Informazione
http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/58793
http://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2014/05/26/ukra-m26.html
Billionaire oligarch declared winner in Ukraine elections
By Thomas Gaist
26 May 2014
Oligarch Petro Poroshenko was declared the winner of presidential elections held in Ukraine on Sunday. According to exit polls, the billionaire pro-European Union “chocolate king” had about 56 percent of the vote, far ahead of fellow oligarch and former prime minister, Yulia Tymoshenko.
The aim of the poll was to provide a semblance of political legitimacy to the right-wing regime installed three months ago with US and EU support, and backed by fascistic forces. Wide sections of the population boycotted the elections, particularly in the east and the south, where many polling stations were closed. The poll was conducted under conditions of mounting violence and intimidation directed at opponents of the Kiev government.
While the Ukrainian regime and its supporters declared the election a great success, turnout was low, at only 55 percent across the country.
In an effort to guide the election, the Obama administration sent observers, led by former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright. On Friday, a US Navy missile cruiser arrived in the Black Sea, underscoring the active involvement of US military and intelligence agencies in the country.
US President Barack Obama quickly declared the election a success, calling it an “important step forward in the efforts of the Ukrainian government to unify the country”—a reference to the new government’s hostility to the separatist and pro-Russian movements in the east, where the population is majority-Russian speaking.
In the weeks preceding the election, Poroshenko emerged as the consensus candidate among forces in the Ukrainian ruling class favoring closer relations with the EU and the imposition of deep austerity measures against the working class. He received the endorsement of former boxing champion Vitali Klitschko, who was elected mayor of Kiev.
Poroshenko is a veteran political operator in Ukraine who served for five years as the head of the Council of Ukraine’s National Bank. He is the owner of the Roshen Confectionary Corporation, with a net worth of some $1.3 billion, and was also a chief financial supporter of the 2004 western-backed “Orange Revolution.”
Poroshenko’s task will be to continue the integration of Ukraine into the EU, the issue that made previous President Victor Yanukovych a target of US and German imperialism. Poroshenko has vowed to complete an economic and political association agreement with the EU initiated in March, committing the country to harsh austerity measures in the guise of “reforms.” Signing the second part of the agreement was deliberately put off until after the polls so that the unpopular measures it mandates would not become an election issue.
Before casting his ballot, Poroshenko stressed the importance of fostering “a very good investment climate” in Ukraine, and adopting “all the necessary things to attract business.”
While saying that stability in Ukraine requires some sort of dialogue with Russia, Poroshenko also insisted that he does not recognize the annexation of Crimea by Russia or the independence of the eastern provides of Donetsk and Lugansk, which have declared themselves to be autonomous.
The second-place position in the election went to Yulia Tymoshenko, the billionaire natural gas oligarch, who received about 13 percent of the vote according to preliminary results. Tymoshenko, whose 7 year-prison sentence was commuted in the wake of the US-backed February putsch, responded to Poroshenko’s victory by calling for national unity and for a referendum on Ukraine’s accession to NATO.
In the weeks preceding the poll, Right Sector forces beat, intimidated and killed members of the Borotba (“Struggle”) group and the Communist Party of Ukraine (KPU). Oleg Tsarev, of Yanukovych’s Party of the Regions, was beaten by right-wing forces as well. Both Tsarev and the KPU candidate withdrew from the elections and called for a boycott.
While the new regime has relied on fascistic forces as the shock troops of the “revolution” and to terrorize political opposition, popular support for these groups is very low, in both the east and the west. Svoboda Party leader Oleg Tyahnybok received only 1.3 percent of the vote, and Right Sector head Dmitry Yarosh received 1.1 percent.
The election was held under deepening civil war conditions, particularly in the east. The sham character of the election was exposed by the mass boycott by millions in the industrial and largely Russian-speaking sections of the country. There were also reports of separatist forces taking control of ballots or shutting down polling stations.
The Ukrainian Central Elections Commission found that turnout in the Donetsk region was barely more than 12 percent. According to sources cited by Ria Novosti, elections did not take place at all in 23 of Donetsk’s cities.
Even as the elections have proceeded, these areas have been subjected to occupation and bombardment by regime forces. Video footage surfaced on Friday showing Ukrainian ultranationalist forces attacking Ukrainian regulars who had refused to fire on civilians and separatist groups. Clashes were still occurring near Slavyansk on Saturday, with an Italian journalist and his Russian colleague killed in the crossfire.
Prime Minister Arsieniy Yatsenyuk made clear that repression against the population in the east, where hostility to the quasi-fascist regime in Kiev is especially strong, will continue in the days ahead. “I would like to assure our compatriots in Donetsk and Luhansk regions, who will be prevented from coming to the polling stations by the war waged against Ukraine: The criminals don't have much time left to terrorize your land.”
Fearing that the increasingly explosive situation in Ukraine may catalyze an upsurge of opposition against his own government, Russian President Vladimir Putin has responded to the elections with a number of conciliatory statements.
Putin declared that he is prepared to work with whoever wins the election, despite what he described as “chaos and full blown civil war.”
Putin signaled his desire to forge a compromise with US imperialism and de-escalate the crisis. “Despite our varying, maybe diametrically non-overlapping approaches in assessing critical situations, we nevertheless continue cooperation,” Putin said. “They [the US] have not suspended military cargo transit to and from Afghanistan via our territory, because it is convenient for them. As a matter of fact, we have not refused it, either,” he added.
Deutsche Außenpolitik-Experten plädieren in einem PR-Projekt des Auswärtigen Amts für eine "neue Abschreckungspolitik gegenüber Russland" und sagen dem "Vielvölkerstaat" wegen separatistischer Bestrebungen in einigen Regionen eine "Zerreißprobe" voraus… (GFP 20.05.2014)
By Mahdi Darius Nazemroaya - Global Research, May 12, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/welcome-to-nulandistan-a-videographic-essay-of-what-the-us-and-eu-have-unleashed-on-ukraine/5381838
Il Primo ministro ucraino, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, sarà ricevuto mercoledì prossimo dalla cancelliera tedesca, Angela Merkel, a Berlino, insieme ai capi di governo di Georgia e Moldavia in un evidente tentativo di stringere il cerchio attorno alla Russia strumentalizzando i sentimenti antirussi diffusi in quei paesi – e sostenuti da conflitti territoriali con Mosca - governati da tempo da una classe dirigente selezionata e imposta dall’Unione Europea e dalla Nato.
Il leader golpista ucraina Yatsenyuk, il Primo ministro georgiano Irakli Garibashvili e il loro omologo moldavo, Iurie Leanca, saranno ricevuti ad una cena per fare il punto sulla situazione nella regione, ha spiegato Christiane Wirtz, portavoce aggiunta del governo tedesco.
Non a caso l’incontro è stato convocato appena dopo le elezioni presidenziali di domani in Ucraina che nelle intenzioni dei golpisti dovrebbero legittimare il loro potere.
Intanto però proprio in Germania tiene banco una polemica che nel resto dell’Unione Europea non ha avuto finora cittadinanza. Una polemica sul ruolo che il governo tedesco ha avuto nella destabilizzazione dell’Ucraina e poi nel golpe che ha estromesso il precedente governo imponendone uno fedeli agli interessi di Bruxelles e Washington. Nei giorni scorsi era stata la grande stampa tedesca, e in particolare il Bild, a confermare che nel paese scosso dalla guerra civile operano alcune centinaia di mercenari della multinazionale statunitense Academi, a cui la giunta ha fatto da subito ricorso dopo il golpe per tantare di prendere il controllo di alcune delle aree del sud est del paese non troppo inclini ad accettare un governo xenofobo e ultranazionalista. Che gli Stati Uniti abbiano avuto un ruolo di primo piano nel regime change cruento di Kiev è risaputo. Ma che anche l’Unione Europea abbia partecipato alla partita continua ad essere negato o sottovalutato anche dalla stampa progressista o euroscettica. Eppure non sono pochi i politici o gli “intellettuali mercenari” europei – basti pensare a Daniel Cohn Bendit e al suo compare Bernard Henry Levy – che hanno attivamente sostenuto EuroMaidan anche facendo la spola con Kiev dove hanno incitato la piazza nazionalista a disfarsi del governo e ad aderire alle “magnifiche sorti” della democrazia e della libertà targati Bruxelles. E poi sostenendo le sanzioni contro la Russia, e l'inclusione di Kiev nel meccanismo militare e di sicurezza dell'Ue, e in certi casi - l'italiana Pinotti - promettendo ai golpisti ucraini truppe in caso di bisogno.
Non è un caso che proprio all'interno della Germania sorga il dubbio che dietro i fatti di Kiev ci sia lo zampino del governo tedesco e dei suoi apparati. Nei giorni scorsi alcuni parlamentari di Berlino, eletti nelle liste della Linke (Sinistra) hanno infatti chiesto al governo di Frau Merkel di ordinare «un'inchiesta indipendente sulla presenza di mercenari in Ucraina» esprimendo la loro inquietudine sull’uso di eserciti privati nella guerra civile in corso nel paese. Inoltre, ed è questo che ci preme sottolineare, i deputati della sinistra tedesca hanno anche chiesto di sapere «se la Germania ha preso parte in qualche modo alla ribellione e al successivo conflitto». Non si tratta di una polemica strumentale o ‘elettorale’. Alla loro richieste i deputati della Linke accludono una serie di documenti e di fatti: «La Cdu ha sostenuto ufficialmente il leader della rivolta Vitali Klichko; il primo dicembre 2013 il presidente del parlamento europeo Martin Schulz ha pronunciato un discorso anti-governativo a Maidan; il 7 dicembre il presidente della commissione degli Esteri dell'europarlamento, Elmar Brok, ha pronunciato un discorso a Maidan in favore di Iulia Tymoshenko; il 29 gennaio Elmar Brok ha tenuto una conferenza stampa al fianco di Klichko in cui si chiedevano le dimissioni del presidente Viktor Yanukovich; il 27 febbraio tre ministri tedeschi hanno negoziato e poi firmato un accordo politico tra il Yanukovich e l'opposizione di Maidan, accordo che è servito a coprire il colpo di Stato; il 25 aprile quattro ufficiali tedeschi che lavoravano per l'Osce sono stati arrestati mentre compivano azioni fuori dal loro mandato nell'est dell'Ucraina, e successivamente cacciati dal Paese».
Non è un segreto che uno dei tre attuali partito di governo a Kiev, Udar, sia stato partorito grazie all'intervento della Fondazione Adenauer della Cdu tedesca e che il suo leader, l'ex campione di pugilato Klichko abbia la doppia cittadinanza ucraino-tedesca. Non è neanche da dimenticare quanta pressione abbia esercitato il governo tedesco negli ultimi anni affinché la leader del partito Patria, Yulia Timoshenko, in galera per appropriazione indebita e malversazione, fosse scarcerata prima di aver compiuto la sua condanna. Cosa verificatasi proprio in occasione del golpe di fine febbraio.
Siamo stati giustamente abituati, viste le vicende degli ultimi decenni, ad associare l’imperialismo, i colpi di stato, i complotti per liberarsi di governi scomodi alla politica estera statunitense. Ma è il caso di aggiornare la propria griglia di lettura della realtà, perché l’imperialismo ormai parla anche tedesco e l’Unione Europea persegue una propria espansione ad est e a sud esattamente come Washington ha sempre fatto nel suo ‘cortile di caso’. Costi quel che costi.
http://www.german-foreign-policy.com/de/fulltext/58871
Wie Verheugen in einem Offenen Brief an den ehemaligen Bundeskanzler Helmut Schmidt (SPD) schreibt, sei es falsch, vor allem die Ukraine-Politik der EU-Kommission zu kritisieren. Schmidt hatte dies getan. "Noch immer sind die Mitgliedstaaten die Herren aller Verträge", stellt Verheugen fest: "Die entscheiden, nicht die Kommission." Eine besondere Rolle in puncto Ukraine habe dabei die Bundesregierung gespielt.[1]
Verheugen ruft in Erinnerung, dass "der Weg zur Assoziierung der Ukraine" im Juni 2007 "unter deutscher EU-Präsidentschaft ... eingeschlagen" wurde. "Unter Vorsitz der deutschen Bundeskanzlerin Merkel" sei der Kommission der Auftrag zu Assoziierungsverhandlungen erteilt worden, berichtet Verheugen, der noch bis 2010 als EU-Kommissar tätig war. Im Juni 2008 sei die "Östliche Partnerschaft" initiiert worden - "formell von Polen und Schweden", tatsächlich jedoch unter ausdrücklicher Befürwortung Deutschlands. Die Unterzeichnung des bereits im März 2012 paraphierten Assoziierungsabkommens sei "informell im Mai 2012, offiziell im Dezember 2012" von den EU-Außenministern verweigert worden, obwohl sie damals noch "völlig unstrittig mit Moskau" gewesen sei. Grund (mit Einwilligung des deutschen Außenministers): die Inhaftierung der Ex-Oligarchin Julia Timoschenko, einer Parteigängerin der NATO-Staaten.
Auch den "sogenannten Euro-Maidan" haben, wie Verheugen in Erinnerung ruft, weniger EU- denn vielmehr nationale Politiker unterstützt - an vorderster Stelle der deutsche Außenminister -, ohne zu berücksichtigen, "dass es sich weder um eine landesweite noch um eine homogene Bewegung handelte". Auch hätten sie die nach Janukowitschs Sturz an die Macht gelangte neue Regierung "ohne Not ... sofort rückhaltlos unterstützt", obwohl diese "noch nicht einmal im eigenen Land das Vertrauen der Mehrheit genießt, antirussisch ist und ihr völkisch gesinnte Kräfte angehören". Der ehemalige EU-Kommissar weist darauf hin, dass die Spitzenpolitiker der EU-Mitgliedstaaten damit "die schwerste Krise in Europa in diesem Jahrhundert mit ausgelöst" haben. Verheugen resümiert: "Ein Gutteil der Verantwortung dafür liegt in Berlin."
[1] Zitate hier und im Folgenden: Verheugen zur EU-Russlandpolitik: Warum Helmut Schmidt irrt. www.spiegel.de 19.05.2014.
RÉSEAU VOLTAIRE | 15 MAI 2014
Si nos lecteurs ont été informés dès les 3 et 4 mars de la présence de mercenaires israéliens et états-uniens à Kiev [1], les lecteurs de l’hebdomadaire Bild am Sonntag ont pu observer le 9 mars 2014 une vidéo montrant des employés d’Academi (voir https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1VFMAIv8yvA ).
Les parlementaires ont exprimé leur inquiétude face à la privatisation de la guerre et ont exigé de savoir si oui ou non les autorités allemandes participent à ces opérations.
Cette question est d’autant plus importante que :
• Le parti de la chancelière Angela Merkel, la CDU, soutient officiellement le leader Vitali Klitchsko.
• le 1er décembre 2013, le président du Parlement européen Martin Schulz venait prononcer un discours anti-gouvernemental sur la place Maidan.
• Le 4 décembre, le ministre allemand des Affaires étrangères Guido Westerwelle venait apporter son soutien aux manifestants de la place Maidan.
• Le 7 décembre, le président de la Commission des Affaires étrangères du parlement européen, Elmar Brok, venait prononcer un discours sur la place Maidan en faveur de Iulia Tymoshenko.
• Le 29 janvier 2014, Elmar Brok se présentait à la presse aux côtés de Vitali Klitschko et demandait le départ du président Ianoukovytch.
• Le 27 février, les trois ministres du Triangle de Weimar, dont Guido Westerwelle, négociaient et signaient un accord politique entre le président Ianoukovytch et l’opposition de Maidan. Cependant, cet accord servait à couvrir le coup d’État qui intervint dans les heures suivantes alors que le président Ianoukovytch se rendait en province.
• le 25 avril, quatre officiers allemands travaillant à l’OSCE se sont rendus en dehors de leur mandat à l’Est du pays où ils ont été arrêtés pour espionnage par les fédéralistes et retenus durant une semaine.
[1] « Des soldats israéliens étaient camouflés place Maidan », Réseau Voltaire, 3 mars 2014 [ http://www.voltairenet.org/article182432.html ]. Et « Des mercenaires US déployés au Sud de l’Ukraine », Réseau Voltaire, 4 mars 2014 [ http://www.voltairenet.org/article182466.html ].
By Bill Van Auken / WSWS - 22 May 2014
By Alex Lantier / WSWS - 22 May 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/welcome-to-nulandistan-a-videographic-essay-of-what-the-us-and-eu-have-unleashed-on-ukraine/5381838
John Pilger | johnpilger.com
Traduzione per Resistenze.org a cura del Centro di Cultura e Documentazione Popolare
13/05/2014
Perché tolleriamo la minaccia di un'altra guerra mondiale nel nostro nome? Perché acconsentiamo le menzogne che giustificano questo rischio? La dimensione del nostro indottrinamento, ha scritto Harold Pinter, è un "brillante, persino arguto, atto di ipnosi di grande successo", come se la verità "non accadesse nemmeno mentre accade".
Ogni anno lo storico statunitense William Blum pubblica il suo "sommario aggiornato dei dati di politica estera USA", che mostra come dal 1945 gli Stati Uniti abbiano tentato di rovesciare oltre 50 governi, molti dei quali democraticamente eletti, abbiano grossolanamente interferito nelle elezioni di 30 paesi, bombardato le popolazioni civili di 30 nazioni, fatto uso di armi chimiche e batteriologiche e attentato alla vita di leader stranieri.
In molti casi il Regno Unito ne è stato complice. Il grado di sofferenza umana provocato, per non parlare dei crimini, è poco noto in occidente, malgrado la presenza del più sofisticato sistema di comunicazioni del mondo e del giornalismo nominalmente più libero. Che il maggior numero di vittime del terrorismo - del "nostro" terrorismo - sia di musulmani è taciuto, come è taciuto che lo jihadismo estremo, quello dell'11 settembre, sia stato nutrito come arma dalla politica anglo-statunitense (operazione ciclone in Afghanistan). Nel mese di aprile, il Dipartimento di Stato USA ha reso noto che, in seguito alla campagna della NATO del 2011, "la Libia è diventata un rifugio sicuro dei terroristi".
Nel corso degli anni è mutato il nome del "nostro" nemico, dal comunismo all'islamismo, ma generalmente si tratta di società indipendenti dall'egemonia occidentale o che occupano territori nevralgici dal punto di vista strategico o ricchi di risorse naturali. I leader di queste nazioni recalcitranti deposti di norma con la violenza, come i democratici Muhammad Mossedeq in Iran e Salvador Allende in Cile, o uccisi come Patrice Lumumba in Congo. Tutti sono oggetto di campagne caricaturali e vilipesi dai media occidentali, come Fidel Castro, Hugo Chavez e ora Vladimir Putin.
Il ruolo di Washington in Ucraina è diverso solo per le implicazioni nei nostri riguardi. Per la prima volta dagli anni di Reagan, gli USA minacciano di trascinare il mondo in una guerra. Con l'est Europa e i Balcani oramai avamposti NATO, l'ultimo stato cuscinetto al confine con la Russia viene dilaniato. Noi occidentiali stiamo sostenendo i neonazisti in una nazione dove i nazisti ucraini sostennero Hitler. Dopo aver ideato il colpo di stato nel mese di febbraio contro il governo democraticamente eletto a Kiev, è fallito il piano di Washington di sequestrare alla Russia la sua storica e legittima base navale in Crimea. I russi si sono difesi, come hanno fatto per oltre un secolo contro ogni minaccia e invasione occidentale.
Ma l'accerchiamento militare della NATO ha subito un'accelerazione, insieme con gli attacchi orchestrati dagli Stati Uniti ai danni degli ucraini di etnia russa e se Putin viene provocato a intervenire in loro aiuto, il suo ruolo di paria predestinato giustificherebbe una guerriglia della NATO che potrebbe rovesciarsi nella Russia stessa.
Invece Putin ha frustrato il partito della guerra cercando un'intesa con Washington e l'UE, ritirando le truppe russe dal confine e scoraggiando i russofoni nell'Ucraina orientale a partecipare ai provocatori referendum. Questa popolazione russofona e bilingue, un terzo del totale, aspira da tempo a una federazione democratica che rifletta le differenze etniche del paese, nel contempo autonoma e indipendente da Mosca. La maggioranza di queste persone non sono né "separatiste" e né "ribelli", ma cittadini che vogliono vivere sicuri nella loro patria.
Come le rovine dell'Iraq e dell'Afghanistan, l'Ucraina è diventata un parco divertimenti della CIA, governata da un funzionario della CIA, John Brennan, a Kiev, assieme a "unità speciali" che monitorano attacchi selvaggi contro coloro che si oppongono al colpo di stato di febbraio. Guardate i video, leggete le denunce dei testimoni oculari del massacro di Odessa di questo mese. Bande di criminali fascisti hanno dato fuoco alla sede dei sindacati, uccidendo 41 persone intrappolate al suo interno. Guardate la polizia impassibile. Ascoltate la testimonianza di un dottore che ha tentato di salvare alcune persone "ma sono stato fermato dai sostenitori dei nazisti ucraini. Uno di loro mi ha cacciato brutalmente, promettendomi che presto io e gli altri ebrei di Odessa avremmo avuto la medesima sorte... mi chiedo perché il mondo intero se ne stia in silenzio".
Gli ucraini russofoni stanno lottando per la sopravvivenza. Quando Putin ha annunciato il ritiro delle truppe russe dal confine, il segretario della difesa della giunta di Kiev, un membro fondatore del partito fascista Svoboda, si è vantato che gli attacchi contro "i ribelli" sarebbero continuati. In stile orwelliano, la propaganda occidente ha ribaltato i fatti, asserendo che "Mosca cerca di fomentare il conflitto e la provocazione", secondo William Hague. Il suo cinismo fa il paio con i grotteschi complimenti di Obama alla giunta golpista per la sua "notevole moderazione" dopo il massacro di Odessa. Illegittima e fascista, la giunta è descritta da Obama come "eletta". Ciò che conta non è la verità, ha detto una volta Henry Kissinger, ma ciò che è percepito come vero.
Nei media statunitensi le atrocità di Odessa sono state presentate come "oscure" e "tragiche", con i "nazionalisti" (neonazisti) che hanno attaccato i "separatisti" (persone che raccoglievano firme per un referendum a sostegno della Federazione Ucraina). Il Wall Street Journal di Rupert Murdoch ha dannato le vittime: "Il rogo è stato probabilmente appiccato dai ribelli ucraini, dice il governo". La propaganda in Germania è stata pura guerra fredda, con il Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung che avvertiva i suoi lettori della "guerra non dichiarata" della Russia. Per i tedeschi è una spiacevole ironia che Putin sia l'unico leader a condannare il riemergere del fascismo nell'Europa del 21° secolo.
Una popolare banalità è che "il mondo è cambiato dopo l'11 settembre". Ma cosa è cambiato? Secondo il grande informatore Daniel Ellsberg, un colpo di stato silenzioso è avvenuto a Washington e ora governa il militarismo rampante. Il Pentagono ultimamente svolge "operazioni speciali", guerre segrete, in 124 paesi. In patria, l'aumento della povertà e la riduzione delle libertà sono il tradizionale corollario di uno stato di guerra permanente. Aggiungiamo il rischio di una guerra nucleare e la domanda da porsi é: perché tolleriamo tutto questo?
---
The White House
Office of the Vice President
For Immediate Release May 20, 2014
Remarks by Vice President Joe Biden to Joint United States and Romanian Participants in Carpathian Spring Military Exercise
Otopeni Military Airbase
Bucharest, Romania
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Let me begin by saying, Mr. Minister, thank you, and it’s very hot in here. I was supposed to -- I was told it was going to be cooler here, but thank you for the great weather.
Ladies and gentlemen, it’s an honor to have a chance to see our militaries work together in this Carpathian Spring Joint Military Exercise. The last time I saw you working together was in Afghanistan. And it is -- it’s a great benefit to both of us that we are side by side. It’s my pleasure to take a moment to recognize all that you do to keep the people safe and strong in our alliance.
...I even advocated for Romania’s early entry into NATO when I was a United States senator.
...
And I especially want to pay tribute to the 26 Romanians who gave their lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, and the 143 who were wounded...
In Romania, American forces have found a devoted NATO ally. I never doubted that for a moment as the effort to admit Romania into NATO was underway, serious and steadfast partner that you’ve been from day one. About a thousand Romanians remain in Afghanistan -- four serving without caveats, fully in the fight, alongside our women and men. And I’m pleased that you will continue to support the post-2014 mission in Afghanistan.
Romania today is hosting U.S. Marines at the M-K Airbase, which also supports logistical operations for Afghanistan. You’re building a fleet of F-16s. Romania is working to bring its defense budget up to 2 percent of GDP, as all NATO allies should and must.
To the Americans here today, let me say that I believe you are the greatest generation of warriors the world has ever produced. And that is not hyperbole. You represent a generation of Americans equal to any that has ever gone before you. I’ve seen you in Bosnia and Kosovo, Baghdad and Basra, Fallujah and Ramadi, Kabul and Kandahar. I’ve even seen you in those FOBs up in the Kunar Valley. You’re an incredible group of warriors.
You and your family are part of an unbroken chain of patriots who’ve stood guard since World War II over freedom’s frontier, right here in Europe. I could not be more proud of all of you.
We too care deeply about the alliance, Mr. Minister. America’s commitment to collective defense under Article 5 of NATO is a sacred obligation in our view -- a sacred obligation not just for now, but for all time. So I’m here to say on behalf of the President what I hope you already know: You can count on us. Period. We do what we say, and we mean what we say.
Today aggression in Crimea, less than 250 miles from Romanian territory, from NATO’s borders reminds us why we need NATO and why Romania belongs to NATO...
So long as Russia’s efforts to destabilize Ukraine continues we must remain resolute in imposing greater costs on Russia, imposing those costs together. But our strategy is about more than just imposing cost. It’s fundamentally about investing in a revitalized NATO that emerges from this crisis and works toward a successful summit in Wales, stronger and more united. America and our NATO allies have urgently stepped up our military presence in the air, land and on the sea of NATO’s eastern flank. In just the past weeks we’ve had ships visit. The USS Truxton, Cook, Taylor, as well as the Dacian Viper F-16 exercise. And in the coming days, new ships -- the Vella Gulf will enter the Black Sea to conduct port visits and maritime training. Period.
Since mid March the U.S. has been flying refueling missions over Poland and Romania in support of NATO’s AWACs. And we are on track to open up a missile defense site at Deveselu, next year. We support the Supreme Allied Commander of Europe’s intention to finalize contingency plans for the Black Sea allies by the Wales summit. And we have -- we have assigned extra strategic planners to help NATO meet that goal. As President Obama said, “NATO nations never stand alone.” NATO nations never stand alone.
I want to thank our Romanian colleagues for standing with us, alongside us, emboldening us, making us stronger. And I thank each and every one of the American troops for their continued patriotic service. Each and every one of you is doing your countries a great service.
May God bless Romania, may God bless America, and may God protect our troops. Thank you for your service. (Applause.)
RIA Novosti - May 22, 2014
OPINION: Biden in Romania Talks Reveals Extramundane Nature of US Push for War
Rick Rozoff
MOSCOW: US Vice President Joseph Biden appeared at a military base in the capital of Romania on May 20 and, against the backdrop of this year's annual Carpathian Spring joint military exercises, announced that Washington's willingness to go to war over the mutual military support clause of the 1949 North Atlantic Treaty, the founding document of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, is not only clear and unwavering, but indeed of a mock-religious - extramundane and sempiternal - nature.
In his precise words: "America's commitment to collective defense under Article 5 of NATO is a sacred obligation in our view - a sacred obligation not just for now, but for all time." In aeternum, in saecula saeculorum and in line with eschatological imperatives.
Biden, the once, (near) future and perennial candidate to succeed the current commander-in-chief of the world's sole military superpower (the exact words of his current superior, President Barack Obama in his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech of five years ago), an abrasive and pugnacious Walter Mitty of a malign bent who has often experienced difficulties distinguishing between fact and fiction, campaign claims and occurrences in the real world, and his own modest abilities and megalomaniacal inflation thereof, began his speech in Romania upbraiding his hosts for not providing him the clement weather a personage of his elevated stature deserves and had, moreover, been promised, querulously and inconsistently grousing, "it's very hot in here. I was supposed to - I was told it was going to be cooler here, but thank you for the great weather."
A Roman emperor, Trajan for example, the conqueror of Dacia (modern-day Romania), would have severely chastised and as severely punished the leaders of a subjugated province for not having secured nicer weather for a visiting imperial dignitary of Biden's rank.
Though his modern avatar did commend the military prowess of Romanian troops serving under NATO command in Afghanistan, martial values serving in lieu of miracle-working ones, evidently. The American satrapy, a NATO member for a decade, maintains one of the largest troop contingents remaining in Afghanistan, 1,000 soldiers, and Bucharest will continue to provide NATO with cannon fodder in South Asia even after the formal completion of troop withdrawal at the end of this year.
The vice president acknowledged that Romania, with whom then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice signed an agreement in 2005 for the acquisition of bases and the stationing of military personnel and equipment, is housing a permanent force of US Marines at the Mihail Kogalniceanu Air Base near Constanta on the Black Sea. That base is also home to US Army Europe's Task Force East and the US Marine Corps' Black Sea Rotational Force, the latter a Special Purpose Marine Air Ground Task Force (SPMAGTF) used as the model for US Africa Command's SPMAGTF.
Biden also obliquely pressured Romania in regard to demands of the US (and at least implicitly NATO, because of interoperability exigencies) for the country, like neighboring Bulgaria, to replicate the purchase of American F-16 Fighting Falcons by Poland at the beginning of the century - 48 in all, the largest military outlay in Polish history - by reminding the Romanian officials present that "You're building a fleet of F-16s." Bucharest like Sofia was being pressured to purchase 24-36 apiece of the General Dynamics-manufactured warplanes before the US-generated economic downturn of six years ago led to a scaling back of that number.
With characteristic bravado and brusqueness, he also stated:
"America and our NATO allies have urgently stepped up our military presence in the air, land and on the sea of NATO's eastern flank. In just the past weeks we've had ships visit. The USS Truxton, Cook, Taylor, as well as the Dacian Viper F-16 exercise. And in the coming days, new ships - the Vella Gulf will enter the Black Sea to conduct port visits and maritime training. Period."
The four US warships mentioned are guided missile vessels and part of the US Navy's Aegis Combat System, which is being integrated into the US-NATO European Phased Adaptive Approach interceptor missile system to cover all of Europe west of Russia, the Mediterranean Sea Basin and the South Caucasus.
USS Truxton and USS Donald Cook are Arleigh Burke class destroyers, USS Taylor is a Oliver Hazard Perry class frigate and USS Vella Gulf a Ticonderoga class cruiser.
With an anachronistic martial ethos more suitable to a - much - earlier epoch, say, the late Roman Empire, the deputy commander-in-chief of the world's sole military superpower flattered US military personnel at the event as "the greatest generation of warriors the world has ever produced." He immediately added, "And that is not hyperbole," though of course it is.
Last month's Dacian Spring joint US-Romanian week-long exercise he alluded to consisted of drills with US F-16s and host country MiG-21 Lancers.
At the end of his ex officio declamations, Biden shifted from sub-imperator to pontifex maximus in tone, dispensing benedictions broadcast: "May God bless Romania, may God bless America, and may God protect our troops." It is uncertain which deity, of the underworld or other sphere, has conferred on him the office of bestowing blessings, as it were on the eve of a campaign, a war.
Adjectives like grandiose, magniloquent, millenerial and bombastic come to mind in reference to the pronouncements of Mr. Biden. But they, even, are too generous and elevated in tone.
Having recently had occasion to re-read Imperial Purple (1892), a series of belletristic sketches of the first twenty-five Roman emperors by American-born writer Edgar Saltus, I am more reminded of one or more of the later of those the author, a friend and colleague of such fellow writers as Oscar Wilde and Arthur Symonds during his London years, limned with a combination of urbane bemusement and visceral repugnance. Commodus, say, or Heliogabalus.
Website and articles: http://rickrozoff.wordpress.com
RIA Novosti - May 23, 2014
West’s Refusal of Dialogue May Lead to Ukraine’s Membership in NATO – Putin
ST. PETERSBURG: Russia fears that the West’s refusal to engage in dialogue on Ukraine may lead to Kiev joining NATO and the US deploying missile defense systems in the country, Russian President Vladimir Putin said Friday.
"The coup [in Ukraine] has occurred, and they do not want to talk to us. What should we think of? The next step will be Ukraine's membership in the NATO. They never ask us about that, and they do not engage in dialog with us, as we could see for the last two decades. 'No dialog,' they say, 'it is none of your business, and it does not concern you'," Putin said.
"Ukraine may become a member of the NATO tomorrow, and the next day Defense Missile elements of the United States may be deployed there," the Russian president said during remarks at the annual St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, which is hosting official delegations from 62 countries and CEOs of 146 major world companies.
The European Union, US and NATO representatives refused to attend the event.
Russian NATO envoy Alexander Grushko said Monday that Moscow had insisted on an immediate meeting of the NATO-Russia Council due to a sharp deterioration of the situation in crisis-hit Ukraine. The alliance suggested holding a meeting of ambassadors on May 27 but Moscow asked to postpone the summit.
On April 1, NATO ended all practical cooperation with Russia over Ukraine, only maintaining contacts at the ambassadors' level and higher. The foreign ministers of NATO members are to review relations with Moscow at their next meeting in June.
Putin earlier accused Western countries of supporting the unconstitutional coup in Ukraine at a time when Moscow was calling for searching for a way out of the crisis in the country through dialog.
The statement came at a time of strained Russia-EU relations, after the EU, together with the US, imposed sanctions on Russian officials for allegedly escalating the Ukrainian crisis.
Ukraine went through a regime change resembling a military coup on February 22, after months of clashes between the Russian-oriented authorities and supporters of Ukraine’s affiliation with Europe. The country’s parliament ousted President Viktor Yanukovych, changed the constitution and scheduled early presidential elections for May 25.
Since March, when the former Ukrainian Crimean peninsula rejoined Russia, anti-government protests have been spreading across the mainly Russian-speaking southeastern regions of the Ukraine. The Donetsk and Luhansk regions proclaimed autonomy earlier this month.
Ukraine’s new interim authorities, backed by radical ultranationalist groups, launched a special operation to crack down on the protesters in mid-April, which has already led to dozens of deaths and injuries.
---
http://en.ria.ru/russia/20140523/190076131/Moscow-to-Respond-if-US-Speeds-Up-European-Missile-Defense-.html
RIA Novosti - May 23, 2014
Moscow to Respond if US Speeds Up European Missile Defense – Foreign Ministry
MOSCOW: Moscow hopes Washington understands that Russia will be forced to react if the US speeds up the placement of missile defense systems in Europe, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov said Friday.
“If there is really another look at the European Phased Adaptive Approach to the creation of a missile defense system speeding up to the phase where it’s time to place metal to the cement, then we will regret that because we cannot respond indifferently to attempts that negatively influence the national potential of Russian strategic nuclear restraint,” Ryabkov said.
Late last month, the U.S. Navy deployed for the first an advanced version of a missile-interceptor for its Aegis missile defense system, initiating the second phase of Washington’s plan to boost missile defenses in Europe.
The US missile defense system in Europe, which NATO and the US say is aimed at countering threats from North Korea and Iran, has been a particular source of friction in US-Russian relations for a number of years.
Russia and NATO formally agreed to cooperate on the system at the 2010 NATO summit in Lisbon, but talks foundered, in part over Russian demands for legal guarantees that the system would not target its strategic nuclear deterrent.
The Balkan floods and the break-up of Yugoslavia
By Paul Mitchell
20 May 2014
At least 44 people have died and tens of thousands have been left homeless in the worst-ever flooding to hit the Balkans.
Three months’ worth of rain fell in three days last week, causing the River Sava to burst its banks. It rises in the Alps of western Slovenia, forms the border between Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina and continues through Serbia to the capital Belgrade, where it joins the Danube. Thousands of landslides have been reported, destroying roads, railway lines and entire villages.
At least 27 people have died in Bosnia, including nine from the northeastern town of Doboj, devastated by what the regional police chief called a 3-4 metre high “tsunami” of water. About a third of the country is under water, affecting more than 1 million people.
The chairman of the Bosnian three-man presidency, Bakir Izetbegovic, declared that his country faced a “horrible catastrophe… We are still not fully aware of its actual dimensions.”
In Serbia, 12 bodies were recovered in the flooded town of Obrenovac, about 20 miles from the capital, Belgrade. More than 25,000 people have been evacuated and many more remain stranded.
The Nikola Tesla electricity plant in Obrenovac, which supplies most of Belgrade, is threatened, as is the coal-fired power plant at Kostolac, which provides over 20 percent of Serbia’s electricity needs.
Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic said, “What happened to us happens once in a thousand years, not hundred, but thousand.”
It is clear that the severity of the floods has been compounded by the fall-out from the break-up of the former Yugoslavia, the Bosnian War (1991-95) and the NATO bombardment of Serbia in 1999. Political tensions between the Balkan countries and the economic disaster, worsened by the 2008 global crisis, have continued to take their toll.
These factors have been ignored in most news reports, with comment limited to the danger from the exposure of some of the 120,000 landmines that remain from the Bosnian War and the disappearance of signs warning of minefields. Some 500 people have been killed by mines since 1995. Some reports also quote Sarajevo Mine Action Centre official Sasa Obradovic, who said, “Besides the mines, a lot of weapons were thrown into the rivers, lying idle for almost 20 years.” But that is as far as it goes.
In 1972, the Yugoslav government first attempted to monitor and control the River Sava, the country’s most important inland waterway, linking Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro. Its Sava River Basin Management Plan was one of the first in the world and attempted to reconcile the differing demands of the various republics—hydroelectric power in Slovenia, navigation for Croatia to its large inland port at Sisak, and agricultural needs in Bosnia and Serbia. Levees and reservoirs were built and waterways dredged. Further plans to improve navigation, prevent flooding and tackle pollution were drawn up in the 1980s.
However, these were thwarted by the break-up of the Yugoslav Republic and its descent into war. With the dissolution of the Soviet Union in 1991, the US and Germany both set about dismantling Yugoslavia by recognizing the breakaway republics of the old federation—Slovenia, Croatia, and then Bosnia—as independent sovereign states. The US was intent on exploiting the power vacuum created by the Soviet collapse to project its power eastward and gain control over the vast untapped reserves of oil and natural gas in the newly-independent Central Asian republics of the old USSR. The European powers, led by Germany, were anxious to stake their own claim.
Following years during which flood protection measures were ignored and infrastructure left unrepaired, numerous initiatives and commissions have been created to coordinate action, but these have borne little fruit as a result of the continuing economic and political situation.
In 2001, Bosnia-Herzegovina, the then-Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Croatia and Slovenia signed a “Letter of Intent” to set up “the Sava River Basin Initiative” to “utilize, protect and control the Sava River Basin water resources in a manner that would enable ‘better life conditions and raising the standard of population in the region’, and to find appropriate institutional frame [sic] in order to enhance the cooperation.”
A few years later the International Sava River Basin Commission was established. The River Sava, the largest tributary of the Danube, was also included in the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River, which “commits the contracting parties to join their efforts in sustainable water management, including conservation of surface and ground water, pollution reduction, and the prevention and control of floods, accidents and ice hazards.”
In 2004, the United Nations weighed in with its “Development of Sava River basin Management Plan—Pilot Project,” saying, “There is a need of co-ordination, integration and data exchange for the whole basin. This includes co-ordination of operations in the Sava basin’s retention areas and water reservoirs to avoid the coincidence of floodwaters as well as the maintenance of high flow conditions in the Sava and Drina. National emergency plans, flood forecasting and intervention plans are essential in case of accidents.”
It called for the reconstruction of flood protection embankments and a new early warning system, which had been destroyed during the war.
Nearly 10 years later all that has really materialised is the Sava’s inclusion in the new European Flood Awareness System (EFAS), which came into operational service in 2012. Flood prevention and maintenance largely remain in the hands of national governments, which see these activities as low priority or easy targets when imposing austerity measures.
According to the book Water and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding, published earlier this year, the Sava River basin still remains “less developed than other river basins in Europe, water management suffers from inadequate institutional structures, inefficient operations, lack of water and sewage treatment plants and reduced financial capacity.”
Disputes continue over building hydroelectric power plants on the river and its tributaries. Large ships are still unable to navigate the top third of the river due to erosion, obstruction from bombed bridges, destruction of navigation infrastructure and mines due to the Balkan War and the NATO bombing of Serbia. The oil embargo on the country also gave rise to “severe deforestation” and soil erosion, increasing the risk of flooding. Sanctions prevented its scientists from attending international conferences.
Water and Post-Conflict Peacebuilding points out that a unified approach to the Sava River has also been thwarted by political tensions. The Montenegrin government has refused to take part in discussions over its future since its split from Serbia in 2006. Authorities of the two component parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina—Republica Srpska and the Croat-Muslim federation—hardly speak to each other and, in 2009, the Serbian government filed a lawsuit in the World Court accusing Croatia of genocide during the Balkan War in response to one filed by Croatia in 1999.