svoboda, and oligarchic parties, such as Fatherland. Concealed shooters and spotters were located in at least 20 Maidan-controlled buildings or areas. The various evidence that the protesters were killed from these locations include some 70 testimonies, primarily by Maidan protesters, several videos of “snipers” targeting protesters from these buildings, comparisons of positions of the specific protesters at the time of their killing and their entry wounds, and bullet impact signs. The study uncovered
various videos and photos of armed Maidan “snipers” and spotters in many of these buildings. The paper presents implications of these findings for understanding the nature of the change of the government in Ukraine, the civil war in Donbas, Russian military intervention in Crimea and Donbas, and an international conflict between the West and Russia over Ukraine. Original PDF below
Quelle: Ivan Katchanovski, Ph.D. School of Political Studies University of Ottawa
(Paper prepared for presentation at the Annual Meeting of American Political Science Association in San Francisco, September 3-6, 2015)
A Top US Foreign Policy Magazine Warns Negotiations Preferable to US Defeat in Ukraine
- Article in The National Interest* warns against escalation and says US is setting itself up for a humiliating defeat in Ukraine
- Washington urged to seek a negotiated solution with Moscow – which holds all the cards in the conflict – to avoid humiliation
- TNI is a magazine connected to the Center for the National Interest representing the realists in the US foreign policy establiment
By Alexander MERCOURIS
As we first disclosed in January, a debate is underway within the foreign policy establishment in Washington about what to do with the Ukrainian crisis.
On the one hand are the realists, who appear to be led within the administration by Secretary of State John Kerry.
Pitted against them are the hardliners, who include Obama’s National Security Adviser Susan Rice, US ambassador to the UN Samantha Power and Assistant Secretary of State Victoria Nuland.
Obama, characteristically, refuses to commit himself clearly to one side or the other. Instead, he tilts one way or the other, depending on which side appears stronger.
Since the late autumn, as Russia’s help for the deal with Iran has moved into focus, and as it became clear that Russia would not let the Ukrainians overrun the Donbass, the balance of advantage has tilted towards the realists.
However, as we discussed shortly after the Kerry-Putin meeting in Sochi, it is essential to understand the nature of the discussion.
The realists in Washington are not friends of Russia. On the contrary, they think of Russia as an adversary – just as the hardliners do.
The people we call the “realists” are not seeking friendship or a rapprochement with Russia. They simply see no sense in confronting Russia in Ukraine where Russia is strongest, whilst at the same time being willing to work with Russia on some issues such as the deal with Iran where there is a mutual interest in doing so.
True realists, people like (from their very different perspectives) Henry Kissinger and the historian Stephen Cohen, who understand that US national interests are best served by good relations with Russia, and that these require an honest acknowledgement of Russia’s legitimate interests, have no voice in the present administration, or in any likely succeeding one.
An article (attached below) has just appeared in The National Interest, an international affairs magazine published by the Center for the National Interest, a US think-tank known to be close to the realists in the US foreign policy establishment, which provides a clear statement of their views, and which is obviously intended to make them public as part of the ongoing policy debate.
What sets this article apart is its frank admission of the point we repeatedly make: in Ukraine it is Russia that holds all the high cards.
That admission could not be made more clearly. In essence what the article says is that Ukraine matters a lot to Russia, but does not matter anything like as much to the US – and matters even less to the US’s European allies.
The result is that US and EU support for Ukraine is essentially rhetorical. Though they talk big about backing Ukraine and “stopping Putin”, what they do in practice is less than little.
The result is that Ukraine actually gets from the West microscopic amounts of economic and military support, whilst the West’s overblown rhetoric simply encourages it to engage Russia in a conflict it cannot win. (…)