Analysis, Commentary & Analysis, Minsk Negotiations

Profits Before Glory

Preamble: “‘Rien pour la gloire! Glory brings no profit! Peace everywhere and always! War depresses the quotations of the three and four per cents!’ the France of the Bourse jobbers had inscribed on her banner.”

-Karl Marx, The Class Struggles in France


Translations by Gleb Bazov / Editing by @GBabeuf

Putin’s Cunning Plan

Original article here: El Murid
Photographs – Associated Press

03Judging by the fact that, on both sides of the front, the participants are scaling back their activity and preparing for winter (and that, on the Ukrainian side, conversations about the Army’s lack of readiness for wintering in the field are getting louder), it can be assumed that, after all, a decision has been made to wait until the spring. We no longer need to suspect the sides of some kind of clandestine intentions—it is getting colder and damper, and, while, of course, there could be fighting, it will be solely in the form of torpid skirmishes and sabotage behind enemy lines. The usual kind of positional war following a Verdun-esque meat grinder.

In a sense the Cunning Plan has prevailed. Kiev was not allowed to finish off Donetsk and Lugansk, and they were pulled back from the brink at the very last moment. The existence of the rebel territory remains a thorn in the chubby backside and carries the threat of the pain being drastically amplified in case of misconduct. On the rebel territory itself, by the looks of it, a classic sweep of disloyal elements and the transformation of the freemen into something like a controllable entity has begun.

The existing bedlam has its negative aspects—the proliferation of weapons has taken on quite a menacing form. Just today, two contract soldiers were caught trying to sell a hundred grenades in the Rostov region. One can hazard the guess that this was simply scraps from the master’s table of the mobile Voentorg shop. What is carried out of the shop by men with stars on their epaulettes is, of course, not reported to the general public; but, as always, in times like this the arms trade is brisk and not at all retail in nature. Pumping the border regions—already complicated in every respect—full of weapons can only be done at one’s own peril. 

On the other hand, by swiftly and firmly reining in the offensive impulse of the reinvigorated Militia, Moscow has demonstrated its commitment to a partnership with Kiev. It does not in the least fancy losing a thirty billion cubic metre Ukrainian gas consumption market, and the fact that Yatsenyuk is threatening that in ten years Ukraine will become fully self-sufficient in this product only causes them to sniff disdainfully in the Gazprom offices—“we will see where Yatsenyuk himself will be in ten years.”

We can assume that in the near future we may see a breakthrough in gas relations. The issue of the debt has not been resolved; however, “Aleks”, my acquaintance from Kiev, has already enlightened me as to the mechanism of this breakthrough. An international consortium has already been created, which will issue to Naftogaz a special purpose loan of six billion dollars so that it can repay the debt to Gazprom and make prepayment for additional volumes of gas required to maintain an uninterrupted transit to Europe. Naftogaz will also have to pay something, but it will be a mere trifle—approximately a hundred million dollars. The Ukrainian gas transport system (GTS) will serve as collateral for the loan. It is clear that no one will pay anything back, and we can already guess who will be the next owner of the GTS.

For Gazprom this situation is entirely comfortable—it will receive payment and will be relieved of the headache of the transit to Europe over the winter season. For all this, however, the payment will be a thrifty price for domestic Ukrainian gas consumption. The main negotiation is, in fact, centred on this price—there are conditions on either side that remain unacceptable for the other; however, in the end, as usual, everything will be decided at the last minute, in a conversation between the Presidents.

2bThe oligarchs on both side are also quite satisfied—in the end, no nationalization took place in the DPR. Pushilin and Purgin, who stammered something about it once, were given short shrift, following which the question was taken off the table altogether. By the looks of it, Akhmetov will soon appear on the scene and solve the problem of the lack of qualified cadre plaguing the young republics—he has no shortage of specialists in all areas. Today’s home-makers, who are managing the state, will be asked to go, leaving a few of the familiar, but now entirely loyal, faces for television appearances.

The Western sanctions that cause very serious alarm in Moscow, will be frozen, with the most unpleasant personal (and some sectoral) ones removed. However, the situation will not return to initial positions—it was not all started just for that to happen.

It should be understood that everything will be frozen until the spring. No one knows what the winter weather will be like, and that is why the Europeans are categorically opposed to taking risks now. The United States will be forced to make some concessions; however, the ultimate goal—an attack on Russia—is not being abandoned. It is simply being delayed. Although, of course, the Saxons are masters of lies, and there is no vouching for anything.

All sides have a deep sense of personal satisfaction, even though all of them lost something. The residents of the Donbass, of course, cannot share this profound feeling, but then who cares about some bunch of natives?


01

What is Good and What is Bad

Original article here: El Murid
Photograph – REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

[On September 24, 2014], Obama spoke at the United Nations General Assembly. He touched on a broad range of subjects, but he devoted most of the time to Ukraine and Russia. Against the background of American bombing in Syria, his speech has a most cynical quality to it:

“…Russia’s actions in Ukraine challenge this post-war order. Here are the facts. After the people of Ukraine mobilized popular protests and calls for reform, their corrupt President fled. Against the will of the government in Kiev, Crimea was annexed. Russia poured arms into Eastern Ukraine, fuelling violent separatists and a conflict that has killed thousands. When a civilian airliner was shot down from areas that these proxies controlled, they refused to allow access to the crash for days. When Ukraine started to reassert control over its territory, Russia gave up the pretence of merely supporting the separatists, and moved troops across the border…”

It is interesting, by the way, that the question of who shot down the Boeing is no longer even raised. The tune is now different: the unforgivable transgression of the Militiamen is that they did not allow someone to go somewhere. Even though, as I recall, the inspectors could not reach the crash site because of merciless shelling by the Ukrainian punitive forces. But who remembers that now?

Obama’s ominous summary: “We will reinforce our NATO allies, and uphold our commitment to collective defence. We will impose a cost on Russia for aggression, and counter falsehoods with the truth…”

However, there is also some pleasant news: “…[Russia can choose the path of peace.] The recent cease-fire agreement in Ukraine offers an opening to achieve that objective. If Russia takes that path—a path that for stretches of the post-Cold War period resulted in prosperity for the Russian people—then we will lift our sanctions and welcome Russia’s role in addressing common challenges. That’s what the United States and Russia have been able to do in past years[…]And that’s the kind of cooperation we are prepared to pursue again—if Russia changes course…”

Essentially, the President of the United States has issued an ultimatum. For now it is general and non-specific in nature, but his threats carry an absolutely clear message. According to Obama, Russia’s actions challenged the world order that was created following the Second World War. He is slightly disingenuous, but only slightly. It would be more accurate to say that Russia has challenged that order which arose after defeat in the Cold War. Formally, though, Obama is right—the Cold War ended after the Second World War. It is just that the current world order was established on the spur of the moment by the Unites States. This explains their rigid position: no one is permitted to change it. Only the United States is permitted to decide what is good and what is bad.

The allusion to “the path of peace”—this is a hint: not for Putin, with whom all bridges have been burned and who will not be forgiven for anything. It is a more than clear call to the sleeper agents in Russia—it is time to wake up and go to work. The cause of peace cannot wait.

The full text of President Barack Obama’s address to the United Nations is here.


Discussion of this Article on our Newest Resource – Slavyangrad Forum

Advertisements

Discussion

36 thoughts on “Profits Before Glory

  1. If the oligarchs remain, what is the point.

    Liked by 1 person

    Posted by Fri | September 28, 2014, 02:08
    • A free state would be no oligarchs, repudiate the IMF loan and de-nazify– also lift censorship of Russian media & broadcasting. BUT, who’s going to pay for rebuilding infrastructure and housing and the standing army? Ukraine doesn’t have the funds. Russia has enormous military demands if she’s going to survive the forces arrayed against her. Crimea is expensive, too– all those pensions, the defense buildup. Sanctions will probably prevent Crimea’s huge tourist success. Russia MUST industrialize to be less vulnerable. Russia must modernize to hold onto her young people. So neither Russia nor Ukraine can make the necessary economic investments into Novorossiya. The IMF imposes austerity and loots everything. Probably the oligarchs are the lesser evil– especially under Russia’s rulebook.

      We are all disappointed that you cannot go at once to a free state, and certainly it FEELS like a betrayal. But remember that Putin and Lavrov have maintained from the begining that Russia wants a unified, peaceful and prosperous Ukraine. We were all infatuated with the dream, but it’s not to be.

      Like

      Posted by Penelope Powell | September 28, 2014, 23:12
      • Penelope Powell,
        Doesn’t matter what Putin and Lavrov want because they don’t live in NovoRossyia besides that they are around oligarchs all the time and they represent oligarchs interest. What really matters is the struggle of the NovoRossyia and Ukraine people for a better country, a country without oligarchs. If they cannot achieve such goal the fight will be in vain.

        About what you said “Russia MUST industrialize”, the true is that Putin like Gorbachev and Yeltsin have been living from soviet industrialization success, furthermore the true drive for industrialization was done for Stalin, liked or not.
        Putin probably will not achieve any new high-tech industrialization because actually there not exist the conditions for such goal in Russia.

        Like

        Posted by Obi-Juan | September 29, 2014, 00:35
      • Please, everyone, forgive my ignorance. Penelope Powell says “who’s going to pay for rebuilding infrastructure and housing and the standing army? Ukraine doesn’t have the funds … ” etc.

        Why does Novorossiya need outside financial help? This is a rhetorical question. They have people, resources. They can print their own money. What’s to stop them from rebuilding themselves, like a self-sufficient independent country? Self-reliance takes a lot of hard work, but it’s a satisfying way of life. Has this kind of hard good life gone out of style? It seems to be the assumption of everyone today, individual people and countries alike, that you have to have loans loans loans, help help help, to do anything. This must be the brainwashing of the Banksters at work. Just my opinion, but Novorossiya will be better off in the end if they do it all themselves.

        Like

        Posted by karen | September 29, 2014, 00:59
      • Karen,
        What’s to stop them from rebuilding themselves, like a self-sufficient independent country?

        Yes you are right. What Novorossiya needs is the political leadership and a socio-economic program supported by the people to achieve such goal.

        Like

        Posted by Obi-Juan | September 29, 2014, 22:19
    • OBI-JUAN & KAREN: Russia kept telling us she wanted a united, nonhostile & economically successful Ukraine. But we didn’t believe it. Who could prefer that to a free and just mini-country without oligarchs– or the whole of Ukraine, de-nazified?
      It would be wonderful if Novorossiya could just start thinking like a country, open its industries, all work together rebuilding. But would several million people be that brave and resourceful? It takes more than labor; takes materials. Could they do it in addition to fighting off all the covert action that NATO/US/UK/Israel would send at them? Probably Chechens too. Probably sanctions.
      I am imagining that Putin’s reliance upon the oligarchs is reliance upon the only rational (altho thieving) power structure available. Is it possible that the oligarchs can control Porky? They controlled Yanukovych. I’m guessing that the oligarchs plus the implicit threat of Novorossiya’s taking more territory is enough to control the Ukrainian state. The oligarchs obviously want order and jobs, and living conditions for their workers.
      PAUL: I don’t think ‘huge bribes’ is the means by which Kremlin deals w Ukrainian oligarchs. I think oligarchs are like mafia. In ’91 at Ukrainian independence they came in w their own private armies and simply took over some of the state enterprises. I think the Kremilin is simply not opposing their ill-gotten enterprises. The coup-govt and Porky didn’t either– but the IMF deal would have made it necessary for them to sell a partnership in each enterprise to the West, as ‘protection’.
      My imaginings and guesses don’t go as far as the IMF loans and their conditionalities. They produce near-slavery. If Ukraine is to lose ownership of its pipelines and its rich ag land I just don’t know what will become of it. I’m much more concerned about the IMF than about the oligarchs.
      It’s not freedom and justice, but they are alive and there may be better opportunities down the road. Peace may be worth a whole lot more to the refugees than it is to the militia.
      OBI-JUAN, you said “The tragedy for Novorossiya people is that they were not confronting a country, but they are confronting a system.
      Bottom line, NATO is closer to achieve their goals that anyone believes; all the historical and systemic odds are against Russia.”
      It is scarey, Obi-Juan. I wonder if you know HOW scarey. Have you heard how some of the banksters have openly stated that they want to vastly reduce the human population? Like around a million people total– that’s enough for their projects and their servants, etc. The idea is that they will never lose control of the population again if it’s small enough, and their reign will be forever.

      Like

      Posted by Penelope Powell | October 3, 2014, 02:41
      • Penelope Powell,
        What you propose “I’m much more concerned about the IMF than about the oligarchs. It’s not freedom and justice, but they are alive and there may be better opportunities down the road.” is a lose-lose situation.

        From my point of view we the people must fight for our interest (for the people, to the people and by the people) if we left the ideological leadership of the struggle to other oligarchs (Putin oligarchs or any other) we are doomed.

        Sometimes oligarchs of different countries have an interest crash (like now or in the ww1) and is good to take advantage of such situation.
        About what you said “Have you heard how some of the banksters have openly stated that they want to vastly reduce the human population?”

        I heard that before but I am not so sure about that, they need us as canon fodder, slaves and labor army of reserve, probably they have not problem to kill 90 % of the world population to keep squeezing what reminds, but I don’t believe that they are planning any population reduction.

        Now if you are interested in the geopolitical situation, I recommend you an interview (sub English) with the Russian minister of Defense Dmitry Rogozin:

        If you put aside the nationalistic cheering, what he said is chilling for Russia:

        1. Russia should have a population of 600 millions to defend the whole territory, but actually only has 148 millions, therefore they have to improvise solutions. What are they planning to solve such demographic problem? I don’t know.

        2. Russia cannot afford to manufacture the same number of military systems like the Soviet Union used to do.

        3. Russia still living from Soviet technological base.

        4. Western (NATO) technological sanctions are hurting Russia development.

        5. The Minister said that they will start over a new technological base; from my point of view is wishful thinking.

        6. The Minister said that they will start a new industrialization drive; from my point of view is wishful thinking. Every Russian-Soviet leader from Lenin to Gorbachev used the magic word “industrialization”, but the only one who achieved such goal was Stalin.

        The good news for Russia:

        1. Putin signed today the ratification of the Eurasian Economic Union agreement (Russia, Belorussia, and Kashastan).

        2. India joined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.

        3. China will start in December the construction of the new interoceanic canal (Pacific-Atlantic) in Nicaragua.

        4. Russia still has a foot in Ukraine meanwhile Novorossiya is alive.

        For today that is all!

        Like

        Posted by Obi-Juan | October 3, 2014, 14:27
      • actually, the Globalists (and by that i mean their NWO) have stated a reduction of the global population by 80-90%. Have you heard about the georgia guidestones recently? It actually states to keep the world population at 500 million! That’s 5.5 billion corpses worldwide. Seems crazy…Oh wait, they have their ebola hoax, thats right. they said 700,000 will die by the end of the year – How can they *know* or even say that!? Unless…they’re just saying what they *want*? Tie that in with today’s Palestinian, Ukrainian, Christian and Iraqi Yazidi genocides and they just might progress to their heinous desires and this NWO, new world order. However, many have been saying that Putin and the other BRICS nations are against it and that’s why they are targeted by NATO and the United Snakes of Amurrika with all these wars and ISIS etc. It’s not even worth spelling properly.
        What Novorossiya are doing is what the whole world should be doing against these global elitist pricks. And I mean standing up to the ones whipping us. There have been so many protests this year and in recent years…can we say that they have brought anything fruitful? Maybe because they were all HI-JACKED by the pigs in Congress and CIA? Novorossiya has to change this fact. And Hong Kong…good luck, you’re next.

        Like

        Posted by Ariel | October 9, 2014, 10:56
  2. The oligarchs will be removed eventually.

    Like

    Posted by Fri | September 28, 2014, 02:25
    • OBI-JUAN, i don’t take such a pessimistic view of Rogozin’s interview. When he says they should have 600 millon to defend such a large territory, it was just a way to emphasize his comment that Russian weapons and strategy are NOT to use their soldiery as cannon-fodder, but to conserve them. I certainly didn’t take literally his comment about 600 million. However, there’s no question they need more people. This is being addressed two ways:
      1. Russia has the 2d highest immigration rate (I think in the whole world, tho I’m not positive)
      2. There are incentives. I think there’s a subsidy for each child after the 2d one. The populations growing again.

      I don’t think it’s impossible for Russia to re-industrialize, tho I’m not informed on the subject. I know there are a fantastic number of small German businesses in Russia– I suppose many must be manufacturing. If memory serves, there are 4,000 of these!

      I DO see the IMF in Ukraine as a losing situation for Ukraine– just as it has been for every other country. The fall of the hyrvnia makes repayment of loans even more impossible, since the loans are denominated in dollars or euros. I see no future at all unless they repudiate the loans.

      I’ve gotten lost in the discussion. I think our point of disagreement is whether Novorossiya can somehow defy Russia, kick out the oligarchs, and stand alone against the world. I see no way this is possible.

      Like

      Posted by Penelope Powell | October 3, 2014, 18:57
  3. Regarding Obama’s speech, the author says: “It is just that the current world order was established on the spur of the moment by the Unites States. This explains their rigid position: no one is permitted to change it. Only the United States is permitted to decide what is good and what is bad.”

    I would say to the author, Obama uses a lot of lofty speech, but that doesn’t mean he has any authority. Don’t be intimidated by his nonsense. That’s how he got elected. People fell for it.

    Like

    Posted by konar | September 28, 2014, 02:30
    • Dear KONAR

      Paul Craig Roberts’ opinion on Obama’s UN speech (extracts)

      Obama’s September 24 speech at the UN is the most absurd thing I have heard in my entire life. It is absolutely amazing that the president of the United States would stand before the entire world and tell what everyone knows are blatant lies while simultaneously demonstrating Washington’s double standards and belief that Washington alone has the right to violate all law.
      It is even more amazing that every person present did not get up and walk out of the assembly.

      The diplomats of the world actually sat there and listened to blatant lies from the world’s worst terrorist. They even clapped their approval.
      The rest of the speech was just utter bullshit: “We stand at a crossroads,” “signposts of progress,” “reduced chance of war between major powers,” “hundreds of millions lifted from poverty,” and while ebola ravages Africa
      “we’ve learned how to cure disease and harness the power of the wind and the sun.”

      It is impossible to pick the most absurd statement in Obama’s speech or the most outrageous lie. Is it this one? “Russian aggression in Europe recalls the days when large nations trampled small ones in pursuit of territorial ambition.”
      Or is it this one? “After the people of Ukraine mobilized popular protests and calls for reform, their corrupt president fled. Against the will of the government in Kiev, Crimea was annexed. Russia poured arms into eastern Ukraine, fueling violent separatists and a conflict that has killed thousands.
      When a civilian airliner was shot down from areas that these proxies controlled, they refused to allow access to the crash for days. When Ukraine started to reassert control over its territory, Russia gave up the pretense of merely supporting the separatists, and moved troops across the border.”

      The entire world knows that Washington overthrew the elected Ukrainian government, that Washington refuses to release its satellite photos of the destruction of the Malaysian airliner, that Ukraine refuses to release its air traffic control instructions to the airliner, that Washington has prevented a real investigation of the airliner’s destruction, that European experts on the scene have testified that both sides of the airliner’s cockpit demonstrate machine gun fire, an indication that the airliner was shot down by the Ukrainian jets that were following it. Indeed, there has been no explanation why Ukrainian jets were close on the heels of an airliner directed by Ukrainian air traffic control.

      Notice that it is not aggression when Washington bombs and invades seven countries in 13 years without a declaration of war.
      Aggression occurs when Russia accepts the petition of Crimeans who voted 97 percent in favor of reuniting with Russia where Crimea resided for centuries before Khrushchev attached it to the Soviet Socialist Republic of Ukraine in 1954 when Ukraine and Russia were part of the same country.

      ISIS is the creation of Washington. ISIS consists of the jihadists Washington used to overthrow Gaddafi in Libya and then sent to Syria to overthrow Assad.
      If ISIS is a “network of death,” a “brand of evil” with which negotiation is impossible as Obama declares, it is a network of death created by the Obama regime itself. If ISIS poses the threat that Obama claims, how can the regime that created the threat be credible in leading the fight against it?

      Washington has bombed seven countries in the 21st century murdering hundreds of thousands of civilians and displacing millions?
      Who is the worst terrorist–ISIS or Washington with its Wolfowitz Doctrine, the basis of US foreign policy, which declares Washington’s dominant objective to be US hegemony over the world?

      Obama never mentioned in his speech the central problem that the world faces. That problem is Washington’s inability to accept the existence of strong independent countries such as Russia and China.
      The neoconservative Wolfowitz Doctrine commits the United States to maintaining its status as the sole Unipower.
      This task requires Washington “to prevent any hostile power from dominating a region whose resources would, under consolidated control, be sufficient to generate global power.”
      A “hostile power” is any country that has sufficient power or influence to be able to limit Washington’s exercise of power.
      The Wolfowitz Doctrine explicitly targets Russia: “Our first objective is to prevent the re-emergence of a new rival, either on the territory of the former Soviet Union or elsewhere.”
      A “rival” is defined as any country capable of defending its interests or those of allies against Washington’s hegemony.

      In his speech, Obama told Russia and China that they can be part of Washington’s world order on the condition that they accept Washington’s hegemony and do not interfere in any way with Washington’s control.
      When Obama tells Russia that the US will cooperate with Russia “if Russia changes course,” Obama means that Moscow must accept the primacy of Washington’s interest over Russia’s own interest.
      Clearly, this is an inflexible and unrealistic position. If Washington keeps to it, war with Russia and China will ensue.

      Obama told China that Washington intended to continue to be a Pacific power in China’s sphere of influence, “promoting peace, stability, and the free flow of commerce among nations” by building new US air and naval bases from the Philippines to Vietnam so that Washington can control the flow of resources in the South China Sea and cut off China at will.

      As far as I can tell, neither the Russian nor Chinese governments understand the seriousness of the threat that Washington represents. Washington’s claim to world hegemony seems too farfetched to Russia and China to be real. But it is very real.
      By refusing to take the threat seriously, Russia and China have not responded in ways that would bring an end to the threat without the necessity of war.
      Much of Washington’s power and financial hegemony rests on the role of the US dollar as world reserve currency. Russia and China have been slow, even negligent from the standpoint of defending their sovereignty, to take advantage of opportunities to undermine this pillar of Washington’s power.
      For example, the BRICS’ talk of abandoning the dollar payments system has been more talk than action. Russia doesn’t even require Washington’s European puppet states to pay for Russian natural gas in rubles.

      One might think that a country such as Russia experiencing such extreme hostility and demonization from the West would at least use the gas sales to support its own currency instead of Washington’s dollar. If the Russian government is going to continue to support the economies of European countries hostile to Russia and to prevent the European peoples from freezing during the coming winter, shouldn’t Russia in exchange for this extraordinary subsidy to its enemies at least arrange to support its own currency by demanding payment in rubles?
      Unfortunately for Russia, Russia is infected with Western trained neoliberal economists who represent Western, not Russian, interests.

      When the West sees such extraordinary weakness on the part of the Russian government, Obama knows he can go to the UN and tell the most blatant lies about Russia with no cost whatsoever to the US or Europe. Russian inaction subsidizes Russia’s demonization.

      By their restraint, Russia and China enable Washington’s attack upon them.
      Last week Washington put thousands of its NGO operatives into the Moscow streets protesting “Putin’s war against Ukraine.”
      Foolishly, Russia has permitted foreign interests to buy up its newspapers, and these interests continually denounce Putin and the Russian government to their Russian readers.

      Both Russia and China have Muslim populations among whom the CIA operates encouraging disassociation, rebellion, and violence.
      Washington intends to break up the Russian Federation into smaller, weaker countries that could not stand in the way of Washington’s hegemony.
      Russian and Chinese fear of discord among their own Muslim populations have caused both governments to make the extremely serious strategic mistake of aligning with Washington against ISIS.

      Both Russia and China have significant percentages of their populations who wish to be western. The failure of communism in both countries and the success of American cold war propaganda have created loyalties to America in place of their own governments.

      The inability of the Russian and Chinese governments to come to terms with the threat posed to their existence as sovereign countries by the US government insistence on American world hegemony makes nuclear war more likely.
      If Russia and China catch on too late in the game, their only alternative will be war or submission to Washington’s hegemony.
      As there is no possibility of the US and NATO invading and occupying Russia and China, the war would be nuclear.
      To avoid this war, which, as so many experts have shown, would terminate life on earth, the Russian and Chinese governments must soon become far more realistic in their assessment of the evil that resides in what Washington has turned into the world’s worst terrorist state–the US.

      Like

      Posted by BAB | September 28, 2014, 22:13
      • Bab,
        Paul Craig Roberts said “Both Russia and China have significant percentages of their populations who wish to be western. ”

        That is a big true, if you live in a society ruled by oligarchs, the world driving culture belong the strongest oligarchs, that means USA.

        Like

        Posted by Obi-Juan | September 29, 2014, 00:43
      • Bab, thanks for posting Paul Craig Roberts article. His opening sentences are hysterical, and made me laugh out loud with relief that someone has said it so well.

        Like

        Posted by konar | September 29, 2014, 01:07
  4. Αιγός Ποταμοί | vgiannelakis
    http://vgiannelakis.wordpress.com/2012/05/10/748/

    Like

    Posted by rizes | September 28, 2014, 04:49
  5. It is quite likely the Kiev Rada votes down any gas deal. Then the plan to have Gazprom make money can quickly unravel. Or transit gas can stop working for any of many reasons as Ukraine fails to hold together as a country. It won’t take much to spark an explosion that will take down into a Somalia-like eternal war run by warlords. If Russian industry gets no profits out of Ukraine then it gets nothing out of Donbas either, and the revolutionaries take it back.

    Like

    Posted by HenryHall | September 28, 2014, 09:10
    • Henry, I’m not sure this falls under the Rada’s jurisdiction. Further, since US seems to have retired from Ukraine it seems EU is temporarily the boss of Ukraine, since it holds the purse-strings. Do you agree w Paul Craig Roberts that Russia and China don’t take the US/NATO threat seriously, and that’s why they haven’t taken steps to de-dollarize? Both countries seem to prefer doing things in an incremental fashion.

      Like

      Posted by Penelope Powell | September 29, 2014, 00:07
  6. Obama was “elected” “president” of the US based on an anti-neocon campaign. He then effectivly became the paramount neocon. His present and former entourage, including the “ultra-liberal” Hillary Clinton, are flamingly hawkish neoconservatives. Yet, if we are to combat the neocon mindset, it’ is necessary to understand it. Neocons first and foremost are staunch self-righteous do-gooders. They are wrapped in inbred glory of Washington. It offends them to hear they are hurting anyone, a concept beyond their conscious imagination. They are like privileged, over-protected ten-year-olds. What is worse, virtually all of them went to Ivy League universities, where they were indoctrinated with the belief that they are the creme de la creme, that they will rule the world. Paul Theroux, travel author of Dark Star Safari, calls such crusaders “Agents of Virtue”, noting that these are the operatives who do the most harm, and are also the hardest to stop, because they believe they have righteousness on their side.

    The challenge for the rest of us is, how do you get through to a mindset like that? Factually pointing out the harm they are doing only makes them contemptuous of you. Striking back brands you a terrorist. They have ready categories for every form of opposition. Or so it seems. Yet they are human beings with vulnerabilities. If only we could see what those are and exploit them to make this a fairer world.

    American exceptionalism = exemption from the Golden Rule.

    Like

    Posted by kennedy applebaum | September 28, 2014, 20:23
    • Dear Kennedy, the neocons are not the real power, but only the implementers of policies made by the banksters and other ultra-rich principals of transnational corps. The reason that country after country is being destroyed (and our own civil rights) is not because of misguidd do-gooders. There actually is a plan to complete the formation of a global oligarchy. I can see that it is difficult for you to believe that there are people who don’t share your compassion for your fellowman. I recommend you look at a brief video “video Wolfensohn’s Confession”. He reveals the thinking that allows ‘his group’ to destroy others. Regards.

      Like

      Posted by Penelope Powell | September 29, 2014, 00:19
    • The neocons are not a shadowy group, or a political tendency. They are real people, signatures on the public record and available for all to see. They arise from a think tank called PNAC, Project for the New American Century, which was disbanded after all their members landed high-ranking jobs in government and thus a better base of operations.

      I believe you can get the manifesto, which proudly and clearly proclaims the goal is American world conquest, through Wikipedia links. If not there, a quick google search will find it. Note who signed it.

      Like

      Posted by Cass | October 1, 2014, 05:49
      • KENNEDY APPLEBAUM: Doesn’t matter if the ‘real power’ right now is with the global oligarchy. Unlike the local Ukrainian oligarchy they must be fought because their agenda IS global. It spells the end to civilization as we know it. They are the big banksters and the largest transnational corps. There’s an interlocking directorate that controls a large percent of global wealth. I suggest youi read about the Swiss study that was done into the question you ask about WHO is exerting power. Search “Swiss Study Large Corps”.

        Like

        Posted by Penelope Powell | October 3, 2014, 02:57
      • OBI-JUAN Thanks for the referral to the Joaquin Flores material. Interesting idea that a Pravi-Sector takeonver might be preferred by the West as a pretext for invasion/endless war. I confess I didn’t have the patience to go all the way through his mat’l;. I find if diffecult to project so many steps ahead even if this should occur. At each step in the progression there is more than one possibility for each of the actors.
        Regards.
        Incidentally there is a reason why France and Germany are forever giving in to US wishes rather than pursuing their own self-interest. Seems each of them has a large skeleton in the closet that US could publicize.
        Sorry, I don’t have the link handy. Search ‘Will France and Germany Challenge NATO?’

        Like

        Posted by Penelope Powell | October 3, 2014, 03:08
  7. Why am I thinking that the last chance for the Republic is to confound all expectations and attack this Winter and force everyone to agree on sovereign borders, perhaps including the Crimea? Insane. But then the NAF is better in every respect than its enemy. By Spring the NAF will be fighting mercenaries with air cover (from Poland?). If this all-but-in-name NATO army succeeds next year in conquering the East, it is hard to see how this would not end up involving the RF and could light the fuse to nuclear war. I suspect that the intransigence at the Donetsk airport is fueled in part by trying to avoid the bad marketing spin involved in abandoning the mercenaries there. Do that and good luck with the hiring mercenaries thing.

    A winter campaign could provision itself and replace equipment from what the enemy would, true to form, abandon during a chaotic and sabotage ridden retreat right up to the west bank, ceding E. Kiev to Republican forces. As has already happened, and will be expected to happen once a rout is ignited, whole units of the UAF will change sides, those still resisting become cauldron meat.

    Such a blow would be greatly enhanced by captured aircraft – have your pilots ready – both military and commercial, including sport aircraft such as single engine light aircraft and ultralights. This would enable a rear guard in the event that that UAF forces attempted to break out of their cauldrons. And imagine, air lifting the wounded out for a change, leaving the well bodied to carry on the fight without being bogged down with casualties.

    I expect even making a credible threat to Kiev would see some sincere bargaining, and quick, REAL concessions. Otherwise it is Kiev’s turn to experience shelling (warning civilian population to flee and concentrating on oligarch assets should do the trick).

    Changed my mind about the mercenaries trapped in the airport. For now, keep them hiding underground and not shelling anything. Nothing happens by early Spring? Annihilate them in a very public manner by intense bombardment with concrete melting incendiaries.

    Timing of an assault is everything.

    Aging arm chair warrior.

    Like

    Posted by hruhs | September 28, 2014, 22:26
  8. A question for Gleb Basov,

    Tonight I see on your Twitter page a discussion of Moscow taking control of and cutting off private aid to Novorossiya, with blockage at the border. Can Putin really be doing this? What are the details?

    I urge Novorossiya to redouble its efforts to prevail regardless of the actions of any foreign government, including Russia.

    Like

    Posted by kennedy applebaum | September 29, 2014, 02:19
    • Sure, the Kremlin could do that. The issue is that Novorossiya and Russia have different goals. Gleb has a Tweet:

      “A thought: if, from the beginning, we all had focused more on winning, than on making Ukraine lose, we’d be further ahead now.”

      The problem is that “winning” from the point of the Kremlin is not what winning means to the fighters in Novorossiya. Russia wants a non-hostile regime in Kiev. Russia strongly preferred a united Ukraine, though that is probably impossible now. So Russia has been hoping for a situation where the oligarchs in the Ukraine deal with Russia in a reasonable manner, as in corrupt manner, and things resemble what they did five or ten years ago. So Russia wants to go back to the old system of huge bribes to the oligarchs in the Ukraine. They also really need to stall for time, because Russia has foolishly not prepared sufficiently for a struggle with the Anglo-Americans. Russia’s elites seem to always love the West, no matter how much this causes trouble due to vastly different strategic interests.

      Gleb may argue that the NAF taking Kiev would be a win, but most of us don’t see how they could possibly hold it. Kiev is anti-Russian these days, and the anti-Russian groups would get lots of support from the West. What happens the week after the NAF drives the Kiev government to Lvov? One likely thing is that lots of the Western countries will announce Poroshenko the legitimate government and the NAF an outlaw group bordering on terrorism. And they will threaten Russia. The Kremlin doesn’t want these problems. Russia is trying to prevent a war, not win one.

      Like

      Posted by Paul | September 29, 2014, 02:45
      • Paul,
        I totally agree with you, also I want to add something:

        1. You said “They also really need to stall for time, because Russia has foolishly not prepared sufficiently for a struggle with the Anglo-Americans.”

        Russia has lost land and or population in every single confrontation abroad in the past century.
        Russo-Japanese war: Korea, Manchuria
        WWI: Poland, Baltic States, Finland, millions of people, total destruction of the country during civil war
        WWII: Even though they were the big military winners of the WII they lost 30 millions of people plus total destruction of the country
        Cold war: Russia lost 16 out of 17 republics of the USSR plus Warsovia Pact countries and million of people death during the transition

        Summarizing, Russia always arrived late to technological level of the new confrontation and paid the price for that.

        2. You said “So Russia has been hoping for a situation where the oligarchs in the Ukraine deal with Russia in a reasonable manner, as in corrupt manner, and things resemble what they did five or ten years ago. So Russia wants to go back to the old system of huge bribes to the oligarchs in the Ukraine. ”

        That’s it because Russia is sailing inside the Matrix of capitalism, they have to follow the rules (liked or not) of the system and the leading capitalist country, USA.

        3. You said “Russia’s elites seem to always love the West, no matter how much this causes trouble due to vastly different strategic interests.”

        That is a big true and beware of what Russian chauvinist like the Saker of Dmitry Orlov can tell you, they can say that USA is in free fall and Russia is flourishing but they still living in USA and not in Russia, they say that the Dollar will collapse, but they are saving in Dollars and not in Rubles. Bottom line, they usually said the opposite of what they do. Right now Putin can have millions of followers, but he will not last forever, but be sure that Russia always will have millions of Gorvachev willing to love Western rule.

        4. The tragedy for Novorossiya people is that they were not confronting a country, but they are confronting a system.
        Bottom line, NATO is closer to achieve their goals that anyone believes; all the historical and systemic odds are against Russia.

        Liked by 1 person

        Posted by Obi-Juan | September 29, 2014, 13:09
  9. Or it could be that intelligent psychopaths have made a world wide pact to enslave or eradicate normals and all we hear and see is just camouflage to cover their plans. To a psychopath we are all sub-humans, witless animals easily manipulated and needing to be culled to improve the herd.

    Like

    Posted by hruhs | October 3, 2014, 15:33
  10. OBI-JUAN: More replies to you below. I’m interested to see what you think of the skeletons in the closets of France and Germany. It explains a lot about their behavior in always being cowed by US.

    Like

    Posted by Penelope Powell | October 3, 2014, 19:05
    • Dear Penelope,
      You said “I’m interested to see what you think of the skeletons in the closets of France and Germany. It explains a lot about their behavior in always being cowed by US.”

      My sense tell me that NATO, NSA, IMF, World Bank,….are just tools of a imperial power and the European Union presidents and prime ministers are just clowns in a big game, they have autonomy to rule over small potatoes issues related with their territory, period. For anything else those clowns have to follow orders and sometimes bribes, sanctions or punishment is needed to impose discipline between the clowns.

      Please, if you have any information about the skeletons in the closets of France and Germany, we will be glad if you can share this information-opinion with us (the commentators).

      About what you said in your other post: “I think our point of disagreement is whether Novorossiya can somehow defy Russia, kick out the oligarchs, and stand alone against the world. I see no way this is possible.”

      I see this is possible and also a necessity, for the peoples of Novorossiya, Ukraine, Russia and the rest of the world. I believe that is not coincidence that we (the commentators) are so passionate with this civil war, the struggle that Novorossiya people are conducting against fascist gangs, oligarchs and imperial powers with their associated clowns, bring back ours best dreams for brotherhood, justice and freedom.

      Best, Obi Juan

      Like

      Posted by Obi-Juan | October 4, 2014, 01:24
      • OBI-JUAN: I share the passion, and only quarrel w the practicality (possibility).
        In another comment above that you must not have seen (there was more than one addressed to you) I mentioned an article that references specific skeletons in the closets of France and of Germany– skeletons which would make publicity very troublesome, and which therefore may be part of US control of those two countries. The article: Search ‘Will France and Germany Challenge NATO?’ The article is long and contains much insight, written by the Danish principal behind nsnbc international, Christof Lehmann..
        The French skeleton you will understand at once. The German one may seem baffling even after the article. If so, see ‘Germany Still In Juridical Limbo Rense’
        Regards

        Like

        Posted by Penelope Powell | October 4, 2014, 04:29

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Pingback: Putin’s Cunning Plan | Piotr Bein's blog = blog Piotra Beina - September 28, 2014

  2. Pingback: Profits Before Glory | SLAVYANGRAD.org | keesened's Blog - September 28, 2014

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Latest map of hostilities (25/01)

Our Partners:

southfront.org
VoxPopuliEvo

Archived Briefings

A Record of Our Times

September 2014
M T W T F S S
« Aug   Oct »
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930  
Follow SLAVYANGRAD.org on WordPress.com

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 37,710 other followers

Latest Briefings

Blog Stats

  • 1,618,430 hits
%d bloggers like this: